Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 16: 375–378, 2001.

Book review

Polite Politics, A Sociological Analysis of an Urban Protest in Hong Kong, Denny Ho Kwok-leung, 2000, Ashgate, Aldershot, 375 pp., price $84.95, ISBN 1-84014-333-9 Polite Politics provides new insights into the urban housing protest in Hong Kong under British rule. Further, the book is of more general interest, as it contributes to the theoretical and methodological debate on collective action and urban movement research. This book is a PhD thesis supervised by Prof. Chris Pickvance at the University of Kent at Canterbury. Like many theses, it features a somewhat oversized discussion of the literature, has numerous and long methodological appendices, and is somewhat dated (the thesis was completed in 1995!). Nevertheless, the book remains recommendable reading for those interested in urban movements, collective action, and the social consequences of temporary housing schemes. Its lasting importance is due to the interesting ways in which Denny Ho Kwok-leung frames his analysis and deals with methodological issues. His discussion of the pros and cons of participative observation and of his research experience is original and highly valuable. In the first chapter, the author discusses urban movements. Ho addresses the significance of urban movements to urban politics (including those movements with narrower agendas than urban social movements that are seen as agents of social change) as well as the importance of urban protests in Hong Kong. The words ‘polite politics’ in the title refer to the main strategy of these protesters: to act outside the political structure but without disrupting social life or the political structure (as opposed to taking recourse to ordinary politics, protest, or violence). The second chapter deals with collective action. The author presents two old and two newer approaches to collective action. Firstly, classical perspectives emphasise individual psychological causes to explain participation in collective actions that are regarded as irrational. Secondly, the resource mobilization approaches emphasise the rational background of collective action and concentrate on the mobilisation and organisation of resources. Thirdly, political process models focus on the political opportunity struc-

376 ture and the success of social movements. Finally, constructionist approaches share an interest in the meaning of collective action to participants: they deal with the social construction of protest. Ho’s discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of each type of approach offers a good overview of the range of standpoints. It ends with a presentation of an original framework for an integrated approach in which he argues for a multilevel analysis. He distinguishes five aspects to be analysed: the origin of social movements, their rise and fall, their character, the nature of the participants, and the success or failure of the social movements. The empirical research deals with protest in Hong Kong Aged Temporary Housing Areas (ATHA), which are THAs that have not been cleared in due time. Aged THAs are defined as existing for at least seven years. At the beginning of the 1990s, this urban protest aimed at early clearance of the ATHAs, long-term clearance, and re-housing of the residents in the same district. Chapter 3 deals with the changing political context in pre-1997 Hong Kong. Remarkably enough, the opening up of the political system (after 1980) distracted local politicians from local issues. They became engaged in electoral politics, thereby becoming more sensitive to middle-class issues than to the interests of the urban poor. Local politicians concentrated on territorywide issues, mainly on democratisation and the imminent incorporation of Hong Kong into China. This left fewer opportunities for urban protesters than in the period before the democratic transition. Chapter 4 introduces Hong Kong’s public housing policies and relevant institutions, including the Temporary Housing Areas (THAs). These areas had been created since 1974 for those who are in need of housing but are not eligible for the regular social housing programmes, as an alternative to squats. Ho also presents three urban minorities: squatters, one person and two person families, and THA residents, who form the group under study here. Chapter 5 offers an account of the protest in ATHAs. The research focuses on two areas in the same district (Kwun Tong district): Kowloon Bay THA and Ping Shek THA. Unfortunately, figures (5.1 and 5.2) about the location of the ATHAs are untraceable. The chapter also reports the findings of extensive questionnaire surveys in both areas regarding the social characteristics of the residents of the ATHAs. Significantly, pre-existing associations are not present, and there are very few social ties between residents (compare this to what we know about similar protests in Latin American contexts). Chapter 6 assesses the political structure in which the protest evolves, including changes in the housing sector and in the social movement sector. It discusses the political orientation and practice of many agents regarding housing issues; these agents include legislative councillors, district boards,

377 political parties, pressure groups, trade unionists, and social workers, among others. Then it deals with the relation between ATHA protest and these actors. Chapter 7 analyses the political participation of ATHA residents, trying to understand who tends to participate or not and why, by looking at individual characteristics. Interestingly, the findings are different in the two areas under study. The author contends that the difference is due to the timing of the surveys in relation to the course of the protest. Time constraint is shown to be a major determinant of the willingness to participate in protest activities. Subsequently, the author deals with mobilisation potential and actual participation. Addressing the mobilisation process, in chapter 8, Ho scrutinizes the roles of three types of agents: two types of external organisers, community social workers (paid for their work) and volunteer organisers (to which the author belongs); and local leaders (who turn out to be residents involved for a longer period of time). In this chapter, the problems of participative observation are the most obvious; indeed, strategy has been influenced by the author himself on several occasions. Nevertheless, Ho convincingly argues that the advantages of his method outweigh the problems (limited recording while observing, interpretation of the data, involvement of the researcher that influences the events to be studied, and partisanship; see also Appendix 2). In fact, his participation enabled him to follow the mobilisation process in a way that one can hardly reconstruct through interviews with key players. Moreover, neither the protest nor the analysis is disqualified by the author’s involvement. One reason is that Ho clearly separates his analysis of the protest potential from his analysis of the mobilisation process. Another is that he largely comments on his contribution to the latter and on its consequences for his position as both researcher and organiser as well as for the research. In both ATHAs, polite politics are predominant, mixed at times either with orderly politics in Kowloon Bay or with a few protest actions in both cases. Success or failure is assessed on three dimensions. Clearance has been effectuated earlier, although the land was not claimed by any government department (which is generally the reason for the clearance of such areas). However, re-housing in the same district did not become a policy, even if some residents obtained it as a concession. There was no impact during the fieldwork period on local leaders in terms of training politicians and the like. And there was not much interest from the media and the politicians for THA issues, the political agenda being completely dominated by the debate about democratic reforms. The concluding chapter offers a summary of the arguments and a discussion of the theoretical and methodological implications of the study. Due to his participation in the protest, the author succeeds in bringing to light the

378 role of external mobilisation agents and their strategy preferences. At the same time, he also describes at length their internal division: community social workers who want to facilitate, not direct the protest versus volunteer organisers who argue that ATHA residents do need direction to organise and mobilise themselves. Under the heading ‘future development of the protest’, the author deals with forecasting the near future . . . from 1995 onwards. This time frame is evidently unfortunate, due to the course of events in Hong Kong. Some kind of epilogue that would inform us about the development in housing policies and urban protests in post-1997 Hong Kong would have been very welcome. But despite its tardy publication, this study is recommended reading for anyone interested in housing policies for the urban poor, housing protest, and urban (social) movements, as well as for those concerned with participative observation in protest movements and related methodological issues. Virginie Mamadouh Department of Geography and Planning University of Amsterdam Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130 1018 VZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands