A strong relationship between the phenomenon of immigration, the urban condition and processes of inclusion has been established throughout Europe. Literature and policies related to immigration are permeated by a double rhetoric: that of exclusion (segregation) and cohesion told, in both cases, through spatial devices in particular neighbourhoods. The story is one of progressive deprivation and subsequent regeneration of many areas in Europe, such as the inner cities in the UK, large social housing estates in central Europe and in France the banlieue - where the most underprivileged - often foreigners – tend to live. While this rhetoric (derived from a US perspective) gained success almost everywhere in Europe , in certain countries it has been brought into question. In particular, taking into account the viewpoint of Southern European countries, it seems that the rhetoric on ethnic exclusion/inclusion uses a spatial focus – that of housing, and residential neighbourhoods – which is not necessarily appropriate. Structural conditions, such as welfare, housing systems, urban and planning policies contribute to the fact that immigrants housing insertion in Southern European cities does not follow concentrative patterns and, consequently, it is less evident. Undoubtedly, urban space can be a device for exclusion and inclusion although it is not clear “which” urban spaces are best suited to the application of this analysis. Adopting a different, locally-based perspective should be the starting point for the design of adequate policies. Exploring these issues allows light to be shed on a particular aspect of the controversial relationship between rhetoric considered centrally yet interpreted locally. While the influence of the EU on urban policies in Southern European countries is acknowledged, this is not exempt from the rhetoric of social cohesion. At the same time these inputs clash with the fact that Mediterranean cities differ substantially from their northern counterparts which constitute the basis of the principal European interpretative model.
Fioretti, C. (2010). Immigration and Territories: Looking beyond Social Cohesion Rhetoric. JOURNAL OF LANDSCAPE STUDIES, 3, 97-104.
Immigration and Territories: Looking beyond Social Cohesion Rhetoric
FIORETTI, CARLOTTA
2010-01-01
Abstract
A strong relationship between the phenomenon of immigration, the urban condition and processes of inclusion has been established throughout Europe. Literature and policies related to immigration are permeated by a double rhetoric: that of exclusion (segregation) and cohesion told, in both cases, through spatial devices in particular neighbourhoods. The story is one of progressive deprivation and subsequent regeneration of many areas in Europe, such as the inner cities in the UK, large social housing estates in central Europe and in France the banlieue - where the most underprivileged - often foreigners – tend to live. While this rhetoric (derived from a US perspective) gained success almost everywhere in Europe , in certain countries it has been brought into question. In particular, taking into account the viewpoint of Southern European countries, it seems that the rhetoric on ethnic exclusion/inclusion uses a spatial focus – that of housing, and residential neighbourhoods – which is not necessarily appropriate. Structural conditions, such as welfare, housing systems, urban and planning policies contribute to the fact that immigrants housing insertion in Southern European cities does not follow concentrative patterns and, consequently, it is less evident. Undoubtedly, urban space can be a device for exclusion and inclusion although it is not clear “which” urban spaces are best suited to the application of this analysis. Adopting a different, locally-based perspective should be the starting point for the design of adequate policies. Exploring these issues allows light to be shed on a particular aspect of the controversial relationship between rhetoric considered centrally yet interpreted locally. While the influence of the EU on urban policies in Southern European countries is acknowledged, this is not exempt from the rhetoric of social cohesion. At the same time these inputs clash with the fact that Mediterranean cities differ substantially from their northern counterparts which constitute the basis of the principal European interpretative model.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
