A reading sample from Inclusive Localities. Perspectives on Local Social Policies and Practices edited by Sabine Meier, Lena Bertelmann and Lars Wissenbach, chapter “Dilemmas of the inclusive city: Amsterdam as a case study” by Ivan Nio.
Dilemmas of the inclusive city: Amsterdam as a case study
Ivan Nio
Inclusion has been the new magic concept in Dutch policy for about ten years now. The term appears in policy memorandums of many municipalities. At the same time, there is a discussion among scholars about interpretations of inclusion. What is an inclusive city? Is it a city that is accessible to everyone? A city without inequality? A city where everyone feels at home? There are no unequivocal answers. Everyone interprets the inclusive city differently. But it does touch on essential issues. This article elaborates on policies for an inclusive city of the municipality of Amsterdam. I will critically assess the effects of three policy areas aimed at inclusion in deprived neighbourhoods. I will show that the results are not so unequivocal because of obstacles in the system world and the realities of everyday life. Finally, I will indicate what this means for the approach of various practitioners who deal with the principle of inclusion.
-
The rise of the concept of inclusion
Before I show how the municipality of Amsterdam strives towards more inclusion, I will first sketch the rise of the Dutch debate on inclusion. The accessibility of cities is one of the United Nationʼs sustainable development goals, to which the Netherlands has committed itself. Based on the principles of an accessible city and equality of opportunity, cities should provide opportunities for all its inhabitants to develop, emancipate, progress in terms of income, find a job, receive an education or move to a better place. Since the 1990s, policy for Dutch cities has focused strongly on economic growth and attracting higher incomes. The attractiveness and popularity of Dutch cities has increased significantly over the past thirty years. But due to the retracting government, increased market forces and more emphasis on self-reliance, negative effects like inequality, growing polarisation and segregation have become more apparent (Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving 2016; Raad voor de Leefomgeving en Infrastructuur 2020).
The discussion about inclusion has gained momentum due to exclusion processes in cities. In the past ten years, inequality of access to housing, employment, education, transport and public facilities has increased, especially in the large Dutch cities. The emancipatory lift function of the city is faltering, because of rising housing prices and the diminishing range of public facilities. Victims of exclusion processes are no longer only the most vulnerable groups (such as people with a low income or social assistance benefits, with a physical or mental disability, with debts and/or a small social network), but also people with middle incomes (teachers, healthcare staff), flex workers and self-employed persons (Raad voor de Leefomgeving en Infrastructuur 2020; Boterman/ Van Gent 2022). Access to the city as a whole has become more restricted for broad groups. For entire sections of the population, exclusion from the city is a threat, and with it, the prospect of social advancement disappears.
Reflecting a shift in thinking about the condition and future of the city, municipalities apply a broadly defined concept of inclusion (of a city which is accessible to everyone) to emphasise more strongly the social aims of urban policy. This concept of inclusion also concerns housing associations which were partly deregulated in the 1990s. For example, a number of large Amsterdam housing associations are now committed to inclusive cities. This means cities where everyone feels at home, can participate and develop their talents. “Where everyone has access to everything the city has to offer; from a place to live to facilities and from public space to education. Inclusive cities offer a healthy and safe living environment with sufficient greenery and public space in all neighbourhoods. Neighbourhoods invite everyday encounters; a first step towards recognition of the other. Ultimately, itʼs about creating valuable places, neighbourhoods that people love” (De Vernieuwde Stad 2011: no page).
Private developers now also embrace inclusion. This proves the capacity of this concept to mobilise and enhance the formation of coalitions for new spatial and social assignments, although it will also be part of their marketing strategies. One of the largest developers in the Netherlands, AM, launched a competition in 2018 entitled: ‘Towards a more inclusive cityʼ. In their definition, it is also a city with a diversity of population groups, backgrounds and incomes. The city must remain accessible to everyone and be a place where everyone has equal opportunities, with access to education and the labour market. The inclusive city offers amenities and activities that residents feel they are part of. Mixed neighbourhoods are seen as a key to achieving this inclusion (Smit 2018).
Because of its broad scope, normative attractiveness and near-universal application, the inclusive city can be seen as a magic concept (Pollitt/Hupe 2011). The concept of inclusion seeks to support efforts to do something about the increased inaccessibility of cities and the inequality of opportunity. It is striking how quickly the concept of inclusion has become common in the system world of municipalities, housing associations and private developers. However, the above quotes suggest that everyone can find a place in an inclusive city and that this can occur in a harmonious and rational-planned manner. That is why the concept has been criticised. Pollitt and Hupe (2011) warn that magic concepts can dilute, obscure or even deny traditional social science concerns with conflicting interests and logic. Franke and Veldhuis (2019: 69) argue, for example, that the concept of an inclusive city has an overly idealistic and moralistic edge. ‘It sometimes suggests the elimination of differences, while the city thrives on difference, contrast, conflict and complexity. ʼ They prefer to speak of the just city. Buitelaar (2020) considers both concepts – just city and inclusive city – to be interchangeable. However, he believes that the concept of justice can draw on a long philosophical tradition, while inclusion is mainly a recent, policy-related invention.
