Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

European Cities, Municipal Organizations and Diversity pp 111–155Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

What Shapes Local Level Policies?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 346 Accesses

Part of the book series: Global Diversities ((GLODIV))

Abstract

This chapter contributes to an understanding of the specific position of cities in the multi-level governance of migration and the resulting diversity. Antwerp, Amsterdam, and Leeds are located in national contexts with similar public debates about the shift away from multiculturalism. They all introduced ‘diversity policies’, but by following different local triggers. I compare the importance of national-level factors, local-level factors, and international exchange between cities with respect to approaches to difference. Overall, I found that national or regional legislation and funding regulations can play a role in defining local diversity policies, but also detected strong local self-confidence in appropriating these standards, and that local factors played a decisive role in shaping cities’ concepts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    With regard to immigration policy, the federal level regulates access to the Belgian soil, the stay and residence of immigrants, and their possible deportation. (Government of Flanders, 2009)

  2. 2.

    The French, Flemish, and German communities.

  3. 3.

    The regions of Wallonia, Flanders, and the Brussels Capital Region.

  4. 4.

    ‘Communauté française de la région wallonne.’

  5. 5.

    ‘Commission communautaire française de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale.’

  6. 6.

    ‘Minderhedennota.

  7. 7.

    This was done through the policy document ‘Contourennota’.

  8. 8.

    These include language and integration exams.

  9. 9.

    This was based on the Wet Inburgering Nieuwkomers WIN of 1998.

  10. 10.

    These are specified as freedom, equality, tolerance. and solidarity.

  11. 11.

    The key notion used in Dutch is ‘zelfredzaamheid’.

  12. 12.

    This notion could be translated as ‘civic citizenship’, as it refers to the behaviour that is expected from citizens in public life.

  13. 13.

    This was based on a report by the ‘Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid’ (WWR), a think tank advising the Dutch government.

  14. 14.

    For a discussion of the lack of effectiveness of the Dutch Equal Treatment Act, which was only adopted in 1994, see, for example (Dierx & Rodrigues, 2003).

  15. 15.

    ‘Kabinetsbeleid Antilliaans-Nederlandse probleemjongeren vanaf 2010’.

  16. 16.

    ‘Minister van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties.’

  17. 17.

    As part of the right-liberal minority cabinet with support of the PVV (Geert Wilder’s party).

  18. 18.

    ‘inburgering.’

  19. 19.

    ‘Begeleidingsdiensten Opbouwwerk Migranten.’

  20. 20.

    ‘Hoge Raad voor migranten.’

  21. 21.

    ‘Koninklijk Commissariaat voor het Migrantenbeleid.’

  22. 22.

    Johan Leman (her cabinet chief) and Bruno Vinikas (her adjunct) were the authors.

  23. 23.

    Later, the KCM was reformed as Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism (‘Centrum voor Gelijkheid van Kansen en Racismebestrijding’—CGKR), which still exists today (Blommaert & Martens, 1999, p. 11; 30).

  24. 24.

    The party reorganised itself in 2004 as ‘Vlaams Belang’.

  25. 25.

    The party received 17.7 % of the vote in Antwerp.

  26. 26.

    ‘gelijkekansenbeleid’.

  27. 27.

    ‘inburgeringsbeleid’.

  28. 28.

    ‘Decreet’ in Belgium refers to a formal law issued by the government of one of either the three language communities or three regions.

  29. 29.

    ‘Minderhedendecreet’.

  30. 30.

    ‘VLD’.

  31. 31.

    ‘SP’.

  32. 32.

    ‘Agalev’.

  33. 33.

    The first ministerial post which explicitly bears ‘civic integration’ in its title was created in 2004. Marino Keulen (the liberal democratic party ‘Open VLD’) held office until 2009. Since then it has been filled by N-VA (the Flemish nationalist party) politician Geert Bourgeois.

  34. 34.

    ‘Inburgeringsdecreet’.

  35. 35.

    ‘inburgeringsprogramma’.

  36. 36.

