Perceptions of Diversity in the Bijlmer Neighbourhood in Amsterdam
Master’s Thesis
Anthea Gick Student number: 11737476 [email protected]
Supervisor: Pamela Prickett Second reader: Apostolos Andrikopoulos
MSc Sociology, Migration and Ethnic Studies Graduate School of Social Sciences, July 2018 University of Amsterdam
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Pamela Prickett, who has helped and guided me through the process of conducting this research that finally resulted in my master’s thesis. I would like to thank all the people that agreed to participate in this research, sharing their experiences and ideas with me. Thanks also goes to my friends and study colleagues Annika, Renée, Kerem, Fernanda, Naiara and Johanna who inspired me and made this intensive time memorable. Finally, I want to acknowledge my second reader Apostolos Andrikopoulos.
Content
Summary ...... 1
1. Introduction: How I got to know the Bijlmer ...... 1
2. Theoretical Framework ...... 4
2.1 Conceptualizing Diversity ...... 4
2.2 Categorization and Normalization of ethnic Difference ...... 6
2.3 Reflection of Power Structures in Perceptions of Diversity ...... 7
3. The Bijlmer ...... 10
3.1 Historical Development and Population ...... 10
3.2 Urban Restructuring and Gentrification ...... 10
4. Research Design and Methodology ...... 12
4.1 Respondents ...... 12
4.2 Conceptual Framework ...... 13
4.3 Interviews ...... 14
4.4 Analysis ...... 14
4.5 Access ...... 15
4.6 Analytic Approach ...... 16
5. Analysis: Perception of Diversity ...... 17
5.1 Enjoying ethnic Diversity ...... 19
5.2 Focus on ‘own’ Ethnicity ...... 26
5.3 Unity in Difference ...... 31
6. Conclusion ...... 39
7. Bibliography ...... 43
8. Appendix ...... 46
I
Perception of Diversity
Summary
The neighbourhood of the Bijlmer (or Bijlmermeer, officially referred to as Amsterdam Zuidoost) was designed as a neighbourhood of the future in the 1960’s and today is famous for its super-diversity (Wassenber 2006, Vertovec 2007), with a share of people with migration background of 71% in comparison to 48% in all Amsterdam (Van Heelsum 2007). In the context of this neighbourhood, this research is interested in how ethnic diversity is perceived by the residents and in how far the own positionality within the social context affects these perceptions, aimed at understanding and deconstructing the discursive power behind perceptions, which is necessary to acknowledge and work against structural inequality. Studying peoples’ perception of diversity and ethnic difference, or more generally of the ‘Other’ is a first step towards a better understanding of existing narratives and the power structures behind. For this purpose, a qualitative research approach will be used to filter out individual ideas and perspectives to make them tangible and to include them in the discourse around Bijlmer. This research tries to give explanatory approaches and show a certain range of how people understand and make sense of their surrounding, which finally can contribute to a more holistic view on social processes in the context of neighbourhoods like the Bijlmer in Amsterdam.
1. Introduction: How I got to know the Bijlmer
Already the first time I visited the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer made me curious. I had an appointment for a viewing of a room I was desperately in need for, just having moved to Amsterdam for my studies. Without informing myself about the place I was going, I got on the metro downtown with a mix of different people, but the further we got outside the centre I couldn’t help but notice that all white people had left except myself and more and more black people entered. Black and white segregation in the Netherlands? I decided to take the room, even without meeting my new flatmates. Within the first few days I got to know them, all white girls from other European countries in their mid- twenties, working. After a while living together, they shared their feelings about the neighbourhood ranging from ‘there are a lot of black people, but they don’t do anything’ over ‘those black people always talk to you’ to ‘it’s dirty and everyone is black, I don’t feel safe’. None of them had any connection to the place or the people, knowing only the shopping mall, the metro station and our apartment.
1 Anthea Gick
These observations intrigued me, the level of social distance and disconnection, the coexistence of different ethnic groups with hardly any point of contact and the perception of my white flatmates, living in the seventh floor of a newly renovated high-rise building, literally looking down on the black population of the neighbourhood. Was Putnam (2007) right with his statement, that diversity reduces trust and solidarity in neighbourhoods? Or was it just the lack of intergroup contact (Allport 1954), that lead to the strong perception of difference of my flatmates? And what role plays the socio-economic situation in the perception of the ‘Other’?
With this research, I will try to present a more complete picture of the Bijlmer with a focus on its ethnic diversity and to get a more integrated understanding of social processes that take place in this neighbourhood. Understanding and deconstructing the discursive power behind perceptions of diversity is necessary to acknowledge and work against structural inequality. Studying peoples’ perception of diversity and ethnic difference, or more generally of the ‘Other’ is a first step towards a better understanding of existing narratives and the power structures behind. For this purpose, a qualitative research approach will help to filter out individual ideas and perspectives to make them tangible, in order to include them in the discourse around Bijlmer. This research tries to give explanatory approaches and show a certain range of how people understand and make sense of their surrounding, which finally can contribute to a more holistic view on social processes in the context of neighbourhoods like the Bijlmer in Amsterdam. Aiming at understanding the different ways of perceiving diversity and ethnicity within the diverse setting of the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer, I will ask the following research questions: How do residents perceive ethnic diversity in the Bijlmer neighbourhood in Amsterdam? The objective of this research will be to get a grasp of how people perceive ethnic diversity and ethnic difference, how own positionalities in the ethno-social context influence these perceptions as well as the awareness of the meaning of power and privilege. With a better understanding of peoples meaning making in the context of ethnic diversity, as well as of the possible consequences of demographic change on perceptions of ethnicity, this research can also contribute to suggestions for neighbourhood policies. First, I will give an overview of theoretical approaches that can help to understand the concept of diversity and ethnicity in todays society followed by an elaboration on why the study of perceptions is important to understand power structures. With theoretical support from Lamont et al. (2014) and Pascale (2008), the processes of categorization and normalization, as well as the power of common-sense knowledge will be used to explain the reproduction of
2 Perception of Diversity difference, which then will be illustrated by the example of Wessendorf’s (2013) study about perceptions of diversity in the Hackney neighbourhood in London. The chapter will be rounded up with a comparison of the ‘contact theory’ and the ‘conflict theory’ in the emancipation of the perception of difference. In the following, I will use Wekker’s (2016) approach to Dutch self-imagination to contextualize the concept of dominant discourse which is reflected in people’s perceptions, in relation to the defensive attitude towards different ethnic influences and the phenomenon of cultural appropriation, as well as the post-racist narrative of today’s society. After the theoretical input, I will give an introduction to the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer, as a famous and extraordinary example of a garden city from the 1960’s in the Netherlands, which was and still is subject of urban restructuring projects, gentrification and accompanying demographic changes. The following chapter will focus on the analysis of my research data that was gathered by interviewing 20 people living or working in the sub-areas of the K-zone and the G-zone. By comparing and structuring the insights of my respondents, I will try to comprehend how they perceive ethnicity in the Bijlmer, with the understanding of my data as a selection of single cases, that allow in-depth insights on subjective experiences, that will give a deeper understanding of the range of people’s perceptions. After the analysis of the data in connection to my theoretical framework the thesis will be rounded up by a conclusion.
3 Anthea Gick
2. Theoretical Framework
2.1 Conceptualizing Diversity
Diversity
The concept of diversity was traditionally used to describe the mere presence of multiple ethnicities, while the meaning of diversity in academic discourse shifted to a more encompassing understanding of the multiple layers of ethnic diversity. Due to the diversification of immigration in the last decades – especially to countries of the global north – the study of diversity also takes a range of different variables into account, such as the gender, legal status or the integration in a transnational social network. All these variables may affect the personal relation to the place of settlement and are therefore relevant to consider when studying the effects of diversity (Vertovec 2007). In this thesis this more encompassing understanding of ethnic diversity is acknowledged, however due to limited data it is not always possible to fully include the different layers into the analysis. Furthermore, when talking about diversity often the dominant or ‘native’ ethnic identity is exempted. For emancipating a more equal understanding of ethnicities, diversity must be understood as the coexistence of multiple ethnic groups, including the native – in this case – ‘white Dutch’ population. Deconstructing especially whiteness but also the Dutch nationality as the default status for people living in the Netherlands is a first step towards equality of ethnicities (Dyer 2000).
Ethnicity
The concept of ethnicity is a fluid term that can be used and interpreted in different ways, including geographical or cultural attributes, such as territorial origin and descent, religion or the concept of race. Its understanding however has shifted from a descriptive analysis of ‘cultures’ to a focus on ethnicity as a socially constructed concept of constantly renegotiated group identities along which inclusion and exclusion takes place (Malešević 2004). It is furthermore important to mention, that categorization in terms of ethnic differentiation is never a neutral process, as categories are always also evaluated in respect to the social context. An example are the ethnic categories of ‘black’ and ‘white’, that can’t be understood apart from their historical meaning and the ‘enunciative power of those who are marking difference’ (Pascale 2008: 731). By assigning these concepts to individuals, a
4 Perception of Diversity differentiation is reinforced that is associated to a social order (Lamont et al. 2014). However not acknowledging the impact of these categories in social life, especially in the context of discriminatory practices, masks the fact that they are still relevant and must be addressed as such (Wekker 2016). In this thesis the term ‘ethnicity’ will be used to describe the intersections of cultural identities, that – next to others – include national origin and descent, religious identity, as well as skin colour. The choice of these attributes is a strategic tool for the analysis of the concepts that appeared in the data. This research acknowledges that identity is a construct of dynamic cultural influences and opposes a static understanding of the concept of ‘culture’ or ‘ethnicity’ as an intrinsic part of a persons’ identity. Ethnic minorities on the other hand are conceptualized as groups of people with the same ethnic background other than the ‘native’ white Dutch. Although it could be argued, that especially in the city of Amsterdam as a minority-majority city, where less than half of the population has a Dutch background (Savini et al. 2015) and also the latter strictly spoken represents an ethnic minority, the distinction will be made. This choice is justified by the understanding, that the positionality in society in terms of power and privilege – in this context with a focus on ethnicity – is relevant when analysing perceptions of social groups.
Why Perceptions of Diversity matter
Perceptions of diversity or ethnic difference indicate narratives and values that lie behind these phenomena. By uncovering the power structures they are based on, it is possible to understand how inequalities are reproduced in social practices. While perceptions reflect these power structures, they can also reproduce them when they are communicated or materialize in actions, as the example of the study of neighbourhood stigma by Sampson et al. (2004) illustrates, where perceived disorder that exceeds the actual state of the neighbourhood influences actions of decision makers as well as residents and other social actors. The perceptions reflect prejudiced imaginations of the neighbourhood and its population, that are highly influenced by the dominant narratives about race and get translated into actions which reify these exact narratives and power structures behind. Furthermore, studying perceptions helps to get an idea of peoples’ attitudes towards certain issues, such as the meaning of skin colour in gentrification processes of a neighbourhood. With a better knowledge of these attitudes, it is easier to determine possible issues or tensions that might come as a consequence of gentrification policies and the current
5 Anthea Gick demographic change in the neighbourhood, and which must be addressed. If we really want to work towards a fairer and more equal society, we can’t ignore prevailing fears and narratives that reproduce racist ideas. Instead, we have to acknowledge, understand and deconstruct them.
