Abstract

An entire paper could be written on the question: what do we mean by that ambiguous word planning, in any particular context? That question must be answered at the outset, because it is central to this paper: here planning will centrally mean land-use planning, that is, the codification and control of land use in new development and redevelopment according to plans that then form the basis of development control decisions; but it is impossible to confine discussion to this narrow definition, because land-use planning inevitably reflects wider urban policy concerns in the fields of economic development, social and community policy, housing policy, transportation planning, and environmental policy, to name only a few of the most important. Tracing these interrelationships will indeed prove the central theme of this discussion. Document type: Book

Abstract

This report examines the current approaches in policies with respect to diversity for the city of Rotterdam, the Netherlands. As a background, we first provide an overview of the national political system and the governance structure for diversity in Rotterdam. We examine which actors - both governmental and non-governmental and at multiple levels of scale - are involved in the governance of diversity in Rotterdam. In addition, we give a short outline of key shifts in national policy discourses on diversity, citizenship and in-migration since the 1980s. Second, we analyse dominant governmental discourses on urban policy and diversity. Therefore, we examine how diversity is addressed in the most significant documents that deal with diversity in Rotterdam. On the basis of qualitative interviews, we also examine how governmental policy actors in the city understand the policies. Third, we also examine non-governmental views on diversity policy. Amongst others, we identify the importance of diversity as a policy issue, and the meaning, objectives and targets of the relevant policies, in different important fields, such as integration, housing, education, and work.

Abstract

This report aims at assessing the role of diversity in urban policy in Italy, with a focus on the case of Milan. Even though we will provide a general overview of diversity discourses mentioning a number of different groups and targets, our focus will be mostly on in-migrant diversity. This is due mainly to the fact that – as interviews and policy documents analysis will show – there is no wide-scope, cross-sectoral, general and strategic discourse on diversity and its promotion in the Italian policy and public agenda. Instead, there is a plurality of fragmented discourses concerning specific groups and categories (e.g. in-migrants, Roma and in the Italian case also the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, young people, women) that is reflected in an institutional fragmentation. The resulting fragmented policy practice is reinforced by a weak inter-institutional coordination at the horizontal level between departments and policy-specific organizations, usually reffered to as "departmentalism" or "silo-culture"

Abstract

variety of local governance arrangements and initiatives exist in urban neighbourhoods that use diversity in a positive way and aim to improve the social and economic conditions for its residents. This policy brief focuses on such arrangements. It calls for an increase in sustainable and flexible support for bottom-up arrangements that fill the gap between official urban policies and the needs of the population.

Abstract

In recent academic and urban policy writings the term urban diversity is usually understood, or discussed within the context of, increasing ‘socio-cultural’ diversity in cities or is explicitly connected to debates over immigration and demographic change. Although policy agendas follow certain common trends ‘to deal with’ the consequences of diversity, there is a lack of evidence-based research on how representations of diversity are mobilised and implemented by institutions of governance operating at multiple scales and how these narratives relate to each other. Policy-makers are faced with new dilemmas over how to govern and manage cities that are becoming increasingly diverse, on the one hand, and increasingly ‘sensitive’ to certain channels of flows of people (such as refugees), on the other. In some cases, city authorities promote the idea of inclusive diversity as a mark of modernisation and tolerance. In others, its recognition may be seen as a threat to an imagined social order and is perceived to be fuelling neo-assimilationist policies in many European Union cities. This special issue aims to fill this gap by providing evidence-based research outcomes that tackle different dimensions of the governance of diversity in cities. The principal aim of the research project, named DIVERCITIES, that underpins this collection was to critically assess evidence concerning the range of socio-economic outcomes that may emerge from the presence of greater urban diversity. DIVERCITIES has shown that city policy agendas across Europe are often more ‘positive’ towards diversity than national policies and media reports. Moreover, local policy initiatives, mostly formed at the bottom-up scale, sometimes as a cooperation between state and civic actors and sometimes as purely private or even individual arrangements, address the actual needs of certain population groups by acting as bridge-builders between public authorities and target groups. This collection aims to provide a clear understanding of how diversity is understood, operationalised and dealt with at different scales of policy-making. In focusing on European examples, it provides an important addition to a literature that has become Anglo-American focused, both in terms of the concepts and policy interventions.