    These include: gender, race, skin color, origin, national or ethnic origin, age, sexual orientation, civil status, birth, ability, religion and belief, political conviction, language, health status, handicap, physical or genetic characteristics, social position, and nationality.

  37. 37.

    Which, since 2009, is based on the so-called ‘Integration decree’ (‘Integratiedecreet’).

  38. 38.

    ‘inburgering’.

  39. 39.

    In 2009, this trend was also followed up on the regional level, when the integration decree was introduced. As regards the labelling of this policy as one of diversity, Antwerp at the local leve is still one step ahead.

  40. 40.

    The city’s integration service needs to set up a policy plan every three years, in accordance with the requirements of the regional minorities/integration decree, to serve as a framework for an agreement between local and regional policy levels. This creates a certain double reporting for Antwerp’s diversity department, which not only publishes its yearly action plan (Stad Antwerpen, 2009b), but also a bi-annual plan for the Flemish government (Stad Antwerpen, 2009a).

  41. 41.

    These include increasing accessibility, living together in diversity and conducting pilot projects.

  42. 42.

    E.g. in 2009 4.5 of seven team members of the diversity department were funded by the Flemish government (Stad Antwerpen, 2009a).

  43. 43.

    This is accompanied by provincial ‘integratie centra’, in the case of Antwerpen the De8 (www.vmc.be)

  44. 44.

    The concept originated in Canada, where it was developed on the basis of the notion of ‘social cohesion’ (Cantle, 2005, p. 50).

  45. 45.

    In the following section, empirical findings from several additional interviews with heads of diversity departments in Bristol, Sheffield, and two London city boroughs, such as an interview with one representative of the Local Government Group (LG), will be included in my analysis. These were conducted in July 2011, prior to my research stay in Leeds.

  46. 46.

    In 1975, and parallel to the racial equality legislation, the Sex Discrimination Act came into place, which was overseen by the Equal Opportunities Commission (Squires, 2009, p. 498).

  47. 47.

    The approach to individual needs by merging attention on different categories was highly welcomed in Leeds. According to a diversity officer, it not only provides synergies, but stimulates thinking across categorical boundaries.

  48. 48.

    In the UK ‘city council’ is the legal and generally used term for local governments with city status.

  49. 49.

    In the following, I will refer to immigrant policies in England, and not to the United Kingdom more broadly, as Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland have their own ways of stimulating local integration politics.

  50. 50.

    The Standard encompassed five levels of attainment.

  51. 51.

    The Framework encompassed three levels of attainment: developing, achieving, excellence.

  52. 52.

    The Disability Rights Commission of 2005 based its work on the Discrimination Act of 1995.

  53. 53.

    When the national Equality Standard for Local Government was reworked as the ‘Equality Framework’ in 2010, the Equality and Diversity department set up an internal validation process. They assessed whether they were ready to apply for the ‘excellent’ appraisal. Its outcomes were summarised in the internal document ‘Our improvement journey’ (City of Leeds, 2011b), which provides a narrative on the current status of the municipal organization in its attainments in five areas of performance in the Equality Framework. Diversity officers in Leeds experienced the use of ‘storyboards’ in this document as a helpful methodology to capture qualitative evidence in documenting the progress of the city council on equality and diversity, and to also communicate these successes to the rest of the organization. Instrumental software (EFECT stands for ‘Equality Framework Evidence Collection Tool’) for collecting evidence and monitoring activities, in order to compare them to the set standards, was provided by the ‘Improvement and Development Agency’ (IDEA). IDEA has in the meantime been renamed ‘Local Government Improvement and Development’ and was merged with the ‘Local Government Association’ to become the ‘Local Government Group’. It is an association of and consultancy body for local governments in England and Wales, and tries to lobby for the local government sector in England and Wales vis-à-vis the national government. Even if the operationalization and monitoring of this data after its collection can be further improved, the use of the software, in one official’s view, had facilitated the introduction of working with indicators and a more business-like approach to services. In fact, the city planned to voluntarily repeat an internal validation of the municipality on equality and diversity in the summer of 2013, as it acknowledged the usefulness of the exercise. After going through a peer-review challenge, the ‘excellent’ appraisal was attained in 2011, and at the time of my research the equality and diversity department was spreading word about its success within the municipal organization. Overall, the exercise was experienced as potentially not challenging enough (Notes Team meeting 6/9/2011).

