1Scholars have minimally examined policymaking within authoritarian regimes (Van den Dool & Schlaufer, 2024), and the Middle East has largely been overlooked (Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023; Barbehon et al., 2015; Luke, 2015). Scholarship in the Arabic language examining policymaking within authoritarian contexts across the Arab world has shown normative and methodological lacuna in capturing structural and normative specificities in the framing process (Shaarawy, 2001; Huseyin, 2021; Agaty et al., 2020). Policymaking has been reduced to a closed and discrete process that falls under the exclusive control of rulers (al-Munawer & al-Alban, 2022; al-Fahdawy, 2001). Following the Arab uprisings, scholars’ academic work and empirical contributions were confined to a reductionist application of policy theories that overlooked citizens and non-state actors’ maneuvers, values, norms, and persuasion tactics in policymaking (Huseyin, 2021; al-Munawer & al-Alban, 2022). Scholars have focused on theoretical inquiries and their application to empirical studies, conceiving the state as the main and sole actor responsible for policymaking (Hilal, 2001). Researchers do not have access to insider information about policy framing, which remains a high-level security issue (Rashid, 1993; Ismail, 2009; Huseyin, 2018). They have faced difficulty conducting (in)formal interviews and collecting raw data about sectoral policies and budgetary and financial allocations. Censorship and/or the unavailability of formal documentation and the securitization of researchers’ requests for access to national archives relating to sectoral policies’ performance, evaluation, and implementation have limited the free flow of information and fieldwork investigations (el-Khachab, 2025).
2Breaking with these limitations on policy studies in Egypt, this study examines citizens’ attempts to contribute to policymaking within an authoritarian context. It does so by tracking the Heliopolis residents’ collective frustration and anger toward the state’s decision to remove the old tram, framing it as an act of violation of a historical site. It posits that, despite scholars’ perception of the state as a centric, unitary, and homogeneous entity omnipresent in policymaking, non-state actors, including citizens, can still influence policy framing. Building on Neveu’s interpretation of the Social Movements Theories (SMTs)’ framing process, this study argues that the Heliopolis residents were involved in the framing of the Egyptian regime’s decision o to remove the old tram as a public concern and political problem related to the preservation of cultural heritage, which aligns with the state’s national priorities.
3Building on the author’s thematic analysis of the Heliopolis residents’ Facebook group and page, non-participatory observation of members’ interactions within the group, and open-ended semi-structured interviews conducted with 11 residents, the study argues that citizens transgressed the state’s restrictions on public participation by framing their concerns in a way that aligned with the regime’s mindset on social media, which they viewed as a safe communication medium. Triangulating findings from the three research methods, the author examined residents’ communication and discursive strategies in framing the issue of the old tram by closely following posts, photos, videos, and stories circulated on the Heliopolis Heritage Facebook page and group from 2018 to 2022. Similarly, interviews revealed the article’s key empirical argument, inferred from residents’ awareness of the futility of direct opposition to the state’s decision to remove the old tram. Overall, the argument states that residents realized that their framing of the tram removal as a threat to the neighborhood’s heritage would be more effective in convincing the government to intervene to address the contentious issue, even though the state removed the tram despite complaints.
4The study is divided into four parts. The first part examines scholarship on problem framing in policymaking within authoritarian contexts, with a focus on Egypt as an overlooked area of study. The second part outlines problem framing to track non-state actors’ strategies and tactics to influence policymaking vis-à-vis repressive regimes. The third section elaborates on the study’s research method, which combines interviews, non-participatory observation by the author, and thematic analysis of social media content to highlight residents’ communication and discursive framing strategies. The fourth part shows, by borrowing Neveu’s interpretation of SMTs’ framing process, problem framing unraveled the role of Heliopolis residents’ in policy framing. They did this by identifying, formulating, and disseminating a common problem that aligned with the state’s worldview to compel its intervention to solve it.
5Conceived within democratic countries, policy theories have rarely been used to examine policymaking within authoritarian regimes (Dool & Schlaufer, 2024; Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024). Although few studies have analyzed structural and normative specificities within restrained environments (el-Haddad, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023), Arab countries, particularly Egypt, have been largely overlooked, especially in the aftermath of the Arab uprisings.
6Policy theories were conceptually established in democratic contexts where state institutions function based on defined rules that organize and protect citizens’ rights, duties, and means of political participation. Starting in the 1980s, the emergence of a global neoliberal order advocating for the normative and structural homogenization of state institutions under the guise of administrative reforms compelled scholars to reconsider the epistemological and methodological foundations of policy theories (Fischer et al., 2015; Boullosa et al, 2021). The emergence of newly independent states combining democratic and authoritarian features known as hybrid regimes and the global trend toward autocratization, prompted scholars to enrich the explanatory foundations and empirical replicability of policy theories to further case studies (Schlaufer & Chalaya, 2025; James, 2025) examining policymaking in non-democracies (Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023).
