Walking the Walk’ Rather Than ‘Talking the Talk’ of Superdiversity: Continuity and Change in the Development of Rotterdam’s Immigrant Integration Policies

Abstract

Rotterdam is commonly characterised as pioneering in immigrant integration governance, often functioning as a predecessor for national and local policies in other cities. Before the first national integration policies were drafted in the Netherlands, Rotterdam already developed integration policies to deal with the interethnic tensions in the ‘Afrikaanderwijk’-neighbourhood. Also more recently Rotterdam’s policies were marked as pioneering, setting an example for other national and local policies. The best known example is the national law ‘Wet Bijzondere Grootstedelijke Problematiek’, also known as the Rotterdam Act. This national law was developed in Rotterdam and offers large cities the discretion to develop measures for specific urban problems in their city. Ethnic segregation and inequalities were the main underlying reason for Rotterdam to develop this policy. A local motto – ‘deeds, not words’ (in Dutch ‘Geen woorden maar daden’) – expresses the hands-on attitude for which the city and its citizens are known. This maxim is reflected in the city’s integration policies as well.

Brokerage in urban networks on diversity and inclusion: The case of Rotterdam

“…Rotterdam has been considered a "laboratory" or pioneer in social, housing and crime/safety policy (Noordegraaf & Vermeulen, 2010;Van Houdt & Schinkel, 2019), as well as in policies relating to gender (Van den Berg, 2012) and targeting immigrants (Dekker & Breugel, 2019;Scholten, 2018). In their historical account of Rotterdam's immigrant integration policies between the late 1970s and 2018, Dekker and Breugel (2019, p. 107ff) identify six different approaches, starting with the generic focus on "socio-economic, legal-political and spatial" inequalities in the 1970s, to more and less targeted approaches either "benefiting" or "burdening" minority groups.…”

Diversity-mainstreaming in times of ageing and migration: implementation paradoxes in municipal aged care provision

“…Although this shift to assimilationism has caused disaffection with multicultural policies at the national level, urban governments have not uncritically adopted the assimilationist discourse in policies. However, they have largely ceased to make specific policies to support minority groups (Poppelaars and Scholten 2008;Hoekstra 2015;Dekker and Van Breugel 2019). The case of Amsterdam, in particular, demonstrates the effect of the shift from policies targeting minorities to diversity-mainstreaming policies.…”

“…Uitermark, Rossi and Van Houtum found that the policy transition fuelled entrepreneurialism among well-established ethnic minority groups and disadvantaged new minority groups and groups with less social capital. In Rotterdam and The Hague, immigrants and ethnic minorities have, like their counterparts in the capital, similarly been 're-cast' as citizens of 'diverse cities' with concomitant citizenship duties (Poppelaars and Scholten 2008;Hoekstra 2015;Dekker and Van Breugel 2019).…”

Guessing games with target groups : Securing a livelihood by supporting refugees in a hostile environment

“…At the same time though, what is and what is not allowed in terms of targeting particular groups remains opaque, because, for instance, consecutive reports (KIS, 2017;The National Ombudsman, 2018;SCP, 2018) call for targeted interventions for people from Eritrean descent-and as such fly in the face of any 'generic' policy assumption. Moreover, different political parties that led subsequent coalitions during successive political periods in Rotterdam each introduced integration policy changes with different approaches to targeting (Dekker & Van Breugel, 2019). In trying to adhere to the seemingly inexecutable demand to follow 'generic' policies whilst at the same time articulating a clearly focused target group, Aida struggles to formulate her support activities for Eritrean refugee status holders in a way that applies to all residents.…”

“…What similarly leads to confusion is that, for decades, the City Council in Rotterdam worked with shifting attitudes regarding the desirability of targeted policies. These shifts can be explained by shifts in the make-up of the city executive and City Council during successive political periods, in which different political parties that led subsequent coalitions each introduced different approaches to targeting (Dekker & Van Breugel, 2019). Other factors that render the admissibility of targeted interventions unclear for my interlocutors, is that 'migration-related issues in the Netherlands still tend to be framed in group-specific terms' (Van Breugel & Scholten, 2018, p. 133), and that reports (De Boom & Van Wensveen, 2019) that monitor the achievements of 'people with a migration background' run contrary to generic policy assumptions.…”