The assumption that inclusion must include conflicts is also reflected in criticism based on the theories of political scientist Chantal Mouffe. According to Mouffe (2005), instead of pinning our hopes for an inclusive city on the rational capacity of humans, we should learn to live together again in a world of division, conflict and complexity. Scholars argue that contradiction and conflict should be part of urban development (Visser 2020). It is not a problem if places are not one hundred per cent inclusive. Then there will also be openness to intergenerational inclusion, for citizens who want to alter a place at a later time (Verloo in: Karnenbeek/Willems 2022).
Some Dutch sociologists argue for a more relaxed view of inclusion, with a focus on initiatives where residents connect because of things they have in common and less on inclusive activities that should be accessible to all residents. The aim should be more focused on inclusive neighbourhoods and less on inclusive activities (Engbersen/Jansen 2022).
-
Amsterdam as an inclusive city?
Inclusion is identified as a value in recent policy documents of the municipality of Amsterdam. In the Environmental Vision 2050, the long-term vision for the spatial development of the city, it is described as follows: ‘Amsterdam wants to be an inclusive city. A city where inhabitants of Amsterdam and newcomers can feel at home, and which offers opportunities to develop. An inclusive city is also an undivided city. This means that opportunities to emancipate are the same everywhere in the city. It also means that we combat large differences in perceived quality of life and concentrations of disadvantages and social problemsʼ (Gemeente Amsterdam 2021b: 158).
An important reason the concept is embraced is that Amsterdam as an undivided city is under pressure. The city has experienced strong economic growth since 2000 which has made Amsterdam a more expensive place to live in. The city is struggling with rising land and rent prices, crowds of touristsand the arrival of expats (Milikowski 2018). Housing prices of owner-occupied dwellings and rents in the private sector have risen enormously and there has been a decrease in affordable housing (Christof/Majoor 2021). Not only vulnerable and lower-income households, but also the middle class is finding it increasingly difficult in Amsterdam (Boterman/Van Gent 2022). This is a new situation for this city which has a rich tradition of affordable (social) housing. In the past, Amsterdam was even hailed by Fainstein (2010) as a just city and praised for its social democratic principles of city development. Others claim that Amsterdam no longer deserves this ‘just cityʼ status (Uitermark 2009).
Secondly, there is increasing inequality and segregation. The social geography of Amsterdam shows a growing core-periphery divide (Savini et al. 2015). Pockets of poverty and high unemployment have arisen in vulnerable post-war neighbourhoods in the urban periphery outside the A10 ring road. These neighbourhoods have high percentages of non-Western migrants. In these superdiverse neighbourhoods, various kinds of policies are trying to reverse the threat of exclusion and displacement processes.
In Amsterdam, inclusion has been translated into various policy areas. This article focuses on urban renewal in so-called deprived neighbourhoods. These neighbourhoods are characterised by socio-economic problems such as high unemployment, low incomes and feelings of unsafeness. In addition, the maintenance of homes and public space is often delayed or minimal. In the past 20 years, some of these neighbourhoods have been renovated in terms of housing, social facilities and public space. In 2018, 32 neighbourhoods were again designated for large-scale renovation and socio-economic improvement. In the last few years, the aim has been to better align physical investments with the needs of current and future residents. In addition to extra social investments, restructuring and densification are a means of improving quality of life. Inclusion relates to both the process and the outcome of urban renewal. In order to increase the number of affordable homes in the city and therefore inclusion, the municipality of Amsterdam introduced the ‘40-40-20 schemeʼ since 2018. For new construction, the requirement is 40 per cent social rent, 40 per cent medium-priced rent and purchase and 20 per cent high-end rent and purchase (Gemeente Amsterdam 2017).
Three aspects of inclusive urban and social renewal in deprived neighbourhoods will be discussed here: resident participation, socio-spatial infrastructure and mixed neighbourhoods. The ambition of the left-wing city council is to involve everyone in participation processes and to make the results in the field of housing, social facilities and public space as inclusive as possible. For inclusive goals at the intersection of spatial and social policy domains – participation, collective facilities and neighbourhoods – I will address two issues on the basis of some examples. First, living together in a city is always accompanied by processes of self-selection, division, conflict and inclusion and exclusion in relation to places. Second, I will contrast the system world of the professionals with the everyday living environment of residents in neighbourhoods. Based on research of the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS) and research into the socio-spatial practices of residents in the superdiverse post-war neighbourhoods in Amsterdam, I will show what inclusion as a policy goal means and how it actually works in daily life and what dilemmas it poses.
***
Would you like to continue reading?
Order “Inclusive Localities. Perspectives on Local Social Policies and Practices” in our shop or download as open access
Perspectives on Local Social Policies and Practices
edited by Sabine Meier, Lena Bertelmann and Lars Wissenbach
About “Inclusive Localities”
The contributions in this book shed critical light on the shaping, negotiation, and creation of inclusive conditions of local authorities and localities. The authors analyse policy programs and reflect on their inclusive or exclusive effects in European and non-European contexts. Despite a number of global effects, which come about through supra-locally made decisions and influence the scope of action on the ground, many contributions emphasize the crucial role of the municipal level for a successful realisation of inclusion.
