standards, which remain of fundamental
importance (Smith, D.M., 1994a). Addition-
ally, however, work has focused on the spa-
tially uneven distribution of sources of need
satisfaction, reflecting a departure in welfare
geography, away from narrow definitions of
standards of living. While an emphasis on spa-
tial inequalities can reveal the particular socio-
economic trajectories of spatial units, it can
run the risk of obscuring other factors at
play. For example, we can think of inequality
along the coordinates ofclass,genderand
race (Perrons, 2004). The categories cut
across one another, so that we can now under-
stand how all forms of identity and distinction
- including those shaped byspace– in differ-
ent contexts, produce situations in which
individuals suffer the consequences of inequal-
ity. Moreover, the emphasis on spatial patterns
risks losing sight of the structural basis of
inequalities (Smith, 2008 [1984]).
While we might all think that spatial in-
equality is, by definition, bad, it cannot auto-
matically be labelled as wrong.social justice
involves the conditions under which it might
be possible to argue ethically and morally that
spatial inequality is justified. Perhaps some
groups or some spatial units are disadvantaged
for the greater societal good. Given the rising
inequalities, both within nations and between
nations, what we can say perhaps is that the
responsibility lies with those advocating in-
equality to justify their position in ways that
do not fall back on trickle-down economics or
neo-liberalism(Smith and Lee, 2004). kwa
Suggested reading
Perrons (2004); Smith and Lee (2004).
informal sector A contested term that refers
to forms of employment and exchange rela-
tions that may be some combination of the
following: small-scale; unregulated, poorly
regulated or over-regulated (De Soto, 1989);
sometimes illegal and untaxed (the black
economy); precarious; family-oriented; stro-
ngly entrepreneurial; poorly remunerated;
and/or based on low-level technologies.
Trying to define the informal sector more pre-
cisely is unhelpful, although one can usefully
consider it in relation to its assumed opposite,
the formal sector.
In the context of developing countries in the
1950s, it was widely assumed that the modern
sector of an economy would in time come to
replace all or most of the pre-modern econ-
omy (seemodernization). It was further as-
sumed that the formal (‘Western’) sector of a
dual economywas populated by unionized,
mainly male workers, who enjoyed high real
wages from manufacturing and a large number
of benefits, including dearness allowances and
paid leave. This was the (semi-)skilled labour
aristocracy that Lenin had written about. The
informal sector, in contrast, described an
economy made up of shoe-shiners, domestic
servants and other untenured workers:
women, men and children who contributed
little to the economy as a whole, and who
had to be encouraged into the modern (manu-
facturing) economy from small-scale commer-
cial or service activities.
This teleological view of the informal sector
giving way to the formal sector was sharply
challenged in the 1960s and 1970s. The Inter-
national Labour Organization (ILO) devel-
oped the concept of an urban informal sector
in 1969, when it launched its World Employ-
ment Programme. The ILO aimed to move
beyond measures of the labour force in devel-
oping countries that were restricted to the
employed and the unemployed. A new gener-
ation of urban–ruralmigrationmodels now
appeared, which suggested that migrants to
the city were faced with a choice of remaining
among the urban unemployed while searching
for work in the formal sector, or of accepting
work and lower wages in the informal econ-
omy. Non-economists, meanwhile, led by the
anthropologist Keith Hart, began to challenge
the terms of the debate. Instead of emphasiz-
ing the separation of the formal and informal
sectors, theorists began to focus on the ways in
which ‘popular entrepreneurship’ (Hart,
1973) helped to reproduce capital–labour
relations in the formal sector. For example,
three-wheel taxi services helped to speed up
circuits of exchange in city-systems not well
served by freeways or mass transit systems.
Micro-enterprises subcontracted intermediate
goods from formal-sector firms. What marked
out the informal sector was ease of access
to new entrants, including migrants, both
domestic and international.
Barbara Harriss-White (2003) has sug-
gested that the hype surrounding ‘hi-tech’
India is blind to what she calls the India of
the 88 per cent, or those men, women and
children who work largely unprotected in
India’s agricultural, industrial and service
economies. Other studies have estimated the
scale of the informal sector in parts of Africa at
over 50 per cent, and at over 40 per cent in
Latin America and the Caribbean. The infor-
mal sector is also well entrenched in richer
countries. The growth of Local EconomicGregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_I Final Proof page 381 31.3.2009 7:05pmINFORMAL SECTOR