2.2 Categorization and Normalization of ethnic Difference
As explained above, the study of perceptions can give an insight on narratives and the social values and ideas that lie behind. The power of such narratives is especially visible in what they are taking for granted. Lamont et al. (2014) conceptualizes this mechanism in her description of cultural processes, where the repetition of certain logics and evaluation schemes reinforces and normalizes these logics. The use of ethnic categories for instance, as a logic way of differentiating between people is so much accepted and taken for granted, that the ethnic background seems to be a natural and intrinsic aspect of a persons’ character and reinforces social distance (Pascale 2008). The power of common sense is reflected in the understanding of ethnicity as a normal way of distinction, which ‘through its very obviousness, passes without notice’ (Pascale 2008: 725). Categorizations like this furthermore are reinforced and naturalized by the process of forgetting their constructive character, when the created categories are used to justify differentiation, while the desire to differentiate is the reason for their creation (Lossau 2011). This can be illustrated by the understanding of space and cultural difference – e.g. people from Africa are different than people from Europe – where the distinction of ‘here’ and ‘there’, thus the categorization of space, is used to justify why people are different, while the distinction between ‘here’ and ‘there’ itself is the reason why difference even can be perceived. With the same understanding, Massey (2006) tries to uncover the constructed character of ideas about places, such as cities, states or continents in her theory of geographic imaginations, that through their normalization appear as objective markers of difference. Imaginations like these are one example of the reification of cultural-spatial categories, that are especially relevant in the perception of ethnicity in terms of ethno-spatial origin. A good example of how the normalization of ethnic categories are used to mark difference can be found in Wessendorf’s (2013) study on the celebration of ethnic difference in the Hackney neighbourhood in London. The ethnicity or ethnic background of people is perceived as an important aspect of social life, either in form of the desire to mix with the distinguishable ‘Others’ in public sphere, or of the separation of ethnic groups in private life. The use of and distinction between ethnic categories is perceived as normal, as is the
6 Perception of Diversity understanding of cultural difference, which is seen as the reason for separation and grouping in the private sphere. Ethnic or cultural difference is taken for granted, which illustrates the power of this categorization (Pascale 2008). To overcome the perception of difference and prejudiced views on different ethnic backgrounds, the ‘contact theory’ proposes interethnic contact. The context of the interactions is substantial however, as the pioneer work of Allport (1954) already argued: only under certain circumstances does contact between members of different ethnic groups contribute to better intergroup relations that can help to overcome prejudiced views. The outcome of such contact tends to be more positive, when there is a common goal, the same social status as well as shared interests (Allport 1954). Putnam (2007) challenges Allport’s ‘contact theory’ and uses the ‘conflict theory’ to argue that proximity to people with different ethnic backgrounds leads to the desire to separate and stay with the ‘own’ group. In this case, contact can reify the perception of difference and above all distrust and lower solidarity beyond the ‘own’ group (Putnam 2007), which – in the context of neighbourhood communities – correlates with less investment in participation and volunteering of residents (Dinesen et al. 2015). Either way it is clear, that the experiences individuals have made with people of different ethnic backgrounds provoke effects on the perception of these ‘ethnic groups’. Furthermore, the acceptance of groups is generally interrelated with how they are perceived to behave (Clark 2002).
2.3 Reflection of Power Structures in Perceptions of Diversity
As elaborated above, perceptions of diversity or ethnic difference reflect narratives and the power structures behind, which are reproduced when communicated and acted out. Analysing perceptions means uncovering the narratives and power structures behind, which enables an understanding of the generation and reproduction of inequalities. Every narrative or discourse is positioned in the social structure, inheriting a certain power of the production of knowledge. Hegemonial discourse or narratives own the means of production of knowledge, defining how something is conceptualized. Dyer (2015) gives the example of the white dominated discourse about race, conceptualizing race and generally identify difference from the white point of view, where whiteness is set as default and only blackness is racialized. Therefore, every category within this discourse can’t be neutral as it always represents the power structure behind, in this case the dominant and privileged position of white people in society. Consequently, there is another side, as not everyone has the position
7 Anthea Gick to be heard in this discourse, being marginalized due to belonging to ‘underrepresented or non- dominant societal groups’ (Buzzanell 2017). As this research was conducted in the Dutch context, it is essential to be aware of the hegemonial discourse about ethnicity in the Netherlands, also to understand the self- imagination that is reflected in the perception of the ‘Other’, in this case ethnicities different than the white Dutch. Wekker (2016) describes Dutch identity as intensively shaped by the imperial past, where a small nation reached a powerful status due to the conquest and exploitation of colonies, while simultaneously promoting the notion of innocence, neglecting or rather conveniently forgetting the brutal realities of colonization. Today, the self- imagination of Dutch identity is defined by its understanding as progressive and tolerant towards the many different cultural and other lifestyles coexisting within the Netherlands. In this self-understanding, this tolerant culture must be preserved and protected against other influences, which leads to a defensive attitude e.g. in the example of the own liberal attitude towards LGBTQ1-rights, that must be protected against traditional religious values of the conservative Muslim population. Dutch tolerance ends where the self-imagination as innocent, progressive and tolerant is attacked (Wekker 2016). Of course, this conceptualization of ‘Dutch identity’ describes merely tendencies and can’t be understood as an objective ‘one-and-only’ truth. The fear of too much cultural difference introduced by the multiple ethnic backgrounds of people living in the Netherlands can be explained by these tendencies however (Wekker 2016). Simultaneously, the self-imagination as a tolerant people allows or even demands an open attitude towards ethnic difference. As long as there is the notion of the own cultural privilege to judge when difference exceeds the tolerable, ethnic ‘Otherness’ is put in the position of a cultural resource, that is being ‘sanitised’ for the selective enjoyment. The theoretical term is ‘cultural appropriation’, which is conceptualized by De Oliver (2016) in the context of ethnically diverse and poorer neighbourhoods and their gentrification by more privileged middle-class. He argues that cultural diversity has been integrated in the neoliberal logic of consumerism and is used for marketing purposes of neighbourhoods, where ethnicity – or more precisely the ‘notions of kinship, mutual assistance and affection that are reflexively associated with cultural ‘Others’’ (De Oliver 2016: 1300) – can be selectively consumed by middle-class gentrifiers. By obscuring the context and origin, this process of cultural appropriation marginalizes and reduces the voice of ethnic minorities (Buzzanell 2017).
1 LGBTQ: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer.
8 Perception of Diversity
Another aspect in Dutch identity, which shapes (hegemonial) discourse on race and skin colour is the phenomenon of colour-blindness, arguing with the self-imagination as tolerant, that racism is over and skin colour no longer is a relevant category to differentiate between people. The inability to recognize that ‘even’ in the progressive culture of the Netherlands – to use the words of the dominant narrative – racist discrimination still is an issue fundamentally challenges and attacks the self-imagination outlined above (Wekker 2016). Hooks (1992) furthermore argues, that ‘the eagerness with which contemporary society does away with racism, replacing this recognition with evocations of pluralism and diversity that further mask reality, is a response to the terror’ (Hooks 1992: 345) of racist discrimination. It is an uncomfortable truth that is conveniently masked by the narrative of a tolerant, pluralistic society that appreciates diversity – a narrative in which talking about racist discrimination is made difficult and disagreement easily is interpreted as reversed racism (Hooks 1992). The internalization of this dominant narrative obscures prevailing discrimination and reinforces its power (Pascale 2008), while underlying evaluative schemes – such as the positivity of whiteness – continue to influence perceptions of skin colour. Opposing narratives, that express and acknowledge the terror of racist discrimination are not being heard (Hooks 1992). Understanding and deconstructing this discursive power is necessary to acknowledge and work against structural inequality. Studying peoples’ perception of ethnicity and skin colour, or more generally of the ‘Other’ is a first step towards a better understanding of existing narratives and the power structures behind.
9 Anthea Gick
3. The Bijlmer
3.1 Historical Development and Population
The Bijlmer (or Bijlmermeer, officially referred to as Amsterdam Zuidoost) was planned as the ‘city of tomorrow’ as a carless garden city and was built in the 1960s and 1970s. It was originally directed for middle class families and was responding the housing shortage at the time, however when it as finished, the demand wasn’t the same anymore, as many families finally chose to move to single-family houses with gardens. This lead to a shift in the population and the image, as the dwellings lost in value and people that couldn’t afford housing elsewhere moved in and structural degradation and criminality started to be an issue (Wassenberg 2006). In the same period of the 1970’s Suriname became independent which resulted in a migration flow from the former colony to the Netherlands. Many of the newcomers from Suriname and the Antilles moved to the Bijlmer at this time, which make up the largest ethnic group in the Bijlmer until today (Van de Klundert 2014, Gemeente Amsterdam 2017). In the context of Amsterdam, the Bijlmer is the neighbourhood with most people with a migration background with a share of 71% in comparison to 48% in all Amsterdam (Van Heelsum 2007). The city calls itself a minority-majority city, as there are more people living that have a non-Dutch background, than people that have a Dutch background. As the city continues to attract international labour, migrants keep on moving to Amsterdam, however there are less people from the largest ethnic minority groups – people with Surinamese and Moroccan background – immigrating today (Savini et al. 2016). This tendency also affects the Bijlmer, as more and more people with other migration backgrounds move into the neighbourhood, which diversifies its diversity, as Vertovec (2007) puts it. People with Surinamese background however still form the largest ethnic group, with a share of 29% of the population, which includes up to the third generation ‘migrants’ (Gemeente Amsterdam 2017).
