Planning and Multiculturalism: a Paradigm Shift

PLANNING AND MULTICULTURALISM: A PARADIGM SHIFT AMINA HIRANI Thesis submitted in part fulfilment of the requirement for the M.Phil (Town Planning) Degree UCL BARTLETT FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT BARTLETT SCHOOL OF PLANNING November 2007 UMI Number: U593718 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U593718 Published by ProQuest LLC 2013. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 Declaration I, Amina Hirani, confirm that the work presented in these thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated and acknowledged in the thesis.’ Acknowledgements I would first like to thank God most of all whom I felt through those who are in my heart whom I would like to thank next. I would also like to say thank you to my supervisor Dr. HaeRan Shin for her valued advice and guidance. And last but not least, my heartfelt thanks to my colleagues at work who put me up. “We created you from a single pair of male and female and made you into nations and tribes that you may know each other. The noblest of you in the sight of God is the best in conduct...” [Quran: 49:3] Those whose lives are terminated by the angels, while in a state of wronging their souls, the angels will ask them, “What was the matter with you?” They will say, "We were oppressed on earth.” They will say, “Was God’s earth not spacious enough for you to emigrate therein?” [Quran: 4:97] “Just as biodiversity is an essential component of ecological sustainability, so is cultural diversity essential to social sustainability. Diverse values should not be respected just because we are tolerant folk, but because we must have a pool of diverse perspectives in order to survive, to adapt to changing conditions, to embrace the future.” [Hawke:2001] Abstract Social theorists ‘as diverse as Durkheim, Weber and Marx argued that, as a concomitant of the 19th century emergence of modem industrial society, ethnic groups had lost their saliency in the lives of individuals’1. Policy-makers too believed that assimilation of the ethnic minority was a way forward and inevitable. This view was compounded by the idea typified in the ‘global village’ scenario brought out by the technological revolution. ‘Transnational migrations, post-colonialism, and the rise of civil society’ (Sandercock, 2000) has made the 21st century indisputably the century of multicultural cities which have brought about enormous socio-cultural changes. In 2000, between 150 & 175 million people lived outside the country in which they were bom and Inglis (1996) points out that only 10 to 15 percent of countries can be reasonably described as ethnically homogenous. This has resulted in an increased ethnic and cultural diversity of cities and has led to co existence side by side of ‘dissimilar ways of life within the sphere of the world’s main metropolitan areas’ (Sandercock, 2000). Furthermore, the second and third generations of the settled immigrants - the Diasporas, the Internet and globalisation has led to fast shifting boundaries of social identity, which has in turn led to infinite number of sub cultures. The rediscovery of ethnicity and conflicts brought about as a result of unresolved underlying differences has made decision makers increasingly aware of the need to develop policies which will contribute to the development of harmonious relations within and between diverse ethnic groups. Rapid advancements in technology has enabled us to interact socially, politically and economically with other nations and has gone a long way towards breaking the barriers that kept us apart from one another, allowing corporations to ignore the national boundaries and create networks that disregard politics. However as Schwetz (2004) argue, social understanding of the diversity of this world has not caught up with this technological interconnectivity. He concludes that cultural education is far behind the trend towards globalisation. How can diversity be accepted and incorporated into a practice that is equitable and willing to accommodate different ways of dwelling in urban space and how does local government respond to a diverse community, ensuring that all services and processes are accessible by 1 all? To what extent planners can be said to have an awareness of racial disadvantage and its possible implications for planning? Planners are struggling to find answers to these questions which present relentless challenges. This is made even more difficult when one considers the unrecorded or unspoken beckoning and nuances that have to be dealt with - for example, Qadeer (1997) recalls an story where the newspaper headlines in The Globe and Mail read: “nature meets culture” - ‘Italians and Portuguese like to keep trees short, allowing a better view of the neighbours. Anglo-Saxons want trees to be tall and leafy, blocking any views from and to neighbourhood houses. The Chinese believe trees in front of a home bring bad luck. As if these different preferences were not enough, the city has strict bylaws that prohibit cutting down trees....’ or for example, The Guardian Newspaper reported, ‘beckoning to a Somali is very offensive... it is like calling someone a dog - one can just imagine how a friendly bobby’s curling finger could seem to a Somali youth’ . This thesis argue that in order to grapple with these realities at the neighbourhood level in order to strive to achieve sustainable communities, planners will need to understand the wider social, ethnic and cultural ‘histories’ and ‘stories’ and to have a better and deeper understanding of the culture specificities intrinsic to every ethno-cultural community - a knowledge of their ‘way of life’: customs, faiths, and convention; codes of manners, dress, cuisine, language, arts, science, technology, religion and rituals; norms and regulations of behaviour, traditions and institutions.4 White Papers during the last decade have been informed by the government’s desire of a non-racist and multicultural Britain. ODPM (2005) reminds the planners that planning is now operating within a different context than was the case in the past. Thus if the government’s vision for Britain, ‘where cultural, demographic and social diversity are respected and celebrated; where discrimination is tackled robustly; where different communities co-exit in mutual respect and understanding; and where attitudes that block the progress of individuals and groups are tackled’5 was ever to become a reality then social disadvantage or discrimination related to ethnicity and to land use planning must be recognised and acted upon as otherwise they will remain just rhetorical and aspirational, or in Mitchell’s words remain a ‘liberal fantasy’. 2 Title: Planners & Multiculturalism - A Paradigm Shift Abstract Acknowledgements 1. Introduction 1.1 Framing the Research 1.2 Scope of thesis 2. Britain’s Multicultural Landscape 2.1 In-Migration into Britain and Social Change - 20th century onwards 2.2 Migrants’ Cultural Needs and Changing British Landscapes 2.3 Cultural Meaning of Space and Contestation of Space 2.4 The British Planning System and Black & Minority (BME) Groups 3. Literature Review: Debates and Issues on Planning & Multiculturalism 3.1 Multicultural and Multiculturalism: 3.2 Recognition of Diverse Values and Cultural Sensitivity 3.3 Diversity and Ethnic Disadvantage 3.4 Engaging Meaningfully 3.5 Multicultural Planning - Responses to Diverse Needs 4. Political Context for Social Dimension of Sustainable Communities 4.1 Need for Social Sustainability 4.2 National Level 4.3 Regional Level 4.4 Local Level 5. Methodology & Setting the Context 5.1 Literature Review & Scoping 5.2 Selection of Case Study: London Borough of Brent 5.3 Profiling Brent 5.4 Research Questions, Design and Data Collection 6. Key Findings - Political Context of Brent Planners and Results of the Research 6.1 Critique of Brent Planners and their Political Context 6.2 Recognition of Distinctive Culture Specificities and Planners Sensitivity 6.3 Awareness of Ethnic Disadvantage 6.4 Engaging with Communities 6.5 Responses to Diverse Needs 7. Summing Up: Conclusions 7.1 Mindsets, Skill Sets and Data Sets 7.2 Filling the Skill Gap and Signposts 7.3 Paradigm Shift References & Notes Appendix 1: Archival Studies Appendix 2: Semi Structured Interviews Appendix 3: Policy Issues Bibliography List of Figures: Figure 1: Map of Brent, Brent Website Figure 2: Percentage of BME groups per Ward, Source: Ward Profiles for Brent: 1. Introduction 1.1 Framing the Research Where ‘we’ are today globally is a situation in which every ‘we’ discover that is in part a ‘they’: that the lines between ‘us’ and ‘them’ are continuously redefined through the global realities of immigration, travel, communication, the world economy, and ecological disasters” (Benhabib 1995). We are all descended from immigrants - ‘when you look at how Britain has assimilated groups over the years from Celts to the Romans to the Saxons, Vikings, Normans, lace makers from the low countries, dykes in East Anglia by Dutch builders and our German monarchy - George I could not speak English, although King of this country, then the influence of the commonwealth, and then the very real effort of getting West Indian people over to help run the buses in the 1950’s.’6 In more recent times, effects of globalization and the legacy of colonialisation have been instrumental in creating new cultural geographies in British cities.

Load more