22 | 160 Saba Golchehr IS INTEGRATION AND EMPOWERMENT OF THE EXCLUDED NEEDED?
In the previous chapter I introduced the ongoing trend of migration and its socio-spatial effects. With the focus on this increasing migration in the Netherlands I looked at the governmental and municipal response. Now I will conclude these findings in a problem statement for this project. First in order to recapitulate, I will reflect on the previous findings. We saw that the national response to the effects of migration is to apply mixing schemes in neighbourhoods of ethnical concentration. The effect the policy makers hoped for, that is a social mix of the different communities, however does not occur. Next to this there is the municipal response of a selective migration policy, that does not allow new migrants to find housing within the
National response (government): applying mixing schemes in neighbourhoods of concentration in order to create a social mix on the local level (this does however not occur)
city borders. This policy will put the new migrants in a downwards spiral in which they will be further away from integration into mainstream society. Also this policy will lead to more and more decay of the new receiving cities and areas in the region. So we can conclude that at the moment there is a dichotomy between the regional level of decision making, and the local level where the effects of these decisions become visible. Resulting from this, the problem statement of this project is: Migration is a key factor of transformation (of the local scale) which is not considered in urban renewal planning.
Regional/municipal response: ‘Rotterdamwet’ = no receiving new migrants in city leads to more and more decay of new receiving cities (at the local level)
Dichotomy between:
Regional level (decision making)
dichotomy
Fig. 2.1 Diagram showing the national governmental and municipal response to the increasing migration and ethnic concentration and the dichotomy between these policies and the local effects