3.2 Urban Restructuring and Gentrification
It is an explicit goal of the municipality of Amsterdam to support and extend gentrification processes also in the peripheric areas of the city, such as the Bijlmer, in order to strengthen economic growth. Furthermore, professionals with an international background, often referred to as ‘expats’, are continuously moving to Amsterdam and require housing as well. This is intensified by the global competition between cities to attract foreign companies, which often have their headquarters in the metropolitan area of Amsterdam and require
10 Perception of Diversity international labour. The influx of these mostly high-skilled migrants puts additional pressure on the housing market and is recognized as a factor for gentrifying processes (Glick Schiller et al. 2009, Savini et al. 2016). This trend is expected to continue in the future, as the demand for housing will remain (Van Gent et al. 2016). In order to promote gentrification in Amsterdam, the housing market was liberalized, and social housing dwellings were reduced, by destruction or renovation and subsequent sale as owner-occupied housing. In the Bijlmer, this policy resulted in the destruction of high-rise, which was replaced by low-rise houses, or renovation of the old high-rise (Savini et al. 2016). The Kleiburg building in the K-zone is one example for the latter strategy, that was formerly a social housing complex, and after its renovation now consists of owner-occupied apartments. The objective is to promote an upgrading of the neighbourhood and to attract more affluent residents (Smets et al. 2008), which is supposed to lead to more social equality as well as social mobility (Pinkster et al. 2009). These restructuring plans and the objective to diversify the population were criticized by part of the population as ‘a means to remove poor (‘Black’) people and attract rich (‘White’) people’ (Semts et al. 2008: 1448). It is true, that the relocation of residents to other parts of the city due to the demolishing of high-rise buildings between 2001 and 2004, mostly affected socio-economically less privileged as well as less articulate migrants. The majority of relocated residents however could improve their housing situation (Wassenberg 2006). On the other hand, also black middle class is growing in the neighbourhood and most of the newly built housing units are occupied by people with ‘non-Western’, mostly Surinamese background, and not by white Dutch or white ‘expats’. while there is also a trend of the former group to move to dwellings with garden outside the city, that reduces their share simultaneously. The official plans now state that white and black middle class are desired to move to the neighbourhood (Smets et al. 2008).
11 Anthea Gick
4. Research Design and Methodology
4.1 Respondents
Most of the respondents lived in the neighbourhood for at least one year, in two cases they worked there for a longer period, which allowed them to experience the social environment.
Table 1: Respondents Name Age Gender Country of Birth Ethnicity 1 Ietje 23 F Netherlands White Dutch 2 Mariana 60 F Mozambique White Dutch and (Portugal) 3 Christel 61 F Netherlands White Dutch 4 Jack 23 M Netherlands Black/Arabic Dutch (Egyptian parents) 5 Tom 28 M Netherlands White Dutch 6 Michael 28 M Poland White Polish 7 Joe 70 M South Africa Black South African and Dutch 8 Hank 55 M Netherlands White Dutch 9 Marcio 33 M Netherlands Black Dutch (Black Surinamese parents) 10 Achojah - M Nigeria Black Nigerian and Dutch 11 Sofia 66 F Finland White Finnish 12 Chris 47 M Cameroon Black Cameroonian and Dutch 13 Irena 45 F Poland White Polish 14 Joseph 69 M Aruba Black Dutch-Caribbean (Netherlands) 15 Lea 72 F Netherlands White Dutch 16 Jake 49 M Suriname Black/Indish Surinamese-Dutch (Netherlands) 17 Nora 74 F Caribbean White Dutch-Antillean Netherlands 18 Sjareefa 58 F Suriname Black/Indish Surinamese-Dutch (Netherlands) 19 Eric 55 M Netherlands White Dutch 20 Claire - F Suriname Black Surinamese-Dutch 21 Phil 34 M Netherlands White Dutch
12 Perception of Diversity
Of all 21 respondents, six were younger than 35, six were between 45 and 60 and seven were more than 60 years old. In total 12 males and 9 females participated in the research. Almost half were born in the European Netherlands, four in the Caribbean Netherlands, before the independence of Suriname and some of the Antilles. 12 of the respondents materialized as white and 9 as black, the latter category is used for strategic purposes, subsuming Indish- Surinamese and Arabic backgrounds in this research, while acknowledging that this categorization doesn’t do justice to the complexity of the issue (Dyer 2000).
4.2 Conceptual Framework
To be able to get a better understanding of the perception of diversity in the context of the diverse neighbourhood of the Bijlmer, semi-structured in-depth interviews were used to gather subjective insights from individuals living in the neighbourhood. A qualitative approach was the most suitable for this purpose, as this enabled me as a researcher to investigate insider experiences of people living in the neighbourhood with diversity and thereby to get a sense of their perceptions on the issue (Golafshani 2003). The subjective ideas of the people and the way they are making sense of their surrounding and within their context were in focus of the research, which will be interpreted and combined in the analysis chapter. The objective was to get a more complete picture of the issue and move away from outsider judgments, that only represent one part or one side of reality (Hennink et al. 2011a). Furthermore, the qualitative approach allowed to keep the research open to unexpected findings that haven’t been thought of before, which equally contributes to a more complete picture. As it is not possible however to cover the complete range of perspectives nor to have a sufficiently large ‘sample’, the findings cannot be understood as representative for the whole population of the neighbourhood. Furthermore, within this approach the defining role of the researcher is acknowledged, as every interaction that is necessary for the collection of data, but also the mind set of the researcher have an impact on the results. In qualitative research this positionality must be dealt with in a reflexive and transparent way, in order to ensure validity of the research (Golafshani 2003).
13 Anthea Gick
4.3 Interviews
For gathering data, the method of the semi-structured in-depth interview were applied. With this method it was possible to focus on individuals and their personal views and experiences in respect to the neighborhood. Their narrative and way of perception was of central interest, that is always linked to a specific context. To cover a certain range of perspectives, I conducted 20 interviews with people living or working in the K-zone and the G-zone of the Bijlmer. During conducting in-depth interviews, there was time to build a rapport and a certain degree of trust with the participants, which facilitated them to speak more openly and extensively of their thoughts. Furthermore, the conducting of in-depth interviews helped the participants to feel, that their story was appreciated, and relevant. Therefore, an empathetic attitude was of major importance, not only to ensure a richer outcome but also for moral reasons, as it would be very rude to ask someone to open up and then judge this person’s ideas in a negative way (Hennink et al. 2011b; Hennink et al. 2011c). To find out about the participants’ perceptions of diversity, the research interest was translated into concrete every day situations and concepts the participants could reply to in the interview guide (see Appendix) (Hennink et al. 2011c). During the interview important ideas or observations were noted, however only as far as this didn’t distract the interviewing process, as it was more important to focus on what the interviewee said to be able to react. In order not to lose the detailed information given within the interview, it was audio recorded and then transcribed (Brymann 2012). During the process of transcription and later of the analysis, the notes helped to recreate the interview situation and facilitates a more authentic interpretation of the data. The choice to conduct a semi-structured interview was based on the usefulness of an interview guide as a mental aid, while staying flexible to respond to what the interviewees said. The focus was on what the interviewee had to say and not the own premade ideas about how reality probably looks like, as this could have prevented from learning about everything beyond (Bryman 2012).
4.4 Analysis
The interview was transcribed word-for-word with addition to a description of the way things were said when considered relevant for the understanding, such as when irony or other
14 Perception of Diversity expressions played a role. In the following, the data was coded which helped to get an overview on the range of issues discussed, which then again facilitated the analysis (Hennink et al. 2011d). The transcribed interviews were coded in a first turn of initial coding, followed by a second turn of focused coding. The initial coding approach uses a technique of line by line coding, to avoid a biased analysis of the data and instead forces the researcher to be sensible for every detail that might turn out to be relevant (Charmaz 2014). The many codes that were created by initial coding were analysed and narrowed down to three main topics, that helped to reduce from up to 150 initial codes per interview, to an average of around 30 focused codes per interview. In the following, these codes were organized in sub-groups or sub-topics that helped to compare content of the different interviews with each other. For the comparison, but also for a more exhaustive understanding of the data, the technique of informal memo-writing was applied, using quotes that best captured the range of each sub-topic as starting points. The memo-writing helped to organize the data in re-emerging concepts as well as to analyze and interpret the meaning and relation of these concepts (Charmaz 2006). It was clear however, that the quotes alone couldn’t represent the range of the data, which was taken into consideration when writing the analysis. Again, it is important to acknowledge that the process of transcribing and coding was heavily influenced by the researchers’ perception und subjective interpretation (Bird 2005; Jefferson 2004).
4.5 Access
To get access to the researched population, I attended neighbourhood meetings and visited cultural and community places within the neighbourhood, as I noticed quickly that approaching people on the street wasn’t very successful. The same outcome brought talking to shop owners, of whom most felt uncomfortable, saying they had no time, they didn’t feel suitable for being interviewed or their English skills weren’t sufficient. Consequently, I decided to focus on getting contact to potential gatekeepers and visiting community places, where it was significantly easier to get peoples’ interest and trust. The community bar of the Kleiburg building that opens once a week had a casual and friendly atmosphere and it was easy to get to talk to different people, who could help me connecting to potential respondents. As the visitors of this place belonged to a certain group of people (around 50 years old and white), I decided to visit the daily breakfast at the community
15 Anthea Gick centre of the ‘Bonte Kraai’. Speaking to different people there, I got passed on to a potential respondent. All in all, it was not as easy however to find volunteers there, also due to a lack of trust and interest. When I went to a participatory event organized by the municipality that took place in the ‘Bonte Kraai’ and informed the residents about a building project, I could talk to a number of people that were willing to volunteer as participants in my research. People were more interested than at the public breakfast, which was probably because they were a sample of active residents, that were open for participating in research. Some had already announced, that they could help introduce me to other potential respondents, which succeeded in two cases. In general, I noticed, that the strategy of snowball sampling and in some cases getting contact via gatekeepers was most promising, due to the personal reference (Hennink et al. 2011b). One of my respondents for instance introduced me to the coordinator of a community centre ‘Huiskamer’ I didn’t know before, who then asked people if they were interested, which lead to three more interviews. Furthermore, attending more private meetings or activities, like an informational discussion evening of the local organization ‘Hart voor de K-Buurt’ or the ‘sewing café’ of the ‘Bonte Kraai’, lead to more openness of the people towards my research interest. In the latter, the coordinator additionally introduced me and was also very helpful directing me to different participants of the class.
4.6 Analytic Approach
In this research, the logic of a deductive and inductive approach will alternate, as Hennink at al. (2011e) propose. For the conception of this research, theories and existing research were used to define the frame and structure, which could be understood as a deductive process. With the process of gathering data and its analysis however, the collected insights stand for themselves and only when corresponding to existing research, the latter was integrated in explanations (Hennink et al. 2011e). With the choice of a qualitative approach and of semi-structured in-depth interviews as the research method, it was possible to keep the research open to unexpected findings that haven’t been thought of before, which was most suitable for my analytic approach.
