Eleventh Global Studies Conference

Abstract

Since the arrival of neoliberalism in India in the 1990s, urbanization has taken a dramatic turn. A pattern of instant urbanism is observed spreading across the peripheries of cities into its rural suburbs to accommodate the newly emerging “space of flows.” Special economic zones, satellite townships, technology hubs, shopping malls, golf courses, etc. are being extensively built by private developers on what was once the agricultural lands of the villagers. Within this context, there are conventionally two important streams in urban discourse that are emerging. The first one focuses in bringing out the implication of neoliberalism on urbanization within the analytical framework of “capitalism,” wherein issues related to accumulation by dispossession of the peasantry, privatization, practice of state eminent domain, land grabbing, etc. are being (re)defined within the context of neoliberalism. The second one, in response, is building on the narratives of grass-root incursions of the locals within the framework of “occupancy urbanism.” Insights related to the power of villagers in resisting and sometimes subverting the state and corporate visions have started to unravel. Although both streams bring out valuable insights on facets of emerging neoliberal spatiality, they are often found rendering a highly polarized and contested spatiality, thus reinforcing the dichotomy between the elite and poor, urban and rural, global and local, modernity and traditions, and so on. On the contrary, this paper brings out a special case of Gurugram (Gurgaon) city in India, where the native villagers have evolved to be rather accommodating to neoliberalism under mutually beneficial and negotiable conditions. Thus, elaborating on production of a “negotiated space” instead, where both the imaginaries are found interweaving and at continuous negotiation. Through the study of ethnoscapes and the everyday at the village level, this paper reveals the emerging role of native villagers in the social production of neoliberal space. It firstly illustrates how the villagers have established strong alliance with private developers on the principles of reciprocity and negotiability. This is elaborated by in-depth explanations about the mechanisms and informal dynamics at the micro-level that underline the negotiated process between the dimensions of power and land resources. Secondly, the paper establishes links to the above framework of emerging socio-political dimension to its socio-identity and territoriality. The quintessence behind the rise of native villagers as important stakeholders in production and organization of these spaces is embodied in their centuries-old traditions and evolving land management system. It is a very “specific” clan organization, their identity, and territoriality linked to its historicality that has helped them to rise above the fate of being the dispossessed, and instead, provided them with the higher means to benefit from the larger neoliberal processes (although with questionable sustainability). In Gurgaon, this is evident, as the villagers emerge from being the native zamindaars (agricultural land owners) of yesterday to Mercedes owners of today. Methodologically, the paper uses “space” as a tool and method in order to illustrate the emerging neoliberal spatiality.