Critical urban cosmopolitanism and the governance of urban diversity in European cities

Abstract

This paper draws on the findings of a cross-national EU project named DIVERCITIES that analyses the relationships between narratives and meanings of the term 'diversity' and their influence on the governance and planning of European cities. It is widely argued that there is a growing dissonance between the policy narratives and agendas found in metropolitan cities and amongst national governments. The former are characterised as being more pragmatic, tolerant, and open in their approaches than the latter. In exploring these governance dynamics, the paper builds on the work of Delanty to argue for a methodological approach grounded in what he terms critical cosmopolitanism, or a focus on the dynamic interactions between global and local influences on governmentalities and policy priorities. Much of the writing on critical cosmopolitanism has focused on questions of identity. This paper expands the concept and assesses its applicability to understandings and interpretations of urban politics and governance, through the lens of diversity narratives and the ways in which they are 'fixed' to broader political projects by regimes in different contexts. It argues that a range of meanings are being attached to 'diversity'. In some instances the term acts as a focus for more progressive forms of intervention. In others, however, it is being used to justify divisive forms of growth politics or acts as a lightning rod for existing discontents. The paper concludes by reflecting on the impacts of recent anti-globalisation and immigration politics across Europe and the fragility of existing fixes and policy assumptions.

Valuing the bowling alley: Contestations over the preservation of spaces of everyday urban multiculture in London

“…In the case discussed below, I trace both a change over time in how diversity has been conceptualised in moments of urban change and a clash over the way diversity is being deployed in arguments about the future of a building. This shift in the meaning over time I describe is not only applicable to London but has also been identified elsewhere (De Oliver, 2016; Raco, 2018). Drawing on his Texas case study, De Oliver (2016) has argued that the meaning of ‘diversity’ in urban development has moved from denoting a concern with social justice to a becoming a lifestyle amenity.…”

“…However, while diversity may be articulated as part of an alternative set of measures of value, it is deployed in multiple ways in tussles over urban space (Raco, 2018). As Berrey argues, diversity is ‘powerful and plastic’ (2005, p. 143) and can thus be deployed to mean different things in the same place and to gloss over race and class inequalities.…”

“…Drawing on his Texas case study, De Oliver (2016) has argued that the meaning of ‘diversity’ in urban development has moved from denoting a concern with social justice to a becoming a lifestyle amenity. Raco points out to how this is writ large in urban development projects across the EU, suggesting: ‘The social and cultural diversity of urban populations has been increasingly commodified and presented as a resource that underpins contemporary economic development priorities’ (Raco, 2018, p. 17). These promises of the ability of diversity to deliver economic development are heavily influenced by Florida’s (2002) argument that the presence of immigrant communities is associated with economic development in cities.…”

“…These promises of the ability of diversity to deliver economic development are heavily influenced by Florida’s (2002) argument that the presence of immigrant communities is associated with economic development in cities. This argument has been highly influential and has been echoed by the World Economic Forum (2015, see discussion in Raco, 2018). In the example explored below, the vision of diversity that is advanced in development plans is used to displace existing physical spaces of everyday urban multiculture (see also Holgersson, 2014; Lees, 2003).…”

“…Shifting the focus away from describing the particular qualities or impacts of spaces of ‘everyday multiculturalism’ (Wise & Velayutham, 2009), this article instead examines how arguments about diversity – and the use of space by marginalised groups – are deployed to make competing value claims in moments of urban change. Building on Dines’ identification of a discordance between ‘grounded experiences of diversity’ and ‘a top-down, decontextualized vision of diversity contemplated by regeneration’ (2009, p. 258), the article brings Skeggs’ work exploring value/devaluation (2004, 2014) into dialogue with research on diversity and development (Berrey, 2005; Raco, 2018). The article thus aims to unpick some of the power-laden processes that underscore the production of everyday spaces of multiculture and indeed determine their future.…”