16 Perception of Diversity
5. Analysis: Perception of Diversity
Loosely borrowing from the idea to divide respondents in social milieus (Bynner 2017), four different groups of respondents could be distinguished in relation to specific demographic characteristics, that were chosen in connection to the respondents’ positionality within the ethnically diverse environment. Within these groups, some main perspectives on ethnic diversity were shared and others contested. Therefore, it is merely possible to talk of trends as no group represents a completely homogeneous perspective. The different perceptions could be subsumed into three ways of relating to ethnicity, that will serve as a structure for the following chapter and could be narrowed down to the concepts of ‘enjoying ethnic diversity’, ‘focus on ‘own’ ethnicity’ and ‘unity in difference’. The resulting groups of respondents distinguish between the ethnic background and position of the respondents, as well as the duration of their stay in the neighbourhood. The group of the ‘new white wave’ for instance is composed of people that moved to the neighbourhood in the last 10 years, all of them are white and all but one are Dutch. Most of the respondents chose to move to the neighbourhood due to the affordability of the housing, one got access to social housing. The group of ‘ethnic minorities’ consists of respondents that all moved to the Netherlands from Caribbean and African countries, most of them in the last 15 years. Some of them came without documents and got ‘naturalized’ later. Most belong to the main ethnicities living in the neighbourhood, namely the Surinamese, Dutch-Antillean and Nigerian – only people of Cameroonian descent aren’t represented as much (Van Heelsum 2007). All but one materialize as black2. The group of the ‘Bijlmer believers’ is made up of people that all live in the neighbourhood for at least 23 years, some of them have a white Dutch background, the remaining moved to the Netherlands from South Africa, Suriname, Poland and Finland, all but two materialize as white. When they moved to the Bijlmer it was due to the availability of the apartments, but also because the prices where reasonable at the time compared to other places in Amsterdam.
2 In this context, for simplicities sake the concept of ‘blackness’ is used subsuming all identifications that are opposed to ‘whiteness’, being aware that it doesn’t do justice to the complexity of the issue (Dyer 2000). In some cases, respondents emphasized their different status amongst black people due to their Indish heritage for instance, in others this difference wasn’t relevant. Also, the ‘Arabic’ heritage of one respondent was included in the concept of ‘blackness’. In this context, ‘blackness’ is understood as the belonging to a minority group in a country (the Netherlands) where white dominated structures hold a hegemonic position.
17 Anthea Gick
The group of the ‘Bijlmer children’ includes two respondents that both were born and grew up in the Bijlmer and are now in their twenties and thirties. Both have parents that were born abroad and moved to the Netherlands from Egypt and Suriname respectively, both materialize as black. Some of the respondents could also be placed in other groups, however for reasons of their perspectives on ethnicity and to summarize the main tendencies they were included in their respective group.
Table 2: Groups of respondents
Groups of Respondents Perception of Choice to respondents diversity/ethnicity move to Bijlmer Enjoying ‘New white White Dutch, Ietje, Tom, Enjoying presence of Affordability, ethnic wave’ 1st generation Phil, Michael, different ethnicities, social housing diversity white migrant Mariana, selectively Hank, (Eric*) ‘consuming’
diversity, positive vs. critical views on *Only working in change neighbourhood Focus on Ethnic 1st generation Chris, Joseph, Enjoying own Migrants ‘own’ minorities black & white Claire, Jake, cultural community community ethnicity migrants Achojah, Nora and supply, positive vs. critical views on change Unity in Bijlmer Residents for Christel, Lea, Perception of ethnic Availability, difference believers >23 years, Joe, Irena, differences but affordability, white Dutch, Sofia, Sjareefa solidarity, rather friends 1st generation positive view on black & white change migrants Bijlmer 2nd generation Jack, Marcio Different ethnicities Born and children black migrants as normal, critical raised in view on change Bijlmer
18 Perception of Diversity
5.1 Enjoying ethnic Diversity
‘New white wave’
Enjoying Presence of different Ethnicities
Several of the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ described a positive feeling towards the population of the neighbourhood and the general atmosphere. As described in the example of the diverse neighbourhood of Hackney in London (Wessendorf 2013), the diverse setting of the neighbourhood is celebrated or enjoyed by its residents. Mostly people talked about the positive atmosphere and the open way of interacting with each other, that was put into relation with the cultural influences of the people with African and Caribbean background. For Hank for instance the sense of community in the neighbourhood that differs for him from what he calls the ‘more individualistic Dutch culture’ has a great value. He describes the neighbourhood as a ‘warm blanket’ or ‘one big embrace’, appreciating the assistance and help from neighbours in times of need as well as giving back and investing his energy for the people. Also, for Mariana there is a personal connection to the people of the neighbourhood, although she only moved there two years ago. She reasons that growing up in Mozambique and Brazil as a daughter of two white Dutch parents, makes her feel comfortable living with people from Suriname, but also from different African countries. Because of that, she feels a sense of belonging to the residents of the neighbourhood but acknowledges that they might not feel the same way because of her whiteness. Other respondents emphasized the value of experiencing different cultures and broadening the own horizon. Phil for instance describes the neighbourhood as the ‘place to be’ when you like to discover and are curious about different cultures and ethnic backgrounds. He enjoys the possibility to learn about different cultures without having to travel somewhere else and sees the ethnic diversity of the population in the neighbourhood as a great value. Besides the specificity of the neighbourhood in the Dutch context, Phil also sees a connection to other famous diverse neighbourhoods in London and New York.
‘It’s like the Brixton feeling, the Brooklyn feeling, like this melting pot of cultures and outdoor activities and a lot happening on the street when you go outside on a sunny day, a lot of music around, it’s a very vivid area.’
19 Anthea Gick
He describes the Bijlmer as a place with a dynamic street life and the feeling of creativity, a life style neighbourhood that defines itself through its extraordinary image and history, which he celebrates and enjoys. In a similar way Tom, who experienced the neighbourhood in the years 2009 and 2010, living in a flat that has been renovated now but at the time was described as one of the ‘worst’ places in the neighbourhood, describes the neighbourhood as a ‘fun’ and ‘cozy’ place to be. He liked trying out things like food he didn’t know, interacting with people on the street when playing soccer or doing barbecues and observing customs he wasn’t used to, like people walking around and ‘showing off their birds’ in public space. While enjoying the influence of other cultures than the Dutch one, he feels like there needs to be a certain balance however.
‘Melting pot is good, but it shouldn’t be like going on a holiday in your own country, I guess. You should recognize some typical Dutch things.’
Feeling foreign within the Netherlands, where he was born doesn’t seem like a positive experience for Tom, however enjoying aspects of different cultures he describes as fun. While appreciating different ethnic influences that are convenient to him, he puts himself in the position to judge, when it is too much and not agreeable anymore, which he justifies as a ‘native’ person living in his ‘native’ country and thus having the privilege of cultural superiority. This notion of foreigners intruding the own homogeneous identity conveniently forgets about the imperial past and in the case of the Netherlands is paired with a defensive attitude to protect the imagination of the innocent and tolerant self (Wekker 2016). Not only does this selective acceptance of difference reflect dominant discourse, it also illustrates how the diversity of the neighbourhood has become a life-style amenity for white middle-class, consuming ethnic ‘Otherness’ and by dislocating it from its context and origin, appropriate its voice (De Oliver 2016). Not being aware of the meaning or consequences of their choice, Mariana, Phil and Tom all moved to the neighbourhood due to the affordability of the apartments but also because they were attracted by its diverse ’flair’. All the respondents perceive it as interesting and exciting to experience cultural difference, as long as it is not too much difference, or to put it in De Oliver’s (2016) words, they enjoy the ‘sanitized’ version of the ethnic ‘Other’. Either way, the perception of cultural difference between ethnic groups is very strong among the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’, which also shows in the way they described neighbours or other residents – always mentioning ethnicity in terms of national background or skin colour. While the findings of Wessendorf (2013) suggest that not only
20 Perception of Diversity ethnicity, but also aspects like class and education were perceived to affect social connectedness, the respondents of this research usually emphasized ethnic difference as the main reason for the social separation into different religious as well as housing communities.
‘If you look at how many churches we have, the different kinds of churches. And not only churches, the different (…) mosques. You have the Indian mosque, the Arabic mosque (…). And all separated by nationality, ethnic background.’
Phil sees a connection between peoples’ ethnicity and their religious group, where they separate to practice their specific religion. For him this is a materialization of the tendency to gather in groups of the own cultural background instead of mixing, which most respondents understood as a normal process. Accordingly, for instance Michael only has contact with his neighbours from the Kleiburg complex – all new arrivals and predominantly white like himself. He perceives the other buildings around as occupied by people from Suriname and Africa and feels that they also ‘create their own society’, that is separate from his social environment. Similar like in the example of Hackney in London, where this separation is evaluated as normal of the majority of the population, as long as there is a willingness to mix in public space (Wessendorf 2013), a large part of the respondents of this research didn’t see this process as problematic. The common-sense way of reasoning however, that cultural difference creates social distance and that the separation into different social groups only is a logic consequence, represents the power of the perception of normality (Lamont et al. 2014, Pascale 2008). By doing so, all of the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ reified existing conceptions of ethnic difference, that again strengthened their position as part of their own group, not needing to involve with the rest of the population of the neighbourhood.
Dutch ‘post-racist’ Discourse and the Perception of Difference
Most respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ referred to the Bijlmer as a ‘black neighbourhood’ where blackness is the norm and part of the image. Consequently, the notion of feeling different as a white person in this context appeared several times. Tom for instance describes how he felt like part of the white pioneers when moving to the neighbourhood eight years ago, starting a new trend. Similarly, Phil is very much aware of his whiteness within a predominantly black social context. He describes however, that he lost this awareness over time while getting used to the beforehand different environment and adjusting what he perceives as ‘normal’, which is also connected to him feeling more at home.
21 Anthea Gick
The sensation of not only feeling different, but also of being perceived as different was equally present among the white respondents. Mariana for instance feels irritated when people treat her differently, due to her skin colour.
‘Not everybody looks at you, because some people I think they are not used to be greeted by white people, so they just look the other way.’
For her the default skin colour in the neighbourhood seems to be black, as she only specifies the skin colour of ‘white people’ – which are perceived as different. This feeling of being the ‘other’ even turns into discomfort in another situation, when she went to a community centre in the neighbourhood, where she was invited by a friend. She felt uncomfortable with the idea of not knowing what the normal way of greeting was and imagined an awkward situation amongst Surinamese people. Therefore, when she went there she chose to greet just by saying ‘hi’ and felt embarrassed when she observed other visitors – she describes as Surinamese without having talked to them – greeting by handshake. The main reasons for her discomfort seemed to be her perception of her own difference in colour in this unknown environment, using the skin colour as indicator of difference. In a similar way, Ietje described her discomfort with the idea to move to a ‘black neighbourhood’ as a ‘blond Dutch girl’. Living there for four years, she doesn’t see any problem with that anymore. Both example illustrate, how the unknown ‘Other’ is perceived as threatening until personal encounters and experiences shape a more differentiated understanding (Allport 1954). Beyond these experiences however, perception of ethnic difference prevails. Not only Mariana, but also other respondents of this group used the term ‘Surinamese’ to describe ‘black people’ trying to avoid or felt uncomfortable to name skin colour, which became obvious for instance when differentiating between ‘white Dutch’ and ‘Surinamese Dutch'. While this matches the discursive tradition in the Netherlands to avoid categorizing skin colour in order to not reify difference, it really rather helps to cover up the fact that skin colour still is a reason for discrimination in Dutch society, than actually promoting equality (Wekker 2016, Hooks 1992). While most respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ were aware of their skin colour in terms of feeling different, Eric claims it is irrelevant for him and that he doesn’t perceive colour in general and his whiteness specifically as an issue in his working place as a social worker and leader of a social centre of the neighbourhood.
