Search results

"Urban Popular Movements in Latin America" published on by Oxford University Press.

AbstractUrban popular movements that organize illegal land invasion communities present an intriguing puzzle. When most invasion organizations acquire land titles, their participation levels plummet and their agendas stagnate; yet some neighborhoods achieve land titles, sustain high participation, and acquire other services, such as piped-in water. Why do these organizations achieve movement resilience? The more typical trajectory of movement collapse is explained by the disappearance of the key selective incentive, property security. Some organizations, however, evade this "security trap" through mixed motives: their basic material agenda is supplemented by a nonmaterial and often altruistic agenda, which sustains participation in the face of reduced selective incentives. Examining three neighborhood case studies in Lima and Quito, this article argues that a new, "innovator" type of invasion organization is more likely to exhibit sustained participation and movement resilience due to tactical innovation, democratic governance, and mixed motives.

Study of land invasion organizations in Lima and Quito reveals six surprising trends that differ by metropolitan context. Specifically, invasion organizations tend to differ with respect to building materials, original land ownership, the difficulty and consequences of acquiring land titles, strategies for acquiring electricity, and types of neighborhood regimes. A more general contrast also emerges: Lima organizations are more likely to encounter quick initial success followed by gradual decline, while the success of Quito organizations is often more gradual, resulting in long-term organizational survival. These citywide trends can be explained by three factors—public policy, local democratization, and geography and climate—that are often neglected in favor of neighborhood-level explanations.