Take-down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.

How migration and mobilizations of difference are accommodated at the local level is a burning question. Concepts adopted by local governments and the capacities of cities to formulate and implement these have received increasing attention, but often without examining the ideas and norms that underlie local concepts and practices. This article assesses the hypothesis of local-level pragmatism, which it rejects, and develops the notion of 'paradigmatic pragmatism' to characterize how local-level politics address mobilizations of difference. Based on empirical findings from Amsterdam, Antwerp and Leeds, and comparing the content and the implementation of 'diversity policies', I argue against a dichotomy of pragmatic vs ideational politics. Instead, these cities draw on a variety of ideas and pragmatically combine them under the header of diversity. This paradigmatic pragmatism invites further research on the effects of potential incompatibilities of immigrant policy ideas.

There is widespread agreement that the local level has become more self-confident and self-reliant in formulating its own immigrant policies and sometimes developing distinct philosophies of immigrant incorporation. However, to date we know little about the actual capacities of cities to implement these philosophies consistently. This article offers a level-specific study of the governance of immigrant incorporation by European municipalities. It focuses on cities with diversity policies and it compares the meaning of diversity in formulated policies with policy implementation. Identifying an implementation gap of diversity policies in Antwerp, Amsterdam and Leeds, it argues that cities may have become more self-reliant and self-confident in coming up with their own ideas and concepts for governing immigration, but this may not mean that they also consistently implement these ideas. This article identifies two explanations for an implementation gap and different capacities across cities to consistently implement such policies. Points for practitionersThe article establishes two explanations for the inconsistent implementation of policies, focusing on the case of local diversity policies, and delineates how this plays out across different cities. These findings are relevant as they allow us to define the conditions for consistent policy implementation.

The diversification of population, demands for recognition, and the spread of diversity policies present new challenges to European cities. Do urban actors respond to this development in different ways across cities? Can we distinguish a logic determined by economic considerations or rather a justice-oriented logic? This article presents evidence from 20 German cities based on an original survey of important urban actors. This design reflects current realities of urban governance. Results indicate that, across Germany’s biggest cities, there is a normative consensus over the benefits of diversity. However, other positions are controversial and views seem partly incoherent. Cities neither clearly position themselves as pro- or antidiversity cities nor do most of them adopt clear market-oriented or justice-oriented approaches. We conclude that, in a relatively new field, positions are still uncrystallized, and hybrid combinations of perspectives may remain typical in societies with strong social-welfare traditions.

No abstract