22 Perception of Diversity
‘The colour of my skin is no issue. People don’t see it and I don’t see that colour. We are we, and they know whatever they need (…) they can ask me or approach me.’
Only in some situations he notices that he is the only white person, but he stresses that there is no differentiation between black or white people in this specific social context. For him this is obvious as people know that they can approach him for whatever issue they have. As in the previous example, Eric avoids the recognition of skin colour as relevant, although not due to the feeling of discomfort but rather due to having internalized the ‘post-racist’ narrative. As already explained above, this way of neglecting difference is meant in a positive way, trying not to reify racist categories while ignoring the fact that they still matter, as long as discrimination due to skin colour is happening (Wekker 2016, Hooks 1992).
In contrast to this, Hank is much more aware of this issue and sees a great disparity in connection to skin colour, which he describes as a ‘cultural dominance’ of the white population. Especially in participatory meetings of the neighbourhood he observed the tendency of black people to stand behind others in the second row. Hank reasons this attitude comes from a lack of confidence to speak out for the own interests, also in the context of perceived dominance of white people in such meetings. Both ways of behaving in such situations are culturally learned, which makes skin colour a very relevant aspect for him, that shouldn’t be ignored. Also, Phil observed some situation where white people made comments in a top-down attitude towards the black youngsters he works with as a youth worker. Hank and Phil observe and dislike how unaware other white residents are about their behaviour and its meaning in connection to their skin colour and reflect to a certain point about their own position, however Hank more than Phil. Whereas for some of the white respondents, the sensation of feeling different in a black social context was exceptional, this feeling even turned into discomfort in some cases connected to prejudiced ideas about the black population in the Bijlmer. Over time however, some of the respondents described that they either got less aware of the difference in skin colour, or that the actual contact with the population replaced their prejudiced ideas with own positive experiences (Allport 1954, Wessendorf 2013). While one of the white respondents stressed, that skin colour didn’t matter at all in his environment of experience – with him being the leader of a community place, and often the only white person – another respondent contested this idea describing the dominance of white towards black people. Ironically, the first respondent doesn’t see his position in connection to
23 Anthea Gick his skin colour. Indeed, most of the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ – except Hank and to a certain extend Phil – didn’t reflect on their skin colour in connection to their presence in the neighbourhood, besides their notion of feeling different, which allows an estimation of the low level of awareness of the general significance and power of skin colour among this group (Wekker 2016).
Demographic change and gentrification
All the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ had a generally positive attitude towards the gentrifying processes making the neighbourhood more attractive. Also, the arrival of people with different, often more privileged social backgrounds was perceived as a gain to the social environment, bringing a new dynamic into the area. While rarely explicitly named, the variable of ethnicity always plays a role in the perceptions of the respondents, as most of the new arrivals are perceived to be white. Therefore, every statement must also be evaluated in connection to the ethnic background of the people talked about. When Phil articulates his hope for instance, that the new arrivals can broaden the perspectives especially of the less privileged youth – where many have a limited idea of what they are going to do with their life, beyond becoming a rapper, football player or drug dealer – he implicitly talks about more privileged and mostly white people, serving as better examples for the black youth of the neighbourhood. Only few respondents reflected critically upon gentrification and their own positionality in the process like Ietje for instance, who was especially concerned with the ousting of what she calls the ‘original people’ she defines as ‘migrants’ by the new arrivals she perceives to be mostly white Dutch like herself. Interestingly, five of the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’ could be categorized as part of the gentrifiers, whereof four didn’t remark any concern about this process or their position in terms of socio-economic status as well as ethnicity in the neighbourhood. Two of the respondents noticed that many of the new arrivals have a top-down attitude towards the population of the neighbourhood, paired with ignorance of the local conditions. Hank especially sees the level of unawareness of privilege of the new arrivals, he conceptualizes as mostly white:
‘I think the people in Kleiburg have no idea, how many children here don’t get breakfast in my flat, just because they can’t afford it.’
24 Perception of Diversity
The Kleiburg complex is one of the newly renovated buildings where apartments were sold only four years ago – to mostly white people – while the children he talks about live in one of the older towers. Furthermore, Hank notices that the new arrivals tend to act dominant in their terms of what’s right and wrong, imposing their values on the whole society as they have also the vocal power to do so. As an example, he describes how some of the new arrivals complain about the noise, in a manner of ‘the way I live – ten o’clock it should be quiet at night – is the way everybody should live’. He feels like there should be more understanding and respect of the normality in the neighbourhood by the people that just moved there. It is remarkable, that all of the respondents belonging to the ‘new white wave’, of whom most are part of the gentrifying process, have a very positive attitude towards the enhancement of the neighbourhood. Only some are critical about their own position in terms of socio- economic status as well as ethnicity or the consequences for the local population, and even fewer think about the responsibility of privilege in the context of demographic change. Furthermore, it should be noted that none of the white respondents explicitly included the concept of skin colour in reflections on gentrification, which again confirms Wekker’s (2016) statement about the avoidance of its use in the Dutch context, especially so in connection to issues of power. The luxury of unawareness is part of the privilege of this group.
25 Anthea Gick
5.2 Focus on ‘own’ Ethnicity
Ethnic minorities
Enjoying ‘own’ cultural Community
A clear trend among respondents that were part of ethnic minorities but also first- generation migrants from different parts of the Caribbean and Africa was their appreciation of living with people of a similar ethnic background – reflected in Clark’s (2002) finding about ‘own-group preference’ in the choice of a neighbourhood – which was a reason for most to enjoy living in this area. Chris for instance describes an ‘African’ feeling of life and his feeling of belonging within the neighbourhood, being able to connect to people and culture that remind him of his own Cameroonian background, where he lived until he moved to the Netherlands 14 years ago.
‘Here is like Africa, Suriname or Morocco. It has nothing to do with Dutch, really. Some Dutch people try to integrate into this society, but it’s really, it’s home. You have African food, African supermarkets, fried African food, Surinamese fried food, everything made, everything. This is really Africa, it’s a small Africa.’
Especially the food seems to have a great importance for him connecting to the neighbourhood. As a chef, he often goes to markets and groceries stores in the neighbourhood to compare prizes and look at the range of goods. Also, for Nora, the supply of products from the Caribbean is a great value in this neighbourhood. Furthermore, she is very happy to be able to live with people from the same cultural background as her. Although she also enjoys the presence of other cultures, being born in Bonaire, she admits having a better connection to people from Africa, the Caribbean and South America, appreciating their – how she describes it – ‘jolly’ way of being.
‘I like where I’m living, because I’m living in an apartment, that is our culture, you know, our people, all of the Caribbean, there I’m living. And we speak our language, our language is Papiamentu.’
The diversity of the neighbourhood gives her not only the opportunity to interact with people of different backgrounds, but also to live and surround herself with people from ‘her own’ culture.
26 Perception of Diversity
On a more private level, Achojah describes that his circle of friends also consists of people from the same social or cultural background, which means for him eating the same food, speaking the same language, but also being ‘black’. He describes the kinship relation between people that are black as ‘brothers’ in contrast to ‘you people’, meaning white people who don’t bond with each other the same way. Some of the black respondents mentioned, that living in a neighbourhood where most people are black was something positive. In this respect, and although also having black skin, Jake felt a bit different, mentioning to be looked at as not belonging due to his Indish-Surinamese background. Possibly also due to this experience, he appreciates practicing religious traditions within the safe space of his ‘own’ Hindu community, which he perceives as being respectful towards other customs and to not impose the own culture on others. In this sense, he divides between the sphere of the own religious or ethnic community and the public space where everyone meets and where respecting every other cultural habit is crucial, to strengthen the encompassing neighbourhood community. Living with and being surrounded by people of the same ethnic background was a great value for all of the respondents with ethnic minority backgrounds, and reason to move to the neighbourhood (Clark 2002). Main reasons for connecting were the general, familiar atmosphere, the food supply, speaking the same language, being black or practicing the same religion, that gave the respondents a sense of belonging within the Netherlands, but also within the ethnically diverse context of the Bijlmer neighbourhood. It even comes close to the notion of a safe space for some of the respondents, that helps people connect to the place. Like the respondents of the ‘new white wave’, by celebrating what they understand to be their ‘own’ culture, this group also perceives and reproduces ethnic difference.
Demographic Change, Gentrification and Skin Colour
In contrast to the respondents of the ‘new white wave’, people that belonged to the group of ‘ethnic minorities’ automatically connected skin colour to the current demographic change as well as the issue of gentrification. The main topics were the influx of white people, that are starting to get interested in living in the neighbourhood, but also disparities and power differences in connection to skin colour. For Claire and Chris the reason for the trend of white people moving in was clearly, because the neighbourhood has improved in the last years. For Claire, this is especially due to
27 Anthea Gick the decrease of criminality and issues that came with the different cultures living together as she reasons, although not specifying what issues she means.
‘20 years ago, people don’t want to live in this neighbourhood. Too many things happened here, shooting, everything. Because you have different cultures here. And that’s why the white people think, ‘no, I don’t want to live here’. But the last few years it changed very much, and that’s nice.’
She and Chris reason that the aspect of more security reassures these white people to not be afraid anymore, while they don’t apply this logic for black people. By reasoning like this, they reproduce the stigma around the black population of the Bijlmer as criminal, as well as the image of white people as righteous. Reifying this logic, Chris talks about his view on the responsibility of ‘the black man (…) to show a good character in this country, so the white man can trust him’. The only thing ‘the white man’ must do in his opinion is not to be afraid of ‘the black man’. He furthermore conceptualizes ‘blackness as a problem’ instead of ‘racism as a problem’ in another part of the interview. While he feels the injustice, he chose to cope with it strategically. Just like Joseph, he doesn’t want to make a difference between people due to their skin colour and stresses that he feels like everyone is the same. Both are aware however, that others judge upon it. The extend to which Chris internalized and reproduces the hegemonial (thus white) discourse around colour, putting black people in the responsibility to prove themselves in order to be accepted in a white dominated society, illustrates the power of this narrative rooted in colonial times until today, where whiteness – opposed to blackness – is created as a synonym for goodness (Pascale 2008, Hooks 1992). When talking about the demographic change of the neighbourhood, Chris furthermore describes the arrival of white people in the neighbourhood as beautiful and even ‘enlightening’ for the former population, as they get confronted with difference, which will make them more tolerant and culturally flexible, as he reasons. His selection of the word ‘enlightening’ again matches the construction of whiteness as the good and positive (Hooks 1992) and makes his message appear as if the residents of the neighbourhood depended on the white people to move there to become more tolerant. The illusion that the concepts of race or skin-colour no longer matter in the Dutch society (or in any other) is fundamentally disrupted when acknowledging how powerfully racist narratives still affect peoples perception of skin-colour and ethnicity (Wekker 2016). In a more critical way, Joseph and Achojah perceive a strong difference in privilege due to skin colour. Both describe white people as rich people, that are able to buy apartments
28 Perception of Diversity and thus have access to the newly built freehold homes in the neighbourhood. Joseph perceives a grave difference in prosperity between black and white people in the neighbourhood.
