The longstanding debate around the merits of promoting social class mix in urban neighbourhoods has taken a new twist in recent times. A transatlantic and neoliberal convergence of policy advice, supported by the ‘neighbourhood effects’ thesis, makes a case for addressing deep poverty by spatially deconcentrating it, inter alia, by gentrification. While developing trenchant critiques of this approach, critical urban scholarship has tended to take a ‘top‐down’ view of urban neoliberalism, giving insufficient consideration to the agency of local governance actors in policy design and implementation, as well as to differences in national and local reference points with regard to what social mix connotes. We present findings of a comparative study of the meanings and effects attributed to social mix by key local policy actors across three ‘distressed’ neighbourhoods: in inner‐city Paris (France), Bristol (UK) and Montréal (Canada), targeted for neighbourhood revitalization involving planned residential social mix in two cases and diversification of local retailing and its consumer base in all three. We find that while local actors' rationales for social mix do reflect a neoliberal turn, this is not embraced unequivocally and a strong home‐grown element, drawing on national or local ‘myths’, persists. Our study sheds light on the expectations that local policy actors have on the incoming middle classes to make the mix ‘work’ by supporting community; pointing to the paradoxes and limitations of such a perspective. Résumé Le débat déjà ancien sur l’intérêt de promouvoir la mixité sociale dans les quartiers urbains vient de connaître un revirement. Une convergence transatlantique et néolibérale des orientations politiques, soutenue par la thèse des ‘effets de proximité’, préconise de remédier à la grande pauvreté par une déconcentration spatiale, notamment via la gentrification. Tout en étant très critiques à l’égard de cette approche, les auteurs de recherches urbaines ont plutôt favorisé une vision du néolibéralisme urbain imposée d’en haut, négligeant en partie l’agence des acteurs de la gouvernance locale dans la conception et l’application des politiques, ainsi que les différences de repères nationaux et locaux dans ce qu’évoque la mixité sociale. Les résultats présentés émanent d’une étude comparative des significations et effets attribués à la mixité sociale par les principaux acteurs de l’action publique dans trois quartiers ‘sinistrés’ du centre‐ville de Paris, Bristol et Montréal, ceux‐ci faisant l’objet d’une revitalisation dans laquelle s’inscrivent la mixité sociale de l’espace résidentiel pour deux d’entre eux, et la diversification des commerces de proximité et de leur clientèle dans les trois cas. Si la justification de la mixité sociale par les acteurs locaux reflète effectivement un virage néolibéral, elle n’est pas adoptée sans hésitations, et une forte composante spécifique au lieu persiste, née de ‘mythes’ nationaux ou locaux. L’étude éclaire sur ce que les acteurs de la politique locale att...

En France, la dynamique locale de la politique de la ville est poussée par l'Etat ; aux États-Unis, le mouvement communautaire crée ses propres institutions de lutte contre la pauvreté ; au Brésil, le budget participatif de la ville de Porto Alegre constitue une école de démocratie. Malgré la différence des contextes, des acteurs et des processus, ces expériences de démocratie participative défient l'idée de démocratie de proximité.

International audienceSince the 1980s, the issue of social mix has become a public policy category in France. Enshrined in legislation, yet remaining controversial, it represents a major premise on which housing policies have been reconfigured. The concept of social mix is essentially based on who lives where, but it is also evoked in the context of urban renewal schemes for social housing estates, as well as in relation to new-build developments. A study of the bases of social mix policies conducted in Paris since 2001 in the context of the embourgeoisement of the capital shows the fundamental role of social housing stock. The City Council has become involved in policy decisions about both the location and the allocation of social housing. Particular attention has been paid to the middle classes in the name of the principle of 'balancing the population'. In order to measure the effects of the policy, this article relies on an analysis of two City of Paris schemes that have the stated intent of creating social mix. One of these schemes consists of redeveloping a working-class neighbourhood, Goutte d'Or, while the other involves the new acquisition of social housing in various more affluent neighbourhoods in the capital. This comparative study of the population shows that, whether in a neighbourhood poised for gentrification or in a more affluent neighbourhood, this policy has major effects on forms of local social cohesion, setting in motion individual trajectories and reshaping social and/or ethnic identities

How do households belonging to the middle classes decide to come live in a 'poor'city in the Parisian suburbs? What makes them stay? What are the judgements and strategies that have been brought to bear both individually in their daily lives and as a social group in terms of their collective involvement and their relationships with other social groups? What does this kind of 'social mix' imply in terms of social practices, local and social belonging? This article shows that attitudes towards social mixing have to be considered in terms of their sociological dimensions. This analysis thus takes into account middleclass diversity in socio-residential terms, in terms of trajectories, values and attachmentto a particular area. The article also emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between different dimensions of attitudes towards social mixing: depending on the issues at stake, people can accept and sometimes promote a form of cohabitation, or, quite to the contrary, reject it. Finally, the article emphasizes the importance of local contexts and their temporality: for someone belonging to the middle classes, living in a poor city may also mean holding a relatively higher position than elsewhere.

No abstract