  54. 54.

    Minutes from Equality and Diversity Board 16/6/2011.

  55. 55.

    Based on document ‘Public sector equality duty brief’, received from the strategic policy officer in the Leeds Equality and Diversity department.

  56. 56.

    The national legislation is at the same time still binding at the local level and guidance on the application of the laws is communicated to the local level by DCLG ‘circulars’.

  57. 57.

    The increasing emphasis on the local level in policy-making, however, has been part of government agendas for more than a decade in the UK. In the 1990s, a range of reforms of the role of local government were carried out, transferring substantial responsibility for integration to the local level. As Rhodes has claimed, government in the UK is no longer mono-centric or unitary, but has become a ‘differentiated policy’. Intergovernmental relations are established between government departments of all types and levels, and are exceeded by relations with the private sector and voluntary bodies (Rhodes, 1997, p. 8). In the ‘White Paper on Modern local government: In touch with people’ a strategy for this reform was set out, aiming to make local councils more outward-looking and in touch with people (DETR, 1998, p. 9). These aims for reform were stipulated through the Local Government Act of 2000. The new localism bill was presented to the parliament in December 2010, and in November 2011 received the status of an Act.

  58. 58.

    Notes from Equality and Diversity Board, 8/9/2011.

  59. 59.

    For example, see the shift from a Labour-led council to a council led by the Liberal-Democrat Party in Sheffield, where it shifted again back to Labour in 2011, or Bristol, or the shift in London from having mainly Labour councils to a more ambiguous picture of some councils being led by the Labour Party and others by the Conservative Party.

  60. 60.

    ‘Alderman for social affairs, diversity and service provision’. At first, the position was filled by someone from the Socialist Party, but since the landslide victory of the nationalist party N-VA in 2013, the position has been filled by N-VA representatives.

  61. 61.

    Notes from discussion with team member on the occasion of a presentation of the overall findings of my PhD project in Antwerp, 29 May 2012.

  62. 62.

    The initial anti-discrimination acts were the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975, the Disability Discrimination Act of 1975, and the Race Relations Act of 1976. Only in the 2010 Equalities Act were different categories combined in the national anti-discrimination legislation.

  63. 63.

    Notes from Equality Board meeting, 8/9/2011.

  64. 64.

    Notes from Equality and Diversity workshop, 7/9/2011.

  65. 65.

    Notes from Equality and Diversity workshop, 7/9/2011.

  66. 66.

    In the meantime, the nationalist party N-VA is that of the mayor of Antwerp and has a much stronger representation in the city council.

Bibliography

  • Adam, I. (2011). Une approche différenciée de la diversité. Les politiques d’intégration des personnes issues de l’immigration en Flandre, en Wallonie et à Bruxelles (1980–2006). In J. Ringelheim (Ed.), Le droit et la diversité culturelle. Bruylant: Louvain-la-Neuve.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, M. (2007). Cities and labour immigration: Comparing policy responses in Amsterdam, Paris, Rome and Tel Aviv. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alibhai-Brown, Y. (2000). After multiculturalism. London: The foreign policy center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allers, M. A. (2012). De financiering van gemeenten is onnodig ingewikkeld. Tijdschrift voor openbare financien, 44(1), 38–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambrosini, M. (2013). ‘We are against a multi-ethnic society’: Policies of exclusion at the urban level in Italy. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 36(1), 136–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audit Commission. (2002). Equality and diversity. London: AC Knowledge—Learning from Audit, Inspection and Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrett, M. (2013). Interculturalism and multiculturalism. Similarities and differences. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertossi, C., & Duyvendak, J. W. (2012). National models of immigrant integration: The cost for comparative research. Comparative European Politics, 10, 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blommaert, J., & Martens, A. (1999). Van Blok tot Bouwsteen: Een visie voor een nieuw lokaal migrantenbeleid. Berchem: EPO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borkert, M., & Caponio, T. (2010). Introduction. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brubaker, R. (1992). Citizenship and nationhood in France and Germany. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, D. (2011). PM’s speech at Munich Security Conference. Retrieved November 24, 2015, from www.number10.gov.uk/news/pms-speech-at-munich-security-conference