‘You see the white Dutch or the Holland people, their children have more money to use than the Black here.’
He differentiates between ‘white Dutch’ or ‘Holland people’ and ‘black people’, that don’t have a white Dutch background, but might still be Dutch like himself. This ‘white Dutch background’ however signifies prosperity for him opposed to black people, that are in a less privileged position. His clear way of distinguishing between skin colour illustrates how strongly he feels socio-economic disparities in relation to ethnicity. Also, Achojah observes socio-economic in connection to ethnic segregation, due to the influx of white people that can afford higher rents.
‘Interestingly, like the new place in Kraaiennest, there are a lot of white people, now in the neighbourhood. It’s for white people, because they sell it. The Blacks don’t have that kind of job, to afford to buy a house. So, we still look at this like segregation in a master course. I was almost thinking, ‘ok, they wanna take the Bijlmer back’. A lot of Blacks are now moving to Almere and many places outside Amsterdam to look for a cheaper apartment.’
Achojah describes a racialized gentrification, whereby the richer white people drive out the less prosperous black people he identifies with, that consequently must search for affordable housing elsewhere. The same issue he perceives with African shop owners, who lose their businesses because they cannot pay the rent anymore. Smets et al. (2008) found out that indeed small shops go bankrupt, although due to the outflow of residents they were supplying for, mostly ‘non-Western’. Furthermore, they state that the relocation of residents to other parts of the city due to the demolishing of high-rise buildings mostly affected socio- economically less privileged migrants (Smets et al. 2008), which is coherent to Achojah’s perception of unequal treatment. Either way it is clear that gentrifying processes change the social composition of the neighbourhood, which Achojah is aware of. He puts these processes in the context of the rising attractivity of Amsterdam as a global city and working location for professionals (Savini et al. 2016) that also need a place to live and of whom he says the majority is white. He feels like the municipality thereby serves the privileged at the expense of the less privileged, which in this case is connected to skin colour.
29 Anthea Gick
In general, the group of respondents that are part of an ethnic minority, of whom all but one materialize as black, are more conscious about the meaning of skin colour in a white dominated society, which might be partly because they are confronted with discrimination and therefore are more likely to reflect racist structures, while this isn’t a guarantee for awareness either, as Hooks (1992) makes clear. It is important to note that there are different levels of awareness, as well as different ways of responding amongst the participants. Some seem to have internalized the hegemonial white narrative of skin colour and race in terms of the logic of the right of the ‘native white population’ the rest has to adjust to, without reflecting on the power scheme behind (Pascale 2008). On the other hand, some respondents stressed the extend to which skin colour matters in this neighbourhood, being a signifier for prosperity of the new white residents, that contribute to the gentrification of the area and lead to an ousting of less prosperous black residents. This perception must be put into relation however, as most of the newly built housing units are occupied by people with ‘non-Western’, mostly Surinamese background. Furthermore, there is also more and more black middle class living in the neighbourhood, although the trend to move to dwellings with garden outside the city reduces their share simultaneously (Smets et al. 2008). These facts raise the question in how far the perception of the contrast between the rich white and the poor black is in relation to current developments in the neighbourhood. Either way, the perception of inequality and discrimination in connection to skin colour is very present, illustrating how much ethnicity and skin colour matter.
30 Perception of Diversity
5.3 Unity in Difference
Bijlmer believers
Perception of ethnic Difference
As the other groups of respondents, also the ‘Bijlmer believers’ had a distinct perception of ethnic difference between people. However, different than the other groups of respondents, there was a sense of appreciation and unity beyond this difference. Sjareefa for instance emphasizes that she still feels different, being born in Suriname and having moved to the Netherlands as a child. For her a marker of difference is her blackness she opposes with the Dutch culture, thus using it as a cultural concept and not merely as materialization of skin colour. Also, Christel and Lea stress that there is a difference between the ‘Dutch culture’ and the culture of Suriname, the Antilles and of African countries in the way of ‘going along with each other’, both describe as open and positive. They have an open attitude towards these groups because of their perceived behaviour (Clark 2002), while both identify with their white Dutch background and especially Christel draws a clear line. In the same logic, she feels a division in a more superficial public sphere, where people interact in a tolerant way and a more private sphere, where people prefer to stay with their ‘own’ group, just as Wessendorf (2013) distinguished in her research about Hackney in London.
‘Sometimes I think this neighbourhood is also a bit like living apart together. (…) A lot of people, they see each other, they tolerate each other, they greet each other, but it doesn’t go very far.’
She observes a polite acceptance of each other when people interact but beyond that there is not much investment in building up a relation. She is aware that she doesn’t have any friends that are ‘black’, but instead ‘a bit like herself’ – white Dutch – and reasons that this is because everyone prefers to ‘go along with people they know, their own group’. For her this is a normal tendency, which she observes with many subgroups in the neighbourhood. The idea of ethnic difference is used as a justification for separation which reifies this perception of difference as a supposedly normal state of being. Again, the power in this understanding lies in the notion of common-sense logic, making it appear self-evident, especially when using the result – the separation of ethnic groups – to justify the perception of difference (Pascale 2008, Lamont et al. 2014, Lossau 2011). On the other hand, and while separation into ethnic groups was perceived as normal by most respondents, some also enjoyed close contacts with people
31 Anthea Gick of different ethnic backgrounds as a partner or just in form of a good friendship relation to neighbours.
Some of the respondents remarked their discomfort with the confrontation of difference. Irena for instance mentioned one situation when her neighbour, she described as a ‘Muslim man’, picked up a parcel at her apartment, when she was already in her nightgown and she felt as if he looked at her judgingly because the dress was too short. For her his ethnic background was set equal with traditional values that perceive the exposure of female skin as offence. She also complained about the people from India and Pakistan because she feels like they are ‘dirty’ and throw their waste on the street. In a similar way, Joe connected the habit to ‘shout into the phone’ to people with Ghanaian origin. In both cases people get reduced to an ethnic category in connection to a territorial origin that is set equal to a certain behaviour, which not only reifies cultural stereotypes, but also the concept of ethnic difference. Furthermore, including national spaces to indicate difference and thus supposedly objective categories that are commonly used to define ethnicity, but really are subjective geographical imaginations, gives this narrative additional discursive power (Massey 2006). Next to nationality, also skin colour was perceived as an indicator of ethnic difference. Again Irena described another situation, where she felt different and uncomfortable, being the only white person amongst a group of black people. She reasons that this discomfort is due to the fear of facing disapproval of the black population. However, she says that this isn’t the case in reality. She wasn’t the only one, that felt different as a white person in this neighbourhood. Also, Christel and Sofia remarked that they had to get used to the predominantly black population of the neighbourhood, which was new and different to them. These examples illustrate the level to which skin colour still is perceived as social barrier, distinguishing between people not only on a visual but very much also on a perceived cultural level. In many cases, skin colour got set equal to a way of thinking and behaving, thus to a cultural concept that seems to prove difference.
All respondents of this group expressed their understanding of ethnic difference in different intensity and ways as something given. To split and stay with the ‘own’ group due to the preference of sameness is perceived as normal, just like in the case of Hackney in London (Wessendorf 2013). By accepting this state of being as a proof for ethnic difference, people simultaneously justify their social behaviour of staying with their ‘own’ group. Some cases of confrontation with ethnic difference showed, that respondents felt uncomfortable when being in the position of the outsider, such as being the only white person. After living in the
32 Perception of Diversity neighbourhood for more than 20 years however, most felt like they ‘got used’ to this feeling of being different.
Feeling of Unity
All of the respondents of the group of the ‘Bijlmer believers’ are investing and interested in the neighbourhood, some are participating in different activities for example to clean or improve the area, which is commonly understood as an indicator for social trust (Dinesen et al. 2015). They have a personal connection to their surrounding and despite the many differences in ethnical backgrounds of the residents of the neighbourhood, a couple of the respondents mentioned a sense of solidarity with the neighbourhood community, contesting Putnam’s (2007) hypothesis that diversity tends to reduce social solidarity. Sjareefa for instance makes clear that although she criticizes much of what is happening in the neighbourhood, she is ‘one of them’. She doesn’t want to put herself on another level and even reasons that due to her feeling of solidarity with the neighbourhood, she stayed there for so long and didn’t move away. Irena equally describes a communal sense within the neighbourhood where different religions and cultures live and tolerate each other like friends. She thinks that this is something special, as there might be enough reasons to create conflicts about and hopes that this relaxed way of dealing with difference will be maintained. For Joe the neighbour community of the new residents of the Kleiburg building was very important. Unfortunately, this has changed in the last years as he explains, due to the renting out of apartments and the great fluctuation of residents which made living there more anonymous. Although less than before, he still has a bond with his old neighbours and other active residents he meets during participatory activities. Also, Christel and Sofia participate in community work, cleaning the area or investing in a better participatory structure. Sofia especially takes pride that she and her neighbours won the prize for the cleanest street in Amsterdam Zuidoost in 2012, which illustrates her personal connection to the area. While most of the respondents perceived ethnicity as a relevant category of distinction in the neighbourhood, they had a sense of community beyond this perceived difference, helping each other out, investing in networks and working together to keep the area clean or support local organizations like the ‘Hart voor de K-Burt’, that invests to improve the participation and communication structures of the neighbourhood, etc. This investment in participating as well as the solidarity with the neighbourhood community beyond ethnic identities challenges the findings of Putnam (2007), who argues that diversity can lead to a decrease of trust, social
33 Anthea Gick cohesion and solidarity, although admittedly there is no comparison available how solidarity would be perceived if the Bijlmer was a more homogeneous neighbourhood.
