Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation
Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies , Volume 42 - Issue 1 p. 54- 68
International migration changed large West European cities dramatically. In only two generations’ time, their ethnic make-up is turned upside down. Cities like Amsterdam and Brussels now are majority–minority cities: the old majority group became a minority. This new reality asks for an up-to-date perspective on assimilation and integration. In this article, I will show why grand theories like segmented and new assimilation theory no longer suffice in tackling that new reality of large cities, and I will question critically whether using the perspective of super-diversity is more pertinent for our analyses. Children of immigrants nowadays no longer integrate into the majority group, but into a large amalgam of ethnic groups. Next to the diversification of ethnic groups, we see diversification within ethnic groups in the second and third generations. I will focus on intergenerational social mobility patterns given that they are key to existing grand theories of assimilation. I will argue that super-diversity theory can only partially show us the way. To further build an alternative theoretical perspective, we also need to borrow from the intersectional approach and the integration context theory.
|assimilation theory, diversity, integration context theory, social mobility, Super-diversity|
|Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies|
|Organisation||Centre for Rotterdam Cultural Sociology (CROCUS)|
Crul, M.R.J. (2016). Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 42(1), 54–68. doi:10.1080/1369183X.2015.1061425