“I Just Live Here”: Everyday Practices of Disaffiliation of Middle-class Households in Disadvantaged Neighbourhoods

This paper explores different explanations for the continuing presence of a large share of middle-class households in disadvantaged neighbourhoods in the Netherlands, a seeming anomaly to middle-class residential practices of disaffiliation and elective belonging identified in the research literature. In-depth interviews with middle-class residents in urban restructuring neighbourhoods in Amsterdam and The Hague provide insight into the way in which these residents make sense of and engage with their residential surroundings. The study found that respondents downplay neighbourhood problems and validate living in an urban restructuring area through a value-for-money discourse. At the same time, they display subtle ways of disaffiliating from the neighbourhood through both discursive and socio-spatial practices in everyday life

Chinatown 2.0: El difícil florecimiento de una zona comercial de temática étnica

En la pintoresca zona de canales de Ámsterdam, Zeedijk y sus alrededores, los empresarios chinos han estampado su presencia en lo que parece el Chinatown local. Desde principios de los 90´s, los empresarios y sus organizaciones hicieron campaña por el reconocimiento oficial de Zeedijk como un distrito solo étnico y por el apoyo gubernamental a la mejora de “lo chino”. Siguiendo lo que opinan Hackworth y Rekers (2005), argumentamos que este caso desafía la comprensión tradicional de los paisajes comerciales étnicos. En contraste con la ortodoxia actual, nos hemos acercado ante todo al Chinatown de Ámsterdam como un espacio económico temático. Aquí chinos y otros empresarios compiten por una parte del mercado y por el derecho a reivindicar la identidad de la zona. ¿Cuál es el desarrollo histórico de Zeedijk, cómo los empresarios chinos y sus asociaciones impulsaron el Chinatown y negociaron “lo chino” públicamente, y cómo respondieron los actores institucionales gubernamentales y no gubernamentales a esos intentos

Moving Out and Going Down? A Review of Recent Evidence on Negative Spillover Effects of Housing Restructuring Programmes in the United States and the Netherlands

Comparing USA and Dutch experiences, this paper seeks to determine whether the demolition of public or social housing results in negative spillover effects, i.e. the shift of crime and other social problems to nearby neighbourhoods, as a result of residential relocation patterns. Notwithstanding fundamental contextual differences, existing research shows that many relocatees do recluster in low-income areas not much better than the public or social housing sites they moved from. Furthermore, USA and Dutch research highlights concern among public officials, politicians and community activists that this clustering is resulting in higher crime, increased neighbourhood dissatisfaction (among existing residents), more conflicts between residents, lower school test scores, etc. Few researchers have, however, been able to go beyond correlations and establish cause-effect relations between the in-movement of public/social housing relocatees and increased social problems. Attempts to identify a statistical threshold for clustering, beyond which negative effects occur, have not been successful. Nevertheless, existing evidence regarding negative spillover effects is compelling enough to warrant expanded and improved monitoring of both relocation and neighbourhood change patterns and to initiate programmes to address the concerns of residents in destination areas.Spillover effects, restructuring, demolition, relocation, displacement, HOPE VI, vouchers, United States, Netherlands,