Demographic Change
Most of the respondents had a rather positive attitude towards the demographic change as well as the renewal of the structure because it makes the neighbourhood more attractive. The influx of socio-economically more privileged people was perceived as a gain for the neighbourhood by some of the respondents. Christel for instance sees an opportunity in the demographic change, feeling that a more mixed social composition will be good for the neighbourhood, while she doesn’t specify an exact reason, following the popular understanding that a mix is always better, which is also promoted by mixing policies of the municipality, that aim at a better social mobility (Pinkster et al. 2009). This is a good example how popular discourse can affect personal perceptions of diversity (Wessendorf 2013). For others, especially the renovation of buildings was perceived as positive as it makes the area look nicer. Irena disapproved the structural development and building projects of the last years, as everything is getting more crowded while she preferred the open space before. None of the respondents connected any issues to the structural upgrading of the neighbourhood. They merely perceived it as a gain for the appearance and didn’t mention, how this could be connected to more serious changes in the social composition. Only Lea seemed to feel some irritation and distance towards the new residents of the Kleiburg complex, she categorizes as white ‘Yuppies’ and explains that she doesn’t have anything to do with them. She feels more comfortable among the older population, which seems to be mainly due to her connection to their attitude and lifestyle in contrast to the lifestyle of the new residents. Almost none of the respondents in this group had second thoughts about the current demographic and structural changes in the neighbourhood and didn’t seem much involved with the topic, except on a very superficial level. Living in the neighbourhood for a long time, they all have experienced the Bijlmer of the past, where issues like criminality and structural degradation defined the area (Wassenberg 2006). Possibly due to this knowledge of the past, and although emphasizing that life in the neighbourhood was also good in these times, they appreciate the improvements over the years which might add up to their relatively composed attitude.
34 Perception of Diversity
Bijlmer children
Identifying with ethnic Diversity
The two respondents that were born and grew up in the neighbourhood expressed their feeling of being part of the ethnically diverse population and identifying with the neighbourhood and its people. For them interacting and dealing with ethnic difference seems to be completely normal, themselves having parents that migrated to the Netherlands from Egypt or Suriname, and thus always having been confronted with the issue of ethnicity as members of ethnic minorities in the context of the Netherlands. Jack is very conscious about this however and describes, that for him living with people of different ethnic backgrounds than his own has a great value, as it gave him the opportunity to have a broader horizon always having been confronted with values and standards different to his own. In his childhood for instance, Jack always had friends of many different backgrounds living in the same area but also due to his activity in a soccer club and in the Egyptian Coptic Church community, where he practices his religion with his family. Being part of an ethnic minority themselves but having grown up in the Netherlands, Jack and Marcio both have a different set of experiences than people with a white Dutch background, for whom moving to the Bijlmer feels like a fun experience they chose to have for different reasons, consuming and appropriating ethnic diversity for their pleasure (De Oliver 2016), for Jack and Marcio it is normality. While ethnic diversity is normal for him, Jack still emphasizes the importance of the ethnic background of the people living in the neighbourhood, which shows that the concept of ethnic difference prevails beyond personal experiences for him.
‘I think the people from African countries, where they are more focused on communities less than personal interests, this warmth was something that made this neighbourhood very extraordinary.’
For him, the African background is connected to a certain way of living, different to the Dutch way for instance. While homogenizing the influence of African culture to the importance of community and implicitly opposing it to other cultural influences, he reifies not only common imaginations about Africa (Massey 2006), but also reifies difference in connection to ethnicity. Furthermore, Jack describes the separation of ethnic groups in the practice of own traditions as a valuable aspect of social life, which he appreciates within his religious
35 Anthea Gick community as well. He sees that people do enjoy the ethnically diverse environment, but this doesn’t mean that they don’t appreciate the opportunity to also stay with people from the same ethnic background. While the communication between the different ethnic groups still has a way to go, Jack observed that for a common cause, people will come together and unite. He describes a situation of a protest against the building plans, that foresaw the construction of new apartment complexes on the central square.
‘They collaborated, they gathered, all the people from the neighbourhood, from all the places, from the churches, from the mosque, the Ghanaian, Surinamese, Dutch – all types of people, and they held each others’ hands and stood in the form of a heart on the square. Like “we are gathered and united in this place, we don’t want this to go away”.’
With this protest, the neighbourhood organization ‘Hart voor de K-Buurt’ was founded, which is very active in the neighbourhood, investing for a better communication and participation structure that includes as many residents as possible. As stated in existing research as well as by some respondents, a common objective or overlapping interests as subsumed by the organization ‘Hart voor de K-Buurt’ facilitates intergroup contact and can have positive effects on the perception of other groups – that is in case of positive experiences with members of other groups (Allport 1954). This doesn’t mean however, that the perception of difference will be fully deconstructed, as the example of the respondents of the ‘Bijlmer children’ illustrates. While having grown up in the neighbourhood and identifying with the ethnically diverse population of the Bijlmer as well as feeling to be part of it, ethnic difference is perceived as normal despite or even because of personal experience, which can under certain circumstances reify existing stereotypes about ethnic groups (Putnam 2007). In this context this perceived difference is used by the respondents to justify the separation of ethnic groups in different social contexts. Beyond this difference however the respondents perceive a sense of belonging, spending their childhood in the area. They also observe that other residents come together and feel solidary towards the neighbourhood community, which materializes in situations of a common protest for shared interests (Allport 1954).
Demographic Change, Skin Colour and Voice
The two respondents that grew up in the neighbourhood and have experienced its development over the last decades perceive the demographic change in slightly different ways,
36 Perception of Diversity both however observe and are even enraged by the issue of power disparities between the old and new residents. Marcio perceives the trend of more prosperous people moving into the newly renovated or built apartments very critically. He feels like the political strategy behind doesn’t only aim at improving the image of the neighbourhood by attracting more affluent people, but also by diminishing the proportion of ‘African’ people.
‘What they do is, that they build different houses for richer people so that the neighbourhood looks better. (…) As if other houses would change the neighbourhood. Maybe for people from outside, that there don’t live only African people anymore, only that it’s not right [how they do it].’ (own translation from Dutch)
Marcio is frustrated about the way gentrifying policies are imposed on the neighbourhood, like the building of new apartments that reinforce power inequalities not only between socio-economically more or less privileged people, but also between black and white. Therefore, the presence of white people in the neighbourhood provokes a feeling of injustice for him. He associates whiteness with wealth and perceives a dominance of richer white people that intrude the more modest social context of the older residents. His general enragement towards racist discrimination he is confronted with and very aware of is reflected in this perception of whiteness as well, which should be acknowledged as an indicator that the concepts of race and skin colour not only matter but also continue to ‘terrorize’ – using the expression of Hooks (1992) – parts of society, that have to deal with racist discrimination. For Jack, the focus in the perception of power disparities is directed at the ability to articulate the own interest in the social context of the neighbourhood. On the one hand, he hopes that the influx of more educated and socio-economically more privileged people can have a positive effect on the rest of the people living in the neighbourhood, be it as a good example or inspiration, but also to give the neighbourhood a louder voice. On the other side however, he sees the issue of dominance of the more articulate people in respect to those that can’t or don’t speak out for their interests with the same intensity. The latter concerns mostly the older residents, who lack the ability to claim space for their interests and get run over by the more articulate newer residents. As an example, he uses the communal initiatives of the Kleiburg building complex stating how well its community bar works, just because the responsible persons know how to get subsidies etc. to make it work. On the other side, he observed that a Ghanaian store in another building got his access road taken away by the
37 Anthea Gick municipality, not being able to protest and fight against this measure, due to a lack of knowledge of administrative processes and thus the possibility of being heard (Buzzanell 2017). Both respondents perceive a strong connection between power and skin colour, socio- economic background or education and observe that especially the new arrivals are privileged in all those categories, which gives them a dominant voice in the neighbourhood although numerically they are a small minority (Buzzanell 2017). Furthermore, both respondents perceive that gentrification policies reinforce power differences in serving the more affluent people while trying to improve the image of the neighbourhood. Following the argumentation of De Oliver (2016), the diversity of the neighbourhood is being sanitized for marketing purposes.
38 Perception of Diversity
6. Conclusion
The neighborhood of the Bijlmer in Amsterdam has a specific position within the city as the neighbourhood with the most residents with a migration background. While there are some larger ethnic groups, of whom the largest consists of people with Surinamese background, the number of different national backgrounds is dispersed widely which adds to a great ethnic diversity of the neighbourhood. As argued in this research, diversity as well as ethnicity is perceived differently, depending on the own positionality within the social context, which was illustrated by the distinction of four groups of respondents. Most relevant factors that influenced perceptions were the own ethnic background as well as the duration of living in the neighbourhood. While this research could give insights on tendencies, it would be wrong however to reduce the respondents to these factors in connection to their perceptions, as some cases, that differed significantly from the group tendency, demonstrated. This research aimed at understanding the different ways of perceiving diversity and ethnicity within the diverse setting of the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer. The insights gained by the 20 in-depth interviews with residents as well as people working in the defined area allow an overview of main issues connected to diversity and ethnicity in the neighbourhood and can be understood as a (non-exhaustive) range of perceptions. The respondents belonging to the group of the ‘new white wave’ emerged to particularly enjoy the presence of other ethnicities in the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer. Some of them moved there due to the diverse ‘flair’, while the aspect of affordability of housing always also played a role. While ethnic difference was perceived as exciting and interesting, there was also the notion that it should be too much difference and that the neighbourhood should still be recognizable as Dutch. This selective acceptance of difference reflects the dominant discourse around the preservation of the tolerant Dutch identity in the face of other ethnic influences and illustrates how ethnic difference is consumed from the superior position of those who can judge what is tolerable and what is not (Wekker 2016, De Oliver 2016). The respondents of the ‘ethnic minorities’ group shared the appreciation of their ‘own’ ethnic community, enjoying the familiarity of culture, religion but also skin colour. All of them moved to the Netherlands from African and Caribbean countries. The strong identification with their ‘own’ ethnicity can be understood as a reaction to being an ethnic minority in the Netherlands, which helped the respondents connecting to the neighbourhood. The groups of the ‘Bijlmer believers’ as well as the ‘Bijlmer children’ both had a sense of normality in their perception of ethnic diversity, living in the neighbourhood for at least 20
39 Anthea Gick years. The latter even emphasized their feeling of belonging to the diverse set up. Both developed a sense of unity and even solidarity towards the neighbourhood community beyond perceived ethnic differences. Most participated and invested in neighbourhood networks, which portrayed this solidarity, challenging Puntam’s (2007) statement that diversity reduces trust and solidarity in neighbourhoods. Although every respondent had different associations and experiences living in the ethnically diverse neighbourhood of the Bijlmer, some general trends of perceiving diversity and ethnicity could be defined. Most appreciated the atmosphere in the neighbourhood, due to the cultural influence of the large proportion of people from the Caribbean and African countries. Furthermore, a reification of ethnic difference occurred across all groups of respondents, reinstating existing categories of ethnicity. While the respondents of the ‘new white wave emphasized their excitement about different ethnic influences and thereby essentializing other residents of the neighbourhood to their ethnic background, respondents of the group of ‘ethnic minorities’ reified ethnic identity in celebrating their ‘own’ ethnic community. Also, the other groups of respondents perceived difference between ethnic categories such as skin colour, nationality or religion, and thereby reinforcing social distance (Pascale 2008). The perception of ethnic difference reflected in the language and use of categories of the respondents, when describing other residents of the neighbourhood. Most common characteristics to distinguish between people were the nationality and skin colour, which often was connected to a certain behaviour. For instance, what seemed to be almost a tacit agreement was that the influence of African and Caribbean culture was associated with the outgoing, positive, warm and community-oriented way of interacting in the neighbourhood, which was conceptualized as the opposite to a more remote and individualistic Dutch culture. The reification of these geographical and cultural imaginations as supposedly objective categories along which difference is marked holds a strong power, making the distinction appear self-evident (Pascale 2008, Lamont et al. 2014). The perceived difference was furthermore used as a justification for the separation of ethnic groups in religious and other cultural communities, reinforcing the constructed categories. While Allport (1954) proposes his ‘contact theory’ as an approach to overcome prejudiced attitudes that reifies difference towards the ‘Other’, this research shows, that contact can replace certain ideas and imaginations with own experiences. However, this does not necessarily completely deconstruct the ethnic categories or the perception of ethnic difference.
