The Politics of Incremental Progressivism

42 Holland, A. (2018a). Forbearance as Redistribution: The Politics of Informal Welfare in Latin America. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

43 Holland, A. (2018b). Diminished expectations: redistributive preferences in truncated welfare states. World Politics 70 (4): 555–594.

44 Holland, A. and Palmer‐Rubin, B. (2015). Beyond the machine: clientelist brokers and interest organizations in Latin America. Comparative Political Studies 48 (9): 1186–1223.

45 Holland, A. and Schneider, B. (2017). Easy and hard redistribution: the political economy of welfare states in Latin America. Perspectives in Politics 15 (4): 988–1006.

46 Holston, J. (2009). Insurgent citizenship in an era of global urban peripheries. City & Society 21 (2): 245–267.

47 Hoyler, T. (2016). Private sector housing developments: who produces what, how and where? In: São Paulo in the Twenty‐First Century: Spaces, Heterogeneities, Inequalities (ed. E. Marques), 214–227. New York: Routledge.

48 Hubber, E. and Stephens, J. (2013). Democracy and the Left. Social Policy and Inequality in Latin America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

49 Huntington, S. (1991). The Third Wave: Democratization in the Late Twentieth Century. Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.

50 Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística – IBGE (2020). Aglomerados subnormais 2019. Brasília: IBGE. www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/organizacao‐do‐territorio/tipologias‐do‐territorio/15788‐aglomerados‐subnormais.html(accessed 16 June 2020.

51 Jobert, B. and Muller, P. (1987). L'état en action: politiques publiques et corporatismes. Paris: PUF.

52 John, P. and Cole, A. (2000). When do institutions, policy sectors, and cities matter? Comparing networks of local policy makers in Britain and France. Comparative Political Studies 33 (2): 248–268.

53 Judd, D. (2005). Everything is going to hell: urban scholars as end‐times prophets. Urban Affairs Review 41: 119.

54 Keefer, P. (2005). Democratization and Clientelism: Why Are Young Democracies Badly Governed? Washington, DC: World Bank.

55 Khosa, M. (ed.) (2000). Empowerment through Service Delivery. Pretoria: HSRC Publishers.

56 Kingdom, J. (1984). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies. Boston: Little, Brown.

57 Kitschelt, H. and Wilkinson, S. (2007). Patrons, Clients, and Policies‐Patterns of Democratic Accountability and Political Competition. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

58 Klintowitz, D. (2015). Entre a reforma urbana e a reforma imobiliária: a coordenação de interesses na política habitacional brasileira nos anos 2000. Doctoral dissertation. FGV, University of São Paulo.

59 Kowarick, L. (1979). A espoliação urbana. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.

60 Kuschnir, K. (2000). O cotidiano da política. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar.

61 Lascoumes, P. and Le Galès, P. (2007). Introduction: understanding public policy through its instruments. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 20 (1): 1–21.

62 Lefebvre, C. (2010). Metropolis ingobernables? Experiencias Europeas. Politica y Sociedad 47 (3): 131–143.

63 Le Galès, P. (2011). Urban policies in Europe: what is governed? In: The New Blackwell Companion to the City (eds. G. Bridge and S. Watson), 747–758. Oxford: Blackwel.

64 Le Galès, P. (2020). Rendre la métropole parisienne gouvernable – état, institutions, réseaux. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.

65 Levitsky, S. and Roberts, K. (2011). The Resurgence of the Latin America Left. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

66 Limongi, F. and Mesquita, L. (2011). Estratégia partidária e clivagens eleitorais: as eleições municipais pós redemocratização. In: São Paulo: novos percursos e atores (eds. L. Kowarick and E. Marques), 207–232. São Paulo: Editora 34.

67 Lopez, T. (1996). Gobiernos municipales en México: entre la modernización y la tradicion política. Tijuana: El Colegio de la frontera norte.

68 Lowi, T. (1972). Four systems of policy, politics, and choice. Public Administration Review 32 (4): 298–310.

69 Marques, E. (2003). Redes sociais, instituições e atores políticos no governo da cidade de São Paulo. São Paulo: Annablume.

70 Marques, E. (2012). Public policies, power and social networks in Brazilian urban policies. Latin American Research Review 47 (2): 27–50.

71 Marques, E. (ed.) (2016a). São Paulo in the Twenty‐First Century Spaces, Heterogeneities, Inequalities. New York: Routledge.

72 Marques, E. (2016b). De volta aos capitais para melhor entender as políticas urbanas. Novos Estudos 35 (2): 15–33.

73 Marques, E. (2017). Em busca de um objeto esquecido: a política e as políticas do urbano no brasil. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais 32 (95): 1–18.

74 Marques, E. (2019). Transformações, avanços e impasses nas políticas urbanas brasileiras recentes. In: As políticas da política: desigualdades e inclusão nos governos do PSDB e do PT (eds. M. Arretche, E. Marques and C. Faria), 245–268. São Paulo: Ed. Unesp/CEM.

75 McLennan, A. and Munslow, B. (2009). The Politics of Service Delivery. Johannesburg: Wits University Press.

76 Meltzer, A. and Richard, S. (1981). A rational theory of the size of government. Journal of Political Economy 89: 914–927.

77 Molotch, H. (1976). The City as a growth machine: toward a political economy of place. The American Journal of Sociology 82 (2): 309–332.

78 Novaes, L. (2018). Disloyal brokers and weak parties. American Journal of Political Science 62 (1): 84–98.

79 Oliveros, V. (2016). Making it personal: clientelism, favors, and the personalization of public administration in Argentina. Comparative Politics 48 (3): 373–391.

80 Paller, J. (2015). Informal networks and access to power to obtain housing in urban slums in Ghana. Africa Today 62 (1): 30–55.

81 Palmer, I., Moodley, N., and Parnell, S. (2017). Building a Capable State: Service Delivery in Post‐Apartheid South Africa. London: Zed books.

82 Pasotti, E. (2010a). Sorting through the trash: the waste management crisis in southern Italy. South European Society and Politics 15 (2): 289–307.

83 Pasotti, E. (2010b). Political Branding in Cities: The Decline of Machine Politics in Bogotá, Naples, and Chicago. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

84 Peterson, P. (1982). The City Limits. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

85 Pickvance, C. (2001). Four varieties of comparative analysis. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 16: 7–28.

86 Pierre, J. (2011). The Politics of Urban Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

87 Post, A. (2014). Foreign and Domestic Investment in Argentina: The Politics of Privatized Infrastructure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

88 Post, A. (2019). Cities and politics in the developing world. Annual Review of Political Science 21: 115–133.

89 Raco, M., Durrant, D., and Livingstone, N. (2018). Slow cities, urban politics and the temporalities of planning: lessons from London. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space 36 (7): 1176–1194.

90 Reddy, V. and Rao, R. (1985). Urban Crisis in India. Hyderabad: Hyderabad Publishers.

91 Rhodes, R. (2007). Understanding governance: ten years on. Organization Studies 28 (8): 1243–1264.

92 Rivadulla, M. (2012). Clientelism or something else? Squatter politics in Montevideo. Latin American Politics and Society 54 (1): 37–63.

93 Robinson, J. (2011). Cities in a world of cities: the comparative gesture. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 35 (1): 1–23.

94 Rocha, M. and Silva, B. (2017). O poder de indicar: preferências legislativas de vereadores mineiros. Cadernos Adenauer XVIII (2): 185–208.

95 Rolnik, R. (2009). Democracia no fio da navalha limites e possibilidades para a implementação de uma agenda de reforma urbana no Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Urbanos 21 (2): 30–50.