IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v40y2003i3p531-549.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

'Social Mixing' and the Management of Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods: The Dutch Policy of Urban Restructuring Revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Justus Uitermark

    (Department of Geography and Planning, University of Amsterdam, Minervalaan 17b, 1077 NJ Amsterdam, The Netherlands, j.uitermark@frw.uva.nl)

Abstract

The Dutch government currently pursues a comprehensive and ambitious policy of 'social mixing' in disadvantaged neighbourhoods. The second section of this paper suggests that it has as yet not been adequately explained why the Dutch government pursues this so-called restructuring policy. The third section develops an approach derived from regulation theory that potentially helps to decipher the forces behind the Dutch restructuring policy. It is argued that planning practices and discourses should be analysed in relation to the dynamics of the regulatory framework in which they are embedded. The remainder of the paper uses this approach to give an alternative account of the Dutch restructuring policy, suggesting that it represents an attempt to facilitate the social management of disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Thus, it serves to mitigate the social effects of the problematic integration of ethnic minorities and facilitates a national city-oriented growth strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Justus Uitermark, 2003. "'Social Mixing' and the Management of Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods: The Dutch Policy of Urban Restructuring Revisited," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 40(3), pages 531-549, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:40:y:2003:i:3:p:531-549
    DOI: 10.1080/0042098032000053905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/0042098032000053905
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/0042098032000053905?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hugo Priemus & Peter Boelhouwer & Helen Kruythoff, 1997. "Dutch Urban Policy: a promising perspective for the big cities," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 677-690, December.
    2. Wendy Sarkissian, 1976. "The Idea of Social Mix in Town Planning: An Historical Review," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 13(3), pages 231-246, October.
    3. Gordon MacLeod, 2001. "New Regionalism Reconsidered: Globalization and the Remaking of Political Economic Space," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(4), pages 804-829, December.
    4. Mike Raco & Rob Imrie, 2000. "Governmentality and Rights and Responsibilities in Urban Policy," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(12), pages 2187-2204, December.
    5. Moulaert, Frank, 2000. "Globalization and Integrated Area Development in European Cities," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199241132.
    6. Neil Brenner, 1999. "Globalisation as Reterritorialisation: The Re-scaling of Urban Governance in the European Union," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(3), pages 431-451, March.
    7. Ronald Van Kempen, 2000. "Big cities policy in the Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 91(2), pages 197-203, May.
    8. Hugo Priemus, 1997. "Market‐Oriented Housing Policy: A Contradiction In Terms. Recent Dutch Experiences," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(1), pages 133-142, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sandra Huning & Nina Schuster, 2015. "‘Social Mixing' or ‘Gentrification'? Contradictory Perspectives on Urban Change in the Berlin District of Neukölln," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 738-755, July.
    2. Justus Uitermark, 2014. "Integration and Control: The Governing of Urban Marginality in Western Europe," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1418-1436, July.
    3. Gwen Van Eijk, 2010. "Exclusionary Policies are Not Just about the ‘Neoliberal City’: A Critique of Theories of Urban Revanchism and the Case of Rotterdam," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(4), pages 820-834, December.
    4. Justus Uitermark & Tjerk Bosker, 2014. "Wither the ‘Undivided City'? An Assessment of State-Sponsored Gentrification in Amsterdam," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 105(2), pages 221-230, April.
    5. Sabine Meier, 2018. "Being Accommodated, Well Then? ‘Scalar Narratives’ on Urban Transformation and Asylum Seekers’ Integration in Mid-Sized Cities," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(4), pages 129-140.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tsu Lung Chou & Yu Chun Lin, 2007. "Industrial Park Development across the Taiwan Strait," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(8), pages 1405-1425, July.
    2. Andrew M. Wood, 2004. "Domesticating Urban Theory? US Concepts, British Cities and the Limits of Cross-national Applications," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(11), pages 2103-2118, October.
    3. Santiago Eizaguirre & Marc Pradel & Albert Terrones & Xavier Martinez-Celorrio & Marisol García, 2012. "Multilevel Governance and Social Cohesion: Bringing Back Conflict in Citizenship Practices," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 49(9), pages 1999-2016, July.
    4. Manuel B. Aalbers & Ellen Van Beckhoven, 2010. "The Integrated Approach In Neighbourhood Renewal: More Than Just A Philosophy?," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 101(4), pages 449-461, September.
    5. Keith Jacobs, 2004. "Waterfront Redevelopment: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Policy-making Process within the Chatham Maritime Project," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(4), pages 817-832, April.
    6. Stijn Oosterlynck & Yuri Kazepov & Andreas Novy & Pieter Cools & Eduardo Barberis & Florian Wukovitsch & Tatiana Saruis & Bernhard Leubolt, 2013. "The butterfly and the elephant: local social innovation, the welfare state and new poverty dynamics," ImPRovE Working Papers 13/03, Herman Deleeck Centre for Social Policy, University of Antwerp.
    7. Mustafa Kemal BayirbaÄŸ, 2010. "Local Entrepreneurialism and State Rescaling in Turkey," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(2), pages 363-385, February.
    8. Francesco Andreoli & Eugenio Peluso, 2016. "So close yet so unequal: Reconsidering spatial inequality in U.S. cities," Working Papers 21/2016, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    9. Carmelina Bevilacqua & Yapeng Ou & Pasquale Pizzimenti & Guglielmo Minervino, 2019. "New Public Institutional Forms and Social Innovation in Urban Governance: Insights from the “Mayor’s Office of New Urban Mechanics” (MONUM) in Boston," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-24, December.
    10. Sedlacek Sabine & Kurka Bernhard & Maier Gunther, 2009. "Regional identity: a key to overcome structural weaknesses in peripheral rural regions?," European Countryside, Sciendo, vol. 1(4), pages 180-201, January.
    11. Karen Bickerstaff & Gordon Walker, 2002. "Risk, Responsibility, and Blame: An Analysis of Vocabularies of Motive in Air-Pollution(ing) Discourses," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 34(12), pages 2175-2192, December.
    12. Xue, Jin, 2014. "Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 130-138.
    13. Pengfei Ban & Wei Zhan & Qifeng Yuan & Xiaojian Li, 2021. "Delineating the Urban Areas of a Cross-Boundary City with Open-Access Data: Guangzhou–Foshan, South China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-17, March.
    14. Torill Nyseth & Abdelillah Hamdouch, 2019. "The Transformative Power of Social Innovation in Urban Planning and Local Development," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(1), pages 1-6.
    15. John Friedmann, 2001. "Regional Development and Planning: The Story of a Collaboration," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 24(3), pages 386-395, July.
    16. Judith Schicklinski, 2015. "Civil Society Actors as Drivers of Socio-ecological Transition? Green Spaces in European Cities as Laboratories of Social Innovation. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 102," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58259, April.
    17. Justus Uitermark, 2014. "Integration and Control: The Governing of Urban Marginality in Western Europe," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 1418-1436, July.
    18. Feng, Rundong & Wang, Kaiyong, 2022. "The direct and lag effects of administrative division adjustment on urban expansion patterns in Chinese mega-urban agglomerations," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    19. Jacques Nussbaumer & Frank Moulaert, 2004. "Integrated Area Development and social innovation in European cities," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 249-257, July.
    20. Mark Purcell, 2006. "Urban Democracy and the Local Trap," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 43(11), pages 1921-1941, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:40:y:2003:i:3:p:531-549. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.