  • Cantle, T. (2005). Community cohesion: A new framework for race and diversity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caponio, T. (2010a). Conclusion: Making sense of local migration policy arenas. In T. Caponio & M. Borkert (Eds.), The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Caponio, T. (2010b). The local dimension of migration policymaking: IMISCOE. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Caponio, T., & Borkert, M. (2010). The local dimension of migration policymaking. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carrera, S. (2009). The role and potential of local and regional authorities in the EU framework for the integration of immigrants. Brussels: CEPS.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Antwerpen, S. (2009a). Samenleven in diversiteit: Eenheid in verscheidenheid en verscheidenheid in eenheid. Beleidsplan 2009–2011. Antwerpen: City of Antwerpen Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Leeds. (2006). Equality and diversity strategy 2006–08. Leeds: City of Leeds Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Leeds. (2011a). Leeds: State of the city. Leeds: City of Leeds Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Leeds. (2011b). Our improvement journey. Leeds: City of Leeds Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, S. (1998). Public policies towards immigrant minorities in Western Europe. In C. Young (Ed.), Ethnic diversity and public policy: A comparative inquiry. Hampshire/NYC: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • DCLG. (2010). Decentralisation and the localism bill: An essential guide. London: HM Government.

    Google Scholar 

  • DETR. (1998). Modern local government: In touch with people. London: DETR.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dierx, J. R., & Rodrigues, P. R. (2003). The Dutch equal treatment act in theory and practice. Retrieved November 24, 2015, from http://www.errc.org/article/the-dutch-equal-treatment-act-in-theory-and-practice/1400

  • Downing, J. (2015). European influences on diversity policy frames: Paradoxical outcomes of Lyon’s membership of the Intercultural Cities programme. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38(9), 1557–1572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duyvendak, J. W., Hendriks, F., & van Niekerk, N. (2009). Cities in sight, inside cities: An introduction city in sight: Dutch dealings with urban change. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Duyvendak, J. W., & Scholten, P. W. A. (2011). Beyond the Dutch ‘multicultural model’: The coproduction of integration policy frames in the Netherlands. International Migration and Integration, 12(3), 331–348.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eade, J., Barrett, B., Flood, C., & Race, R. (2008). Advancing multiculturalism, post 7/7. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. (2005). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A common agenda for integration: framework for the integration of third- country Nationals in the European Union. COM 2005)389 final. Retrieved Accessed December 18, 2014, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2005:0389:FIN:EN:PDF

  • EC. (2011). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: European Agenda for the Integration of Third-Country Nationals. SEC(2011)957 final. Retrieved Accessed December 18, 2014., from http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/home-affairs/news/intro/docs/110720/1_en_act_part1_v10.pdf

  • Entzinger, H. (2003). The rise and fall of multiculturalism: The case of the Netherlands. In C. Joppke & E. Morawska (Eds.), Towards assimilation and citizenship: Immigration in liberal nation-states. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Entzinger, H., & Scholten, P. (2014). Between national and local integration policies. In M. Martiniello & J. Rath (Eds.), An introduction to immigrant incorporation studies. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faist, T., & Ette, A. (2007). The europeanization of national policies and politics of immigration. Between autonomy and the European Union. Houndsmill/New York: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Favell, A. (1998). Philosophies of integration immigration and the idea of citizenship in France and Britain. Houndsmills: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Favell, A. (2001). Integration policy and integration research in Europe. In T. A. Aleinikoff & D. Klusmeyer (Eds.), Citizenship today: Global perspectives and practices. Washington: Carnegie Endowment.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennema, M., & Tillie, J. (2004). Do immigrant policies matter? Ethnic civic communities and immigrant policies in Amsterdam, Liege and Zurich. In R. Penninx, K. Kraal, & S. Vertovec (Eds.), Citizenship in European cities: Immigrants, local politics and integration policies. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, S. (2001). The Vlaams Blok in Flanders Retrieved March 22, 2015, from http://www.politik.uni-mainz.de/ereps/download/belgium_overview.pdf

  • Fredman, S. (2001). Equality: A new generation? Industrial Law Journal, 30(2), 145–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, M. (2006). Citizenship practices and urban governance in European cities. Urban Studies, 43(4), 745–765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glick Schiller, N., & Caglar, A. (2010). Locating migration: Rescaling cities and migrants. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of Flanders. (2009). Beleidsnota Inburgering en Integratie 2009–14. Brussels: Government of Flanders Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of the Netherlands. (2011). Integratie, binding, burgerschap. Den Haag: Raad voor het openbaar bestuur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gsir, S. (2009). Diversity policy in employment and service provision. Case study Antwerp, Belgium. Dublin: Eurofound.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, E., & Zapata-Barrero, R. (Eds.). (2014). The politics of immigration in multi-level states: Governance and political parties. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, P. (1994). The policy challenge of ethnic diversity. Immigrant politics in France and Switzerland. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, D., & Swyngedouw, M. (2002). The extreme-right and enfranchisement of immigrants: Main issues in the public ‘debate’ on integration in Belgium. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 3(3&4), 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joppke, C. (2007). Beyond national models: Civic integration policies for immigrants in Western Europe. West European Politics, 30(1), 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen, M. B. (2012). The diverging logics of integration policy making at national and city level. International Migration Review, 46(1), 244–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, R. (2003). Good intentions sometimes make bad policy: A comparison of Dutch and German integration policies. In R. Cuperus, K. A. Duffek, & J. Kandel (Eds.), The challenge of diversity. European social democracy facing migration, integration, and multiculturalism. Innsbruck: StudienVerlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koopmans, R. (2010). Tradeoffs between equality and difference: The crisis of Dutch multiculturalism in cross-national perspective. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 36(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kraler, A. (2005). Immigrant and immigration policy making—A survey of the literature: The case of Austria. ICMPD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Modood, T. (2007). Multiculturalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, R. (2011). Cohesion and race relations. Paper presented at the conference of the British Sociological Association, Leeds.

    Google Scholar 

  • Motmans, J., & Cortier, E. (2009). Koken in dezelfde keuken? Onderzoek naar de mogelijke invulling van een Vlaams geintegreerd gelijkekansen- en/of diversiteitsbeleid. Antwerpen: Steunpunt Gelijkekansenbeleid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicholls, W., & Uitermark, J. (2013). Post-multicultural cities: A comparison of minority politics in Amsterdam and Los Angeles, 1970–2010. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(10), 1555–1575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ODPM. (2003). Equality and diversity in local government in England. London: Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelfrene, E., Doyen, G., & Hellemans, I. (2009). Immigration and migrant integration policies in Flanders. Leuven: Universite Catholique de Louvain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninx, R. (2005). After the Fortuyn and Van Gogh murders: Is the Dutch integration model in disarray? Lecture in the International Seminar for Experts Integrating: Migrants in Europe—Comparing the Different National Approaches. Paris. Retrieved from http://www.cicerofoundation.org/pdf/lecture_penninx.pdf

  • Penninx, R., & Martiniello, M. (2004). Integration processes and policies: State of the art and lessons. In R. K. Penninx, M. Martiniello, & S. Vertovec (Eds.), Citizenship in European cities: Immigrants, local politics and integration policies. New York: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninx, R., Garces-Mascarenas, B., & Scholten, P. (2005). Policy-making related to immigration and integration: A review of the literature on the Dutch case. In I. W. Papers (Ed.). Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninx, R., Kraal, K., Martiniello, M., & Vertovec, S. (2004). Citizenship in European cities: Immigrants, local politics and integration policies. Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poppelaars, C. (2007). Resources exchange in urban governance: On the means that matter. Urban Affairs Review, 43(3), 3–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poppelaars, C., & Scholten, P. (2008). Two worlds apart: The divergence of national and local immigrant integration policies in the Netherlands. Administration and Society, 40(4), 335–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prins, B. (2002). The nerve to break taboos: New realism in the Dutch discourse on multiculturalism. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 3(4&4), 363–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prins, B. (2004). Voorbij de onschuld. Het debat over integratie in Nederland. Amsterdam: Van Gennep.

