Inclusion has been the new magic concept in Dutch policy for about ten years now. The term appears in policy memorandums of many municipalities