40 Perception of Diversity
In general, the awareness of the connection between ethnicity, privilege and power varied between all respondents, while a vague trend in connection to the own ethnic background and thus positionality within the social power structures could be observed. Most white respondents didn’t reflect on their skin colour in connection to their presence in the neighbourhood in the context of gentrification and demographic change, besides their notion of feeling different, which allows an estimation of the low level of awareness of the general significance and power of skin colour in this group (Wekker 2016). Furthermore, only white respondents felt obviously uncomfortable with the categorizations of skin colour in connection to privilege, never including it in reflections on gentrification, which again confirms Wekker’s (2016) statement about the avoidance of its use in the Dutch context, especially so in connection to issues of power. On the other hand, most of the respondents with ethnic minority backgrounds had a feeling of injustice in connection to privilege and ethnicity or more specifically skin colour. Many were more conscious about the meaning of skin colour in a white dominated society, which might be partly because they are confronted with discrimination themselves and therefore are more likely to reflect racist structures, not having the privilege to ignore them. Some however internalized the hegemonial (white) narrative of race and skin colour without critically reflecting the power structures behind. While perceptions can represent a certain awareness of people, they reflect the power of dominant narratives in the extend to which people internalized and reproduce them. Understanding these connections and deconstructing the self-evident nature of imaginations of the ‘Other’, in this case of residents with different ethnic backgrounds, is a first step to a more equal understanding of ethnicities not only in the diverse context of the Bijlmer neighbourhood but in society in general. This research gives insight to a set of cases which reflect a range of perceptions on the diverse social context of the Bijlmer. With a better knowledge of these perceptions, it is easier to determine possible issues or tensions that might come as a consequence of gentrification policies and the current demographic change in the neighbourhood of the Bijlmer, which can help to adequately address them. While this research was held quite open, alternating between an inductive and deductive approach (Hennink et al. 2011e), in order not to predefine and instead to allow unexpected findings that haven’t been thought of before, this became to be a challenge in the limited time span that was given, as it would have been helpful to support the focus defined after analysing the first set of data with a second – more focused – field phase. This was an additional challenge
41 Anthea Gick for the quest to interview a broad range of people living or working in the neighbourhood, as those who were interested or open for an interview, usually had a certain level of education, as well as sufficient English skills. In further research, it would be interesting to investigate more about the significance the socio-economic situation of residents, but also of religious communities for the perception of diversity, as this couldn’t be addressed in this thesis.
42 Perception of Diversity
7. Bibliography
Allport, G. (1954): The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bird, C. (2005): How I stopped dreading and learned to love Transcription. In: Qualitative Inquiry, 11(2): Sage, 226-248.
Bryman, A. (2012): Chapter 20: Interviewing in qualitative research. In: Social Research Methods. Oxford: University Press, 468-499.
Buzzanell, P. (2017): Voice/Multivocality. In: Matthes, J.; Davis, C. & R. Potter (Eds.): The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Charmaz, K. (2006): Memo-writing. In: Constructing Grounded Theory. London: Sage, 72- 95.
Charmaz, K. (2014): The Logic of Grounded Theory Coding Practices and Initial Coding. In: Constructing Grounded Theory. London: Sage, 109-137.
Clark, W. (2002): Ethnic Preferences and Ethnic Perceptions in Multi-Ethnic Settings. In: Urban Geography, 23(3), 237-256.
De Oliver, M. (2016): Gentrification as the appropriation of therapeutic ‘diversity’: A model and case study of the multicultural amenity of contemporary urban renewal. In: Urban Studies, 53(6), 1299-1316.
Dinesen, P. & K. Sonderskov (2015): Ethnic Diversity and Social Trust: Evidence from the Micro-Context. In: American Sociological Review, 80(3), 550-573.
Dyer, R. (2000): The Matter of Whiteness. In: Back, L. & J. Solomos (Eds.): Theories of Race and Racism. London: Routledge, 539-548.
Gemeente Amsterdam (2017): Stadsdelen in cijfers 2017. Onderzoek, Informatie en Statiestiek. Amsterdam.
Glick Schiller, N. and A. Caglar (2009): Towards a Comparative Theory of Locality in Migration Studies: Migration Incorporation and City Scale. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(2) 177-202.
Golafshani, N. (2003): Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. In: The Qualitative Report, 8(4), 597-606.
43 Anthea Gick
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., A. Bailey (2011a): Chapter 2: The Nature of Qualitative Research. In: Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., A. Bailey (2011b): Chapter 4: Ethical Issues in Qualitative Research. In: Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., A. Bailey (2011c): Chapter 6: In Depth Interviews. In: Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., A. Bailey (2011d): Chapter 9: Data Preparation and Developing Codes. In: Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hennink, M., Hutter, I., A. Bailey (2011e): Chapter 3: The Design Cycle. In: Qualitative Research Methods. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hooks, B. (1992): Representing Whiteness in Black Imagination. In: Grossberg, L.; Nelson, C. & P. Treichler (Eds.): Cultural Studies. London: Routledge, 338-346.
Jefferson, G. (2004): Glossary of transcript Symbols with an Introduction. In: Lerner, G. (Ed.) Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation. John Benjamins Publishing, 13-31.
Lossau, J. (2011): Postkoloniale Ansätze: Zum Verhältnis von kultureller Identität und Raum. In: Gebhardt, H.; Glaser, R.; Radtke, U. & P. Reuber (Eds.): Physische Geographie und Humangeographie. Heidelberg: Spektrum, 653-660.
Malešević, S. (2004): The Sociology of Ethnicity. London: Sage.
Massey, D. (2006): The geographical mind. In: Balderston, D. (Ed): Secondary Geography Handbook. Sheffield: Geographical Association, 46-51.
Pascale, C. (2008): Talking about Race, Shifting the Analytical Paradigm. In: Qualitative Inquiry (14/5), 723-741.
Pinkster, F. & B. Völker (2009): Local Social Networks and Social Resources in Two Dutch Neighborhoods. In: Housing Studies, 24(2), 225-242.
Putnam, R. (2007): E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century. The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize Lecture. In: Scandinavian Political Studies, 30(2), 137- 174.
44 Perception of Diversity
Sampson, R. & S. Raudenbush (2004): Seeing Disorder: Neighbourhood Stigma and the Social Construction of “Broken Windows”. In: Social Psychology Quarterly, 67(4), 319-342.
Savini, F.; Boterman, W.; Van Gent, W. & S. Majoor (2016): Amsterdam in the 21st century: Geography, housing, spatial development and politics. In: Cities, 52, 103-113.
Smets, P. & M. Den Uyl (2008): The Complex Role of Ethnicity in Urban Mixing: A Study of Two Deprived Neighbourhoods in Amsterdam. In: Urban Studies, 45(7), 1439- 1460.
Van de Klundert, W. (2014): Bijlmer Regenerated. Modifications of Public and Semi-Public Areas – What can we learn? London.
Van Gent, W. & S. Musterd (2016): Class, migrants, and the European city: spatial impacts of structural changes in early twenty-first century Amsterdam. In: Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(6), 893-912.
Van Heelsum, A (2007): Case study on housing. Amsterdam, Netherlands. European foundation for the improvement of living and working conditions. Dublin.
Vertovec, S. (2007): Super-diversity and its implications. In: Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(6), 1024-1054.
Wassenberg, F. (2006): The integrated renewal of Amsterdam’s Bijlmermeer high-rise. In: Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 3(4), 191-201.
Wekker, G. (2016): White Innocence: Paradoxes of Colonialism and Race. Durham: Duke University Press.
Wessendorf, S. (2013): Commonplace diversity and the ‘ethos of mixing’: perceptions of difference in a London neighbourhood. In: Identities: Global Studies in Culture and Power, 20(4), 407-422.
45 Anthea Gick
8. Appendix
Interview guide
Personal data:
- Fake name, age, occupation, educational qualification - Since when do you live in Amsterdam/Bijlmer? - What is your nationality/ethnic background? How do you identify? - If not born in the Netherlands, since when do you live here?
Tell me something about your life in this neighbourhood…
- How does a normal day in your life look like? (routine, work, free time) - Do you spend a lot of time in the neighbourhood? For what purpose? Who do you - What places do you usually go to? (community centre, shops, etc.) meet there? - Do you leave the neighbourhood regularly? For what purpose? - What belongs to your neighbourhood? (spatial)
Networks in general: Who do you have contact with…
- Who do you meet typically every day/week? Yesterday? Why? - How would you describe the encounter/relation? - How would you describe the ‘vibe’/feeling of interactions on the street?
- Do you have any relatives in the neighbourhood? Somewhere else? - Who are they/what is your relationship to them? (family, close friends, etc.) o How would you describe them? (situation in life, etc.) - Do you have friends in the neighbourhood? Somewhere else? o How would you describe them? (“) - Are there other people you know and see in the neighbourhood? Why? o How would you describe them? (“)
- Did you do something for someone else this week in the neighbourhood? - Did anyone help you out this week in the neighbourhood? - If the store was closed and you needed e.g. bread or medicine, where would you go to? - What was the last time you had contact with your neighbours? - How would you describe them? (“) - Was there any situation you didn’t feel comfortable with your neighbours? Why? - Was there any situation you didn’t feel comfortable with interactions on the street?
46 Perception of Diversity
Perceptions of neighbourhood and diversity:
- How would you describe this neighbourhood? o What is special about it? o Positive vs. issues - What do people say about this neighbourhood? (Would you agree?) - How did the neighbourhood change in the last years? What do you think about that? - [In case long term resident: Did this affect your live/daily routine/…?]
- Did your perception of the people here change over time? (surprises, extraordinary incidents) - How would you describe your own position within the social context? (role, relation) - What are your thoughts to the term ‘diverse/migrant neighbourhood’? o How would you define ‘diversity’?
Closing questions:
- What do you think is the future of this neighbourhood/the Bijlmer? - Does/should something change? - Do you like (living in) this neighbourhood? Why? - Do you think you will stay here? Why (not)?
47