Expansion of urban tourism in historic districts in European cities is putting increasing pressure on these areas as places to live. In Amsterdam, an ever-growing number of tourists visit the famous canal district, which also forms the home of a group of long-term, upper-middle-class residents. While such residents are generally depicted as instigators of urban transformation, in this case, they are on the receiving end. Bringing together the literature on the sociospatial impact of tourism, belonging and the lived experience of place, this article explores the changing relationship between these established residents and their neighbourhood and provides insight into their growing sense of discontent and even powerlessness in the face of neighbourhood change.

The assumed negative effects of living in a low-income neighbourhood on the social mobility of already-poor residents are central to the current political debate about disadvantaged neighbourhoods in the Netherlands. A case study in The Hague addresses the question of which social mechanisms in the daily life of residents might contribute to reduced social mobility in the long run. On the basis of interviews with neighbourhood experts and residents about local social networks, job search strategies and work ethics, evidence can be found for limited opportunity structures and negative socialisation processes. However, the findings suggest that these mechanisms work more subtly than generally assumed in the research literature, as the specific socio-spatial context also provides opportunities and negative effects are selective rather than generic.

This paper explores different explanations for the continuing presence of a large share of middle-class households in disadvantaged neighbourhoods in the Netherlands, a seeming anomaly to middle-class residential practices of disaffiliation and elective belonging identified in the research literature. In-depth interviews with middle-class residents in urban restructuring neighbourhoods in Amsterdam and The Hague provide insight into the way in which these residents make sense of and engage with their residential surroundings. The study found that respondents downplay neighbourhood problems and validate living in an urban restructuring area through a value-for-money discourse. At the same time, they display subtle ways of disaffiliating from the neighbourhood through both discursive and socio-spatial practices in everyday life.

In Western Europe, a select number of "ghettos" are at the forefront of public anxieties about urban inequality and failed integration. These notorious neighbourhoods at the bottom of the moral spatial order are imagined as different and disconnected from the rest of the city. This paper examines how residents in Amsterdam Bijlmer, a peripheral social housing estate long portrayed as the Dutch ghetto, experience the symbolic denigration of their neighbourhood. Interviews show that all residents are highly aware of the negative racial, cultural and material stereotypes associated with their neighbourhood. However, these negative stereotypes are not equally felt: territorial stigma "sticks" more to some residents than others and substantial inequalities are observed in who carries the burden of renegotiating blemish of place. Differential engagement with stigma depends on how residents' identity and the materiality of their surroundings intersect with stigmatising narratives of place.Samenvatting: Zorgen in West-Europa over groeiende ongelijkheid en polarisatie in de samenleving richten zich in het bijzonder op een select groepje "probleemwijken" in de grote steden. Deze "beruchte" buurten liggen in de media onder een vergrootglas en lijken in de collectieve beeldvorming steeds verder verwijderd te raken van de rest van de samenleving. Dit onderzoek richt zich op de vraag hoe bewoners in de Amsterdamse Bijlmer te maken krijgen met zulke negatieve verslaglegging over hun buurt. Interviews geven inzicht in de negatieve raciale, culturele en materiele stereotypen die aan de wijk kleven. Tegelijkertijd blijkt dat sommige bewoners het buurtstigma makkelijker van zich af schudden dan anderen. Dit hangt af van hoe hun eigen klassepositie, raciale identiteit en woonplek samenvalt met stigmatiserende verhalen over de wijk. De gevolgen van ruimtelijke stigmatisering zijn dan ook ongelijk verdeeld: juist bewoners met meer marginale sociale posities dragen de last van het buurtstigma. Het onderzoek toont ten slotte aan dat bewoners zelf-vaak onbewust en onbedoeld-het stigma reproduceren in hun poging om zich van negatieve stereotypes te ontdoen.