Rights to the city: A pluralist analysis of housing controversies in Mumbai and Hong Kong

This paper starts with a discussion of the work of various authors on the ‘right to the city’. We argue that this work is highly relevant for the contemporary discussion of social justice in cities under globalization, but at the same time we observe an implicit tendency to frame the ‘right to the city’ in non-pluralist terms. However, many different groups assert their rights in cities and while the political economy of cities structures their possibilities, at the same time the specific outcomes of urban controversies is determined within local settings. Therefore, we stress the need for empirical research into urban controversies from a pluralist perspective: whose right is ascertained in which situation?

We apply this framework to three housing controversies in two Asian cities: Mumbai and Hong Kong. Specifically, we will discuss the Tardeo Towers project in Mumbai, as well as the Lee Tung Street redevelopment and Midlevels redevelopment in Hong Kong. We will show that in each of these controversies different groups are involved, that each of these groups feels that their right to the city is at stake, and that diverse coalitions of elites and underprivileged groups can both win and lose. Adequate policy responses have to be based on adequate knowledge of such local circumstances.