7With a few exceptions, such as Turkey and Israel, the Middle East remains underexplored (Bakır & Ertan, 2018; Menahem & Zehavi, 2016). By claiming the state’s centrality, homogeneity, and domination over policymaking while dismissing the agency of non-state actors, scholars reduced their studies to theoretical investigations of the policy process (Hilal, 2001; Rashid, 1993; Shaarawy, 2001). They did not account for non-state actors, let alone citizens. Nor did they carry out in-depth, empirical studies that considered actors’ identities, values, worldviews, interests, operational environments, institutional/historical legacies, gender perspectives, and power relations vis-à-vis the state. Transposing policy theories onto Egypt revealed an analytical deficiency in capturing the specifics of autocratic regimes' policymaking. This is because rulers conceive of policymaking as their exclusive domain of action and sphere of influence, which is hidden from public and institutional scrutiny and used to control citizens. (al-Fahdawy, 2001; al-Munawer & al-Alban, 2022). In line with this rationale, scholars have extensively drawn on public administration theories such as bureaucracy and organizational theory to examine state institutions. These theories focus solely on the structural and functional aspects of the unachieved transition from rural communitarianism to an urban and modern framework (Shaarawy, 2001; Rashid, 1993; Ismail, 2009; al-Agati et al., 2020). Borrowing from Weber (1947) and Taylor (1947), scholars have limited their analysis of institutional positions and functions to descriptive and technical concepts, while emphasizing centrality, coherence, and monolithic nature of the state in policymaking (Huseyin, 2007; Huseyin, 2021; Huseyin, 2018).
8Breaking with the overemphasis on the state’s monopoly on policymaking, this study examines how non-state actors contribute to policy framing in repressive contexts. Building on Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing approach, it captures Heliopolis residents’ strategies for addressing the state’s decision to remove the old tram. Framing involves the process of identifying, formulating, diffusing, and bringing a problem to the attention of the state and the public in order to solve it (Entman, 1993; Snow & Benford, 1988; Stone, 1989; Schattschneider, 1960). Drawing on this concept, this study uses problem framing to show how policymaking in nondemocracies involves citizens working alongside officials. Here, citizens carefully adopt communicative and discursive strategies to identify issues of contention in line with the regime’s values, thus avoiding antagonizing the government (Neveu, 2015).
9Breaking with scholars’ reductionist approach toward policymaking, this section draws on Neveu’s (2015) interpretation of SMTs’ framing into a four-pronged process involving problem identification, formulation, dissemination, and solution suggestion. Neveu’s approach to problem framing mirrors Entman’s (1993) definition, which conceived framing as the selection of specific features of an issue to highlight its salience to a target audience. Entman’s (1993) definition refers to actors’ recourse to problem definition by identifying its causes, emphasizing its negative aspects, formulating it in a way that is receptive to the audience, and suggesting remedies and solutions.
10Not only does problem framing focus on the possibility of citizens’ and non-state actors’ intervention in policymaking within nondemocracies, it also emphasizes the state’s selective intervention with regard to relevant policies in response to problems that threaten rulers’ legitimacy. Building on SMTs’ conception of public issues, framing underlines how both officials and non-officials in a repressive environment can pinpoint an issue of concern and orient the state toward it (Benford & Snow, 2000; Snow & Benford, 1988; Goffman, 1974). These definitions conceive of framing as a communication strategy based on the production of meanings and ideas, such as ideological convictions and structural dispositions, to mobilize collective action and achieve a specific purpose from authorities in response to particular events. Framing involves contention and reality construction. It is the interpretation and labeling of a particular incident to give it significance and guide actions in a way that attracts bystanders, demobilizes opponents, and instigates the state’s intervention.
11Beyond democratic contexts, framing reveals how citizens use discursive and communication strategies to express their views in response to authorities’ decisions. It encompasses beliefs, convictions, and meanings and unravels the socio-cognitive background of non-state actors by highlighting their strategies, tracing the results of their actions, and unveiling the informal accounts of their engagement in policymaking despite repression. The focus on actors’ normative dimension unpacks their discursive tactics, ideological backgrounds, values, worldviews, and power relations with the state, which they use to legitimate their actions about a common concern, alter its features, and rearrange its interpretation. As an interactive process, framing provides a perspective on the negotiation process among informal actors and with designated authorities. In this vein, the framing process integrates the agency and strategies of non-state actors as influential factors in reaching a compromise or settled agreement about a specific issue of contention within authoritarian regimes.
12Neveu’s (2015, 2017) appropriation of problem framing into a four-pronged policymaking process built on Mény and Thonig’s (2015) definition of public policy as a program that defines how the state will act to solve a problem within a specific sector. Neveu (2015) indicated that problems are socially constructed by societal and systemic factors by transforming social events into controversial issues of public attention. Problem framing is the process of transforming an incident into an issue of discussion or a matter of common concern to prompt state action to change the status-quo or achieve the desired results (Neveu, 2017). In this vein, problem framing consists of four steps: issue emergence, problem identification, identifying negative aspects by naming the action and blaming the culprit, and suggesting a solution.
13Concerning the first step, i.e., issue emergence, some issues evoke public emotion and result in legislation, while others, despite their severity, may not receive similar public attention (Stone, 2012). Social problems are not predetermined since they are formulated and shaped based on actors’ ability to capture public attention and highlight conflicts of interest. While societies are primarily shaped by concerns related to welfare, social support systems, economic efficiency, and class struggle, social problems do not always have clear or objective logic. Rather, they are the result of competitive mobilization activities by actors and entrepreneurs aiming to translate social issues into political and public problems (Neveu, 2015, 2017).
14The second step is problem identification. For a social event to become a public problem, it must involve an issue of concern that affects individuals and expresses a common source of public discomfort (Neveu, 2015, 2021). By focusing on a specific action and its consequences, a given social event can be conceived as a threat and an undesirable development, thanks to the efforts of actors.
15The third step in formulating and diffusing a public problem depends on the ability of actors and entrepreneurs to raise awareness of an issue, articulate it as a problem, attract attention, and associate it with beliefs and feelings that touch upon the interests of individuals and/or decision-makers. Problems must be constructed through denunciation of their manifestations and contextual constructivism, the process by which issues are adapted culturally through networks of power, institutions, and effective resources to emphasize their connection to practical interests (Spector & Kitsuse, 1987; Best, 2008). A problem is formulated when an action, transformation, process, problematic experience, topic of discussion, or incident occurs that cannot be perceived as normal (Neveu, 2021).
16Issues of concern are conceived as problems thanks to actors’ initiatives or institutional actions which transform an incident into a visible and common problem with defined causes (Gourgues & Hamzaoui, 2009). By understanding the social, cultural, and historical context and formulating an effective discourse, entrepreneurs produce and highlight technological and political data through tactics and alliances to frame the problem and associate it with solutions (Spector & Kitsuse, 1987). Entrepreneurs, including social activists, interest groups, researchers, institutions, and/or individuals, play a major role in identifying public problems and formulating common demands by highlighting the causes and nature of problems and the necessary actions to solve them (Muller, 2009). They present the problem as a narrative to make it a visible and understandable issue of concern with specific causes and prospects for solutions. Then, the issue becomes a popular topic that addresses a target audience I order to obtain public and media attention (Gusfield, 2008). Once the problem becomes a political issue of public interest, entrepreneurs call on authorities to solve it, providing strong justifications supported by numbers, statistics, and scientific arguments that emphasize the urgent nature of the issue.
17The fourth step, problems’ solution, depends on the popularity of the problems and the outreach of the actors to officials involved in the decision-making process. The goal is to attract the attention of political authorities, put a problem on the government’s political agenda, and emphasize it as a sensitive topic for public opinion to incite the state to take appropriate action (Felstiner et al., 1991; Henry, 2007; Neveu, 2015). The transformation of a controversial issue into a political or public problem worthy of state intervention is the result of political actors bringing the issue to light (Stone, 1989). To develop an appropriate solution, actors must define themselves, emphasize their relationships with interest groups, NGOs, and symbolic figures, and highlight their role as political pioneers to determine the appropriate course of action (Gusfield, 2008).
18This study is based on the triangulation of the thematic analysis of the Heliopolis residents’ Facebook group and page with the author’s open-ended and semi-structured interviews with 11 members of the group. The author also conducted unstructured and non-participatory personal observation of members’ interaction on the group and page. The combination of these methods does not only ensure the accuracy of data by cross-cutting findings from different sources but also emphasizes the centrality of language and communication as an alternative tool for collecting data on policymaking in authoritarian contexts. The mobilization of qualitative methods that focus on language, norms, values, and communication allows researchers to examine the state’s monopoly over policymaking, unravel non-state actors’ subjectivity and power relations, and reveal the meanings underlying their perceptions and strategies for dealing with a particular issue of contention vis-à-vis authorities.
19The thematic analysis of the Heliopolis residents’ Facebook page and group ‘Heliopolis Heritage’ involved closely examining and analyzing 213 posts, 57 photos, 234 comments, and 47 videos in Arabic from 2018 until 2022.
20The author regularly and systematically collected data by taking screenshots and notes, which were later rearranged in an Excel spreadsheet detailing the content of each data category and identifying its source (posts, photos, comments, and videos). The author focused on extracting data that informed members’ tactics and strategies for opposing the state’s removal of the neighborhood’s old tram. Interested in this issue since it first occurred, the author has systematically examined textual semantics and tracked keywords associated with the four steps of Neveu’s problem framing throughout posts, photos, comments, stories, and videos, retrieving data throughout four consecutive years from 2018 to 2022. In doing so, the author examined the volume and frequency with which members joined the group, their rate of interaction, patterns of reactions, discussions of focus, sentiments, tones, and hashtags (Braun & Clarke, 2012). to the author manually coded the collected data in the Excel sheet to track recurrent themes and frequencies. Using a combination of deduction and induction, codes were deducted from the steps of problem framing while themes were directly inferred from the collected data that informed residents’ strategies (Snow & Benford, 1988; Stone, 1989; Neveu, 2015).
21As for data analysis, the author manually processed the data to trace the framing strategies of the residents of Heliopolis concerning the old tram. Specifically, the following framing steps were adopted: issue emergence, problem identification, formulation/diffusion, and solution suggestion. Subsequently, thematic analysis was based on the operationalization of problem framing and the delineation of its components, the occurrence of an undesirable incident, the identification of the issue of concern, the formulation of the issue of concern as a public problem, and the problem’s transfer to the decision-makers’ agenda (Neveu, 2015, 2017). The framing components were transformed into themes inferred from the data, the state’s decision to remove the tram, the state’s violation of the neighborhood’s historical heritage, the protection of the neighborhood’s heritage, and the state’s intervention.
22While thematic analysis illustrated residents’ framing strategies regarding the state’s removal of the tram as an issue of concern, the author also relied on open-ended and semi-structured interviews conducted with 11 members of the group between 2018 and 2022. To solicit members’ engagement in the research, an announcement was written and posted on the group in November 2018. The announcement informed members about the main topic of inquiry and asked them if they would like to participate in the research interviews. In response, 11 members agreed to participate upon the author’s pledge to ensure anonymity. Following members’ written consent to participate, each interview was conducted in Arabic via Facebook Messenger, which was deemed a safe medium, and the interviews averaged three hours. The author took regular notes during the interviews to avoid recording and preserve participants’ anonymity. The author benefited from an extensive four-year period to manually process the data and ensure analytical precision, referring to each interviewee by a numerical sequence. The interviews enabled the author to emphasize the extent to which residents engaged in policymaking as conscious actors advancing a solution to a common problem vis-à-vis the state. The interviews constituted a complementary tool to thematic analysis, further highlighting residents’ language, discursive and communication framing strategies, and practices within a repressive context (Zittoun, 2021). Respondents persuasively presented personal arguments reflecting their views, positions, values, and ideas about the state’s role, the government’s decision, and their right as residents to oppose the state’s decision. The author relied on the interviewees’ accounts to meticulously identify the residents’ intentions, strategies, and goals during the process of meaning creation and issue framing in reaction to the state’s decision.
23Relying on unstructured and non-participant observations of members’ interactions within the group and on the page, I acted as a distant observer who abstained from taking part in group and page discussions to ensure sufficient distance from the subject of study (Dzwigol, 2020; Slupińska, 2020). Through systematic daily observation, I followed developments related to the tram removal in line with Neveu’s problem framing steps without adopting any particular order. With the administrator’s approval I joined the group to follow its updates, members’ profiles (while keeping them anonymous), activities, and interests. This allowed me to discern their practices, actions, arguments, values, and positions in reaction to the state’s decision. As a scholar and a resident of the neighborhood, I adopted a reflexive attitude which consisted in articulating residents’ communicative strategies and arguments in relation to their position as upper middle-class residents who supported the army’s eviction of the Muslim Brotherhood and celebrated Field Marshal Abdelfattah al-Sisi’s inauguration as president of Egypt. In this respect, data retrieved from personal observation contextualizes residents’ activities and strategies in relation to their positionality, highlighting the relationship between citizens and decision-makers, as well as policymaking and politics, within a repressive context.
24This section presents data showing how Heliopolis residents engaged in the framing of the state’s policy of preserving the neighborhood’s old tram, drawing on Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing approach: issue emergence, problem identification, diffusion, and solution suggestion. It highlights how the socio-cognitive approach of problem framing transgressed epistemological and methodological lacunas in policy framing across repressive contexts. This was achieved by tracking actors’ ideas, values, and worldview to highlight how they engaged in the framing of the state’s policy prior to implementation. By closely monitoring residents’ activism on social media as a virtual sphere of communication, observing their interactions on the Facebook group and page, and conducting interviews with them, the problem framing approach helped identified residents’ contribution to policymaking with regard to old tram in Heliopolis. This was achieved by highlighting their communication and discursive strategies in problematizing the tram’s removal without antagonizing the state and prompting its intervention to protect the neighborhood’s heritage.