    Google Scholar 

  • Race, R. (2008). Introduction: Advancing multiculturalism, post 7/7. In J. Eade, M. Barrett, C. Flood, R. Race (Eds.), Advancing multiculturalism, post 7/7. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rex, J. (2008). Ethnic identity in a multicultural society. In J. Eade, M. Barrett, C. Flood, R. Race (Eds.), Advancing multiculturalism, post 7/7. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Governing without government: Order and change in British politics. In R. A. W. Rhodes (Ed.), Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham/Philadelphia: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saggar, S., & Somerville, W. (2012). Building a British model of integration in an era of immigration: Policy lessons for Government. In T. C. O. Migration (Ed.). Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2001). The Global city: New York. London/Tokyo: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Scheffer, P. (2000, 29 January). Het multiculturele drama. NRC Handelsblad.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiller, M. (2015). Paradigmatic pragmatism and the politics of diversity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 38, 1120–1136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholten, P. (2013). Agenda dynamics and the multi-level governance of intractable policy controversiers: The caes of migrant integration policies in the Netherlands. Policy Science, 46(3), 217–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Squires, J. (2009). Intersecting inequalities: Britain’s equality review. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 11(4), 496–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stadt Antwerpen (1999). Allemaal Antwerpenaars. Antwerpen: Stad Antwerpen Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stadt Antwerpen (2009b). Stadsplan Diversiteit: Speerpuntacties 2009–2010. Antwerpen: Stadt Antwerpen Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uitermark, J. (2012). Dynamics of power in Dutch integration politics. Amsterdam: Universiteit van Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uitermark, J., & Van Steenbergen, F. (2006). Postmulticulturalisme en stedelijk burgerschap: Over de neoliberale transformatie van het Amsterdamse integratiebeleid. Sociologie, 2(3), 265–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van de Voorde, M., & De Bruijn, H. (2010). Mainstreaming the Flemish employment equity and diversity policy: Opportunities and Threats. OECD Employment, 7, 229–241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Reekum, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Bertossi, C. (2012). National models of integration and the crisis of multiculturalism: A critical comparative perspective. Patterns of Prejudice, 46(5), 417–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vasta, E. (2007). Accommodating diversity: Why current critiques of multiculturalism miss the point (COMPAS working paper no. 53). Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veenman, J. (2002). Drijvende krachten in een veranderende samenleving. In J. Veenman (Ed.), De toekomst in meervoud. Perspectief op multicultureel Nederland. Assen Van Gorcum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vermeulen, F., & Plaggenborg, T. (2009). Between idealism and pragmatism: Pracititioners working with immigrant youth in Amsterdam and Berlin. In J. W. Duyvendak, F. Hendriks, & M. Van Niekerk (Eds.), City in sight: Dutch dealings with urban change. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vlaams Minderhedencentrum. (2010). Het Integratiedecreet. Retrieved October 13, 2010, from www.vmc.be

  • Young, K. (Ed.). (1990). Approaches to policy development in the field of equal opportunities. London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zincone, G., & Caponio, T. (2006). The multilevel governance of migration. In R. Penninx, M. Berger, & K. Kraal (Eds.), The dynamics of international migration and settlement in Europe: A state of the art. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. multireligiöser Gesellschaften, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity, Göttingen, Germany

    Maria Schiller

Authors
  1. Maria Schiller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Schiller, M. (2016). What Shapes Local Level Policies?. In: European Cities, Municipal Organizations and Diversity. Global Diversities. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52185-9_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-52185-9_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-137-52183-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-137-52185-9

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation