The Politics of Incremental Progressivism. Группа авторов

P., and Silva, M. (2011). Bootstraping Democracy: Transforming Local Governance and Civil Society in Brazil. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

      11 Banaszak, L. (2010). The Women's Movement Inside and Outside the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

      12 Bhan, G. (2012). In the Public's Interest. Evictions, Citizenship and Inequality in Contemporary Delhi. Athens: University of Georgia Press.

      13 Bussell, J. (2019). Clients and Constituents: Political Responsiveness in Patronage Democracies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

      14 Caldeira, T. (2000). The City of Walls. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

      15  Caldeira, T. (2016). Peripheral urbanization: autoconstruction, transversal logics, and politics in cities of the Global South. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 35 (1): 3–20.

      16 Campbell, T. (1997). Innovations and Risk Taking: The Engine of Reform in Local Government in Latin America and the Caribbean. Washington, DC: World Bank Discussion papers.

      17 Carmona, R. (2012). El debate sobre nuevos estilos de gobienrno em ciudades argentinas. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Ciccus.

      18 Carrión, F. and Ponce, S. (eds.) (2015). El giro a la izquierda: los gobiernos locales de America Latina. Quito: 5ª avenida Ed.

      19 Chaves, D. and Goldfrank, B. (eds.) (2004). La izquierda en la ciudad. Barcelona: Icaria ed.

      20 Cleary, M. (2007). Electoral competition, participation, and government responsiveness in Mexico. American Journal of Political Science 51 (2): 283–299.

      21 Coslovsky, S. (2016). Beyond bureaucracy: how prosecutors and public defenders enforce urban planning laws in São Paulo, Brazil. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 39 (6): 1103–1119.

      22 Diamond, L. and Morlino, L. (2004). The quality of democracy: an overview. Journal of Democracy 15 (4): 20–31.

      23 Dropp, K. and Peskowitz, Z. (2012). Electoral security and the provision of constituency service. The Journal of Politics 74 (1): 220–234.

      24 Einstein, K. and Glick, D. (2018). Mayors, partisanship, and redistribution: evidence directly from U.S. mayors. Urban Affairs Review 54 (1): 74–106.

      25 Eulau, H. and Karps, P. (1977). The puzzle of representation: specifying components of responsiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly 2 (3): 233–254.

      26 Evans, P., Rueschmeyer, D., and Skocpol, T. (eds.) (1985). Bringing the State Back in. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

      27 Faguet, J.‐P. and Pöschl, C. (2015). Is Decentralization Good for Development? Perspectives from Academics and Policy Makers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

      28 Fairfield, T. and Garay, C. (2017). Redistribution under the right in Latin America: electoral competition and organized actors in policymaking. Comparative Political Studies 50 (14): 1871–1906.

      29 Ferman, B. (1985). Governing the Ungovernable City: Political Skill, Leadership and the Modern Mayor. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

      30 Figueiredo, A. and Limongi, F. (1999). Executivo e Legislativo na nova ordem constitucional. Rio de Janeiro: FGV.

      31 Fiorina, M. (1989). Congress: Keystone of the Washington Establishment. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

      32 França, D. (2016). Inequalities and residential segregation by race and class. In: São Paulo in the Twenty‐First Century Spaces, Heterogeneities, Inequalities (ed. E. Marques), 196–213. New York: Routledge.

      33 Gilbert, A. (2013). How to help, and how not to help, the poor in the megacities of the south. City 17 (5): 628–635.

      34 Gilbert, A. and Gugler, J. (1982). Cities, Poverty, and Development: Urbanization in the Third World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

      35  Giraudy, A., Moncada, E., and Snyder, R. (eds.) (2019). Inside Countries: Subnational Research in Comparative Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

      36 Goldfrank, B. (2011). Deepening Local Democracy in Latin American: Participation, Decentralization and the Left. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

      37 Gordon, I. and Travers, T. (2010). London: planning the ungovernable city. City, Culture and Society 1 (2): 49–55.

      38 Gurza Lavalle, A. (2018). Councils, associations, and inequality. In: Paths of Inequality in Brazil – a Half‐Century of Changes (ed. M. Arretche), 25–44. New York: Springer/Ed. Unesp.

      39 Gurza Lavalle, A., Carlos, E., Dowbor, M., and Szwako, J. (2019). Movimentos sociais, institucionalização e domínios de agência. In: Movimentos sociais e institucionalização: políticas sociais, raça e gênero no Brasil pós‐transição (eds. A. Gurza Lavalle, E. Carlos, M. Dowbor and J. Szwako), 21–87. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Uerj.

      40 Hajnal, Z. and Trounstine, J. (2017). Who or what governs? The effects of economics, politics, institutions, and needs on local spending. American Politics Research 38 (6): 1130–1163.

      41 Herrera, V. (2017). From participatory promises to partisan capture: local democratic transitions and Mexican water politics. Comparative Politics 38 (4): 479–499.

      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,