25Based on the author’s observation of members’ interactions on the group and interviews conducted with residents, the state decided to remove the old tram in the Heliopolis neighborhood in 2016 to expand the bridge network across Cairo. During this period, the state has already embarked on a series of real estate projects in collaboration with crony businessmen and military officials (Sayigh, 2019; Adly, 2018). Starting in 2014, the state launched extensive evacuation campaigns of old, popular neighborhoods located in strategic areas. The goal was to renovate these neighborhoods, protect inhabitants from the dangers of their precarious conditions, and develop lucrative tourist, commercial, and entertainment hubs (World Report, 2013; Kotb, 2014; Lagarde, 2016). These old neighborhoods included residential areas close to historical sites such as the Tahrir Square, Old Downtown, and Islamic Cairo. The low- to middle-class inhabitants of these areas were forcefully evicted in return for resettlement plans that did not suit their lifestyles or daily survival activities. In light of the state’s strict measures against residents who resisted evacuation orders, ranging from military court sentences to repression (Shawkat, 2015; Magued, 2025b), Heliopolis residents developed discursive and communication strategies on social media as a safe and virtual means of expressing rejection in response to the state’s decision. These strategies included mobilizing common feelings of anger and despair to attract public support, raising awareness about Heliopolis’s heritage, publicizing residents’ problems, and exposing the state’s violations of the neighborhood’s heritage. Residents tagged officials in posts, images, and stories conveying their complaints and demands to preserve the tram.
26Through interviews and a close examination of residents’ activities on the ‘Heliopolis Heritage, Facebook group and page, members overcame the state’s closure of the public sphere by using social media as a virtual platform for public expression. This allowed them to highlight the tram issue as a public problem. Agitated by the state’s decision to remove the old Heliopolis tram, they framed this decision as an arbitrary encroachment on their living space, which incited them to take action (Interviewee 4). Despite their awareness of their unequal power relations vis-à-vis the state, residents were determined to transform the state’s decision into a public concern by actively participating in online campaigns. In this vein, a group of 152 residents created a Facebook page and group to protest the state’s decision to remove the old tram rails (Interviewees 3, 6, and 7). By creating a group and page open to Facebook users to visit, join, and interact with the members, they opted for two communication strategies to frame the tram issue. The creators of the group and page acted as cause entrepreneurs, developing online campaigns to mobilize the public and raise awareness about the neighborhood’s historical legacy. This would ensure that the tram issue resonated as a public problem related to the state’s violation of cultural heritage (Facebook group, 2018). Encompassing five retired individuals from the second generation of the neighborhood’s residents, the group and page admins capitalized on the mobilization of common feelings of anger, frustration, and despair, as well as sensitization tactics, to highlight the problematic nature of the state’s decision to remove the neighborhood’s tram.
27To frame the tram issue as a public concern, the admins opted for the mobilization of public support among Facebook users to attract more Heliopolis residents and non-residents and spread the word to wider circles. In doing so, the admins focused on aligning with the regime’s interest in Cairo’s heritage by emphasizing the importance of the tram as a historical site and an old means of transportation reflecting the neighborhood’s uniqueness and historicity (Interviewee 8). They wrote posts tagging friends and encouraging them to take action against the state’s removal of the tram, to which members reacted with extensive comments and shares. Hundreds of residents joined the group and page, criticizing the state’s decision to remove the tram. They expressed anger and despair, referring to the state’s action as an encroachment on the historical legacy of a modern and middle-class residential neighborhood (Facebook group, 2018).
28Alongside the mobilization strategy, the admins embarked on a sensitization campaign through the publication of multiple posts that attracted thousands of viewers (Facebook group, 2018-2020). The group and page admins argued that the Heliopolis neighborhood encompassed a wide network of tram lines built in the late 19th century. They rejected the state’s claims about the tram’s inefficiency and uselessness while contending that the trams deteriorated because of state neglect and urban development projects that disfigured the neighborhood’s architectural style (Personal observation, 2018-2022). In response to the state’s intention to remove the tram to improve traffic flow across the neighborhood’s streets, members indicated that the old tram was not responsible for traffic congestion, but rather, the state-sponsored transformation of the neighborhood’s urban landscape (Personal observation, 2018-2022). Members also emphasized that the tram is a legacy of the neighborhood’s modern history, one that has been violated by the state’s intervention through reconstruction projects (Interviewees, 9,11). Rebutting the state’s justification of its decision, respondents concurred that the tram did not constitute a problem and was still used by residents as a means of transportation.
While the state embarked on a campaign to remove the old tram network, the Heliopolis tram was one of the remaining lines that continued operating as a means of transportation in the neighborhood. (Interviewee 4)
29Hundreds of residents endorsed the admins’ argument about the tram’s historicity and the facticity of the state’s justification, providing further evidence to support their position. Newcomers posted pictures of old historical residential buildings demolished by the government and replaced by high-rise buildings erected by private and public contractors assigned by the army in exchange for hefty benefits (Interviewees 3, 7). Diffusing the word among friends and close circles on social media, members shared stories and posts outlining the neighborhood’s history (Personal observation, 2018-2022). New members used storytelling and shared personal archives of photos and documents to raise awareness among members and viewers about the history and cultural heritage of the Heliopolis neighborhood, which dates back to the beginning of the 19th century. Admins posted about the history of the neighborhood, relying on residents’ family archives. The posts highlighted the singularity of the neighborhood’s history and urban design, asserting its unique historical features (Facebook group, 2018-2020). In doing so, they presented extensive accounts of the architect who erected the neighborhood, designed its urban planning, and developed its modern architectural and artistic landmarks in cooperation with famous Western designers and engineers.
30By 2020, the group had reached three thousand members. The admins then highlighted the immediate need to embark on a diffusion campaign exposing the state’s determination to remove an old heritage belonging to a historical Cairene neighborhood. This campaign emphasized the collective and firm position of the members, who called for the protection of this heritage from neglect and arbitrary removal (Interviewee 7). Members in both the Facebook page and group embarked on a diffusion campaign by posting pictures of the tram before and during the removal process. They used the following hashtags: #Heliopolis Heritage,’ ‘#Save Heliopolis,’ ‘#Heliopolis is in Danger,’ and ‘#Heliopolis Tram’ (Facebook group, 2018-2022). Members commented extensively on these pictures while denouncing and expressing a common feeling of despair toward the local authorities' decision to eliminate the old tram, which had passed through the neighborhood’s streets for decades. Two members expressed their anger toward the state’s decision and brought up the state’s vision for protecting national heritage:
Although the government launched a restoration campaign to renew Cairo’s old historical buildings, such as the Baron Palace, in preparation for its inauguration and opening to the public, the removal of the old tram rails angered us and raised questions about the state’s intentions regarding the protection of national heritage. (Interviewee 3)
31By closely monitoring the removal process and widely sharing pictures of the process with members, admins expressed their concerns about the negative repercussions of the state’s interventions in the neighborhood. Calling for the immediate protection of the neighborhood’s heritage, they mobilized members to raise awareness among government officials. Members engaged in an intensive diffusion campaign by holding virtual gatherings on the Facebook page and group, writing about Heliopolis’s history, using hashtags, and sharing posts and pictures. They called for the rescue of the tram and urged the neighborhood’s local authorities not to remove the tram rails from Heliopolis streets (Personal observation, 2018-2022).
32Once the government started removing the tram’s wagons, members exposed the government’s actions by writing and sharing extensive posts about the state’s ‘disappointing’ attitude toward residents’ request to keep the tram. In reaction to the government’s indifference toward residents’ common concerns, admins and members collectively expressed frustration over the neighborhood’s tram, a strong identification to its heritage, and an attachment to its unique architecture and urban features which distinguished Heliopolis from other Cairene neighborhoods. According to one respondent,
We organized public sensitization campaigns asking the government to repair the tram lines when the state was expanding the Cairo metro networks in 2012. The government accepted this request in 2016 when the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the Egyptian Ministry of International Cooperation concluded a $250 million loan agreement to repair the tram lines, according to which the project was introduced to the government’s agenda. (Interviewee 10)
33Following the removal of the tram, respondents were furious with the government’s indifference,
In 2018, the government broke its promise to residents and removed the tram tracks without prior notification for renovating Cairo’s public infrastructure. (Interviewee 2)
In spite of our persistent expression of discontent, the state implemented its project which consisted in the construction of five bridges by the Armed Forces’ Engineering Authority in Heliopolis and required the removal of the tram. (Interviewee 8)
34Not only did residents consider the state’s removal of the tram rails as a violation of the neighborhood’s heritage but also an absolute breach of international treaties on the preservation of the environment (Facebook page, 2018-2022). Members’ contributions to the group and the page’s campaign exposing the government’s action implicitly opposed the state’s urban expansion at the expense of the neighborhood’s old heritage (Personal observation, 2018-2022). Embodying a strong sense of historicity and collective memory, the admins accused the government of distracting citizens and removing the old tram tracks despite an agreement for their renewal. They posted and shared pictures depicting the different stages of the removal process, starting from the assignment of blue signs on the tram wagons in preparation for removal to the start of the bridges’ construction project, which was planned to be built in the tram’s location (Facebook group, 2018-2021). Hundreds of photos of the bridges’ construction sites were widely shared to show residents the phases of the government project that resulted in the removal of the neighborhood’s historical landmark. A member shared a post that garnered hundreds of likes on the group,
We feel very sorry for the end of the tram, a historical monument that we fought to preserve against the state’s determination to remove it, but we cannot do anything more. (Interviewee 5)
35The admin stated,
We deployed extensive efforts to inform the government about the historical nature of the tram but they were in vain. We shared old photos of the first tram workers in Heliopolis to convey our message about the absolute necessity of preserving the tram as a historical heritage of the neighborhood. (Interviewee 3)
36Although the diffusion and exposure campaigns by admins and members about the state’s violation of the neighborhood’s heritage did not deter the government from removing the tram rails, they pressured officials to consider preserving the tram as part of the neighborhood’s heritage.
37Members’ persistence in conducting online campaigns on behalf of Heliopolis residents, exposing the state’s removal of the tram and diffusing the call for preserving the neighborhood’s heritage, elicited the state’s intervention. The Islamic Antiquities sector, the Central Administration of the Tram, the Public Transportation Authority, the Cairo Governorate, and the Ministry of Antiquities agreed to collaborate in moving one of the oldest tram wagons to Baron Empain’s Palace for public display. They installed the wagon’s concrete bases, flanges, and rails which became one of the neighborhood’s historical landmarks (Facebook group, 2021). The exhibition included the remainder of the red tram, which was the main means of transportation in Heliopolis, and the white tram that connected Heliopolis to other areas. The tram cars were added to the exposition at Baron Empain’s Palace, located in the heart of Heliopolis, to share the neighborhood’s history with future generations. According to one member,
We were determined to reach out to the authorities to do something about the trams and fortunately they suggested creating this exposition to preserve the tram as a neighborhood heritage. This is meaningful since it tells the story of the first tram line in Egypt, sheds light on the neighborhood’s architectural singularity and attracts residents. (Interviewee 2)
38The Heliopolis Heritage Foundation, a civil society organization, expanded the exposition, creating ‘The Heliopolis Museum,’ which showcases the possessions of families who used to live in Heliopolis until the first half of the 20th century, telling the neighborhood history. During a radio program, the Foundation’s leader stated that the Ministry of Antiquities had agreed to display tickets, tram subscriptions, family photos, postal cards, furniture, certificates, old telephones, statues, water and electricity bills, advertisements, old storefronts, maps, correspondence, bags, stationery, and dinnerware in the museum. Each time would be labeled with the name of the owner and the exhibitor (Personal observation, 2018-2022). In cooperation with the Belgian Embassy and the Heliopolis Heritage Foundation, the Ministry sought to reuse the Palace by creating an exhibition that narrates the history of the Heliopolis neighborhood through photos, archives, illustrations, maps, correspondence, and short documentaries that emphasize Heliopolis’s unique lifestyle. Members expressed satisfaction with the government’s proposed solution to the tram issue, praising the admins’ efforts and expressing gratitude to the Ministry of Antiquities for collaborating to preserve the tram’s rails in a museum (Facebook group, 2021). In a show of gratitude, they shared their possessions of old pictures, testaments, and newspapers related to the neighborhood’s history. According to the members,
We are happy to preserve our heritage and share what our ancestors left to inform future generations about the neighborhood’s foundation, buildings, architecture, property, and news. (Interviewee 6)
Despite the old tram’s removal and the shift in the neighborhood’s landscape, at least a middle position was reached through the creation of a museum to sustain the neighborhood’s old heritage and display pictures and possessions telling the neighborhood’s story and showing how it looked like before the state’s intervention. (Interviewee 1)
39The engagement of Heliopolis residents in framing the tram issue contributes to the scholarship addressing policymaking within authoritarian contexts (Van den Dool & Schlaufer, 2024; Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023). It sheds light on the careful choice of repertoires and strategies of informal actors in problem framing to reach out to the state without triggering its repressive machinery. In doing so, residents circumvented the legal and constitutional constraints prohibiting citizens’ right to protest and assembly, issued in July 2013, by resorting to social media as a virtual platform for communication and sharing information with the public. Circumventing the state’s control over the public sphere, residents were forced to adapt their strategies to the state’s agenda and the exigencies of their operational environment. Rather than appealing to elected representatives in local councils or Parliament, residents, aware of the state’s determination to remove the tram, framed the removal of the tram as an infringement on the neighborhood’s heritage to gain public attention and support vis-à-vis the state’s decision. In this vein, residents adopted innovative communication and discursive framing strategies manifesting their concern for the neighborhood’s historicity rather than showing outright opposition to the state’s decision.
40Examining how a neighborhood’s residents framed a contentious issue as a public problem requiring state intervention in Egypt, this case highlights the salience of Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing as a suitable theoretical framework for unpacking informal actors’ strategies for influencing policymaking within repressive contexts. Unlike scholarship examining policymaking in authoritarian contexts (Van den Dool & Schlaufer, 2024; Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023), this study addresses Heliopolis residents’ role in framing a common concern into a public problem by emphasizing the centrality of actors’ profiles, backgrounds, and values to grasp their dynamics and influence on the state’s decision-making process. Although the residents did not deter the state from removing the tram, they capitalized on the state’s determination to remove it to strengthen their strategies of action. Building on the state’s determination to remove the tram, they drew inspiration from the state’s sociopolitical lexicon of heritage protection to mobilize more public support and gain wider maneuverability vis-à-vis the state’s security restrictions.
41Contributing to the body of scholarship examining policymaking within authoritarian regimes (Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024), this study revealed the particularity of empirical cases addressing informal actors’ engagement in policy framing within autocratic countries. It shed light on the specific steps that Heliopolis residents took to formulate communication and discursive framing strategies to mobilize a wider public, diffuse the issue of contention across social media, and influence decision-makers’ final deliberation. The residents’ call for the preservation of the Heliopolis heritage in response to the state’s tram removal decision not only demonstrated citizens’ ability to engage in problem framing and influence policymaking within autocracies; it also underlined how they adapted these framing strategies to ensure both their safety and the state’s responsiveness. While citizens do engage in policymaking through accessible legal and constitutional pathways and institutional channels of communication in democracies, authoritarian regimes’ security and legal restrictions prompt citizens to develop implicit and innovative tactics to avoid triggering the state’s retaliation in the event of objection. Rather than resorting to direct opposition in reaction to the state’s decision, such as protesting, signing petitions, taking the case to court, or organizing sit-ins, the Heliopolis residents resolved the issue of contention by deploying indirect and innovative conciliatory tactics.
42While studies addressing policymaking within autocracies have referred to the practice of citizens engaging in policy framing (Haddad, 2024; Chalaya & Uldanov, 2024; Wang & Duckett, 2023), the current study overcame epistemological deficiencies in the scholarship addressing policymaking in Egypt (Hilal, 2001; Shaarawy, 2001), where the mention of citizens’ role in policy framing was deemphasized in favor of an omnipresent, dominant, and unitary state. In this vein, the study capitalized on showing how residents redirected the state attention toward viewing the tram as historical heritage instead of an obstruction to traffic flow. Despite the state’s exclusive domain of action, the residents developed autonomous agency, intervening in the framing of a public concern and inciting the state to come up with a solution.
43Drawing on Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing, this study also underlined the normative flexibility of policy theories in identifying and tracing actors’ strategies within an autocratic context. Although Neveu’s problem framing definitely captures actors’ contribution to policymaking in democratic settings (Neveu, 2017, 2019, 2021), it has been underutilized by scholars examining policymaking in authoritarian regimes (Van den Dool & Schlaufer, 2024; Magued, 2025a). Using Neveu’s steps, this study highlighted how both official and informal actors’ contribution to policymaking in autocracies can be studied based on available sources such as their profiles, repertoires, and strategies of action to unveil the nature and means of their contribution and influence on decision-making.
44Furthermore, the case of Heliopolis residents’ framing of the state’s policy toward the old tram emphasized the methodological suitability of problem framing for authoritarian contexts by bypassing political censorship and security restrictions (Khachab, 2025; Schlaufer & Chalaya, 2025). Neveu’s problem framing enables scholars to mobilize accessible data using safer and more convenient research methods, such as critical discourse analysis, content analysis, and in our case, personal observation of social media, textual, and visual content, as well as the conducting of indirect/online interviews through encrypted platforms such as Facebook Messenger and WhatsApp.
45In response to policy framing scholarship on authoritarian contexts that overlooks Arab countries, this study examined Heliopolis residents’ contributions to policymaking in Egypt. It unpacked residents’ framing strategies of a public problem, the tram removal, from 2018 until 2022. To this end, the author relied on Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing approach and the triangulation of open-ended semi-structured interviews with residents, thematic analysis, and personal observation of residents’ interaction in a Facebook group. The study revealed residents’ discursive and communication strategies as informal actors in framing their concerns in line with the state’s political lexicon and adapting to contextual exigencies.
46To address analytical deficiencies in the scholarship investigating actors’ strategies in policymaking within autocratic contexts, this study relied on Neveu’s four-pronged problem framing. Capitalizing on informal actors’ linguistic, discursive, and communication strategies in problem framing expanded the scope and methods of policy research to include the emotions, values, and perceptions of actors, highlighting their agency in policy framing and revealing their adaptation tactics in their operational contexts. This paved the way for the mobilization of accessible and more suitable research methods that bypass security restrictions on public access to official documentation, archives, and decision-makers.
47Although this study aimed to address a gap in policy framing scholarship, the author primarily focused on Egypt as a case study. Drawing inspiration from studies examining the role of informal actors in policymaking within autocracies, this study applied problem framing to a case from Egypt to emphasize variations in actors’ strategies for adapting to their sociopolitical environment. While a single case study limits generalization, it sheds light on methodological and analytical imperatives related to the particularities of each empirical case. This empirical particularity is associated with the current expansion of policy theory applications to different types of authoritarian regimes, which vary in their legal, constitutional, security, and social limitations. By closely examining the Heliopolis case in Egypt, this study presents a further application of problem framing in an autocratic context. It uses a combination of available and suitable research methods to overcome the lack of transparency and security-institutional limitations on sharing information.
48This study is a preliminary step for future researchers to delve into variations in authoritarian regimes as an independent factor in policymaking and capture their varying impact on actors’ tools, strategies, and scopes of influence or contributions to state policies. Manifesting various types, structures, and norms, the authoritarian variable constitutes a normative and methodological turn in policy studies that warrants future examination to expand the replication of policy theories and ensure their empirical validity across case studies. The emergence of actors with a range of innovative tools of action and varying degrees of influence must be examined in relation to the state’s centrality in policymaking and the influence of actors on policies within autocracies.
