Redefines urban informality in the Global South, suggesting it is an essential urban production system.
Urban informality has historically been framed within planning discourse as a manifestation of illegality, disorder, and institutional failure. This paper challenges such conventional interpretations by conceptualizing urban informality as an alternative system of urban production, particularly within cities of the Global South. Drawing on interdisciplinary insights from Urban Planning, Urban Sociology, and Development Studies, the study interrogates the structural, economic, and governance dimensions of informality. It argues that informal systems spanning housing, economic activities, and service provision operate through adaptive, decentralized, and socially embedded mechanisms that often outperform formal systems in responsiveness and accessibility. Using illustrative references to cities such as Lagos and Mumbai, the paper demonstrates how informality is not external to formal planning but is co-produced through state practices and regulatory ambiguities. The study concludes by advocating for a paradigm shift from eradication-focused policies toward integrative planning frameworks that recognize informality as a legitimate and essential component of urban development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Omobolaji et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: