Dutch immigration and integration policies are being interpreted and implemented by local streetlevel bureaucrats. We carried out 28 semi-structured interviews with integration coaches, integration teachers and client managers in order to understand the dilemmas they face, and to explain their subsequent behaviour. The results show that although organizational characteristics such as the bureaucratic burden made street-level bureaucrats reluctant to enlarge their discretionary space at the expense of policy rules, their willingness to help clients often transcends these boundaries under a combination of three conditions: high client motivation, extreme personal distress of the client, and negative assessment of existing policies and policy instruments (both in terms of fairness and practicality). Furthermore, street-level bureaucrats were found to be constantly reinterpreting and revising their roles.

How do superdiverse cities re-imagine themselves in response to migration-related diversity? Based on a double case study on the branding strategies of two superdiverse Dutch cities, Amsterdam and Rotterdam, this paper shows that although diversity is part of the brand identity in both cities, it is not used prominently in urban planning or brand communications. Migration-related diversity is redefined strategically (as 'cosmopolitan' and 'international') for two reasons: (1) to turn it into an asset that enhances the brand, and (2) to align the brand with existing policies and political discourses on migration and accommodate political pressures. City marketers have depoliticized place branding. Marketing logic pushed migration-related diversity to the background, because according to the city marketers diversity does not help a city to stand out. There is limited interaction between spatial planners and city marketers, and marketers use spatial planning selectively in place branding.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract