The prevailing dynamic developments on local level within the MENA region are indeed rooted and organized in the frame of informal spaces, but they also exemplify how intricate interrelations between formal and informal spaces of local politics are in this region. Local governance structures in MENA countries are characterized by a specific coexistence of informal structures, such as tribal and family networks, and formal institutional arrangements, such as local councils. This paper will contribute to the question of how local politics is organized in Amman and Ma’an by focussing on the interdependences of formal and informal institutions as well as on the relation between state and societal actors. In doing so, the paper seeks to highlight state-society-relations in Jordan in order to contribute to the understanding of mechanisms of authoritarian stability from ‘below’. Subsequently, the paper analyzes if and how these interactions are affected by decentralization programs. The hypothesis of this paper is that local informal structures as well as new modes of interactions between local governments and private actors in the frame of decentralization do not implicate any shift in local power structures. In contrary, informal institutions and state-societal interactions frequently contribute to the stability of authoritarian regimes from ‘below’. The paper will follow up with the discussion about informal spaces and employs a wide concept of participation that includes formal, informal as well as ‘invisible’ participation modes. It will be based on Migdal’s theoretical state-in-society approach and on the governance concept. Based on first empirical field studies, the next chapter will provide a mapping of local actors and institutions in a comparative perspective between Amman and Ma’an. It will be shown that the local level encompasses a variety of different (new) societal actors who increasingly demand opportunities of “co-governance”. The subsequent chapter analyzes these new demands by embedding them into the context of decentralization processes and discourses in Jordan. The paper concludes stating that these demands indeed encourage an incremental opening up of limited spaces resulting in the establishment of new governance institutions, but these new structures have not been the result of local struggles, but a decision from “above”. By integrating private actors into new governance institutions, authoritarian regimes seek to legitimate these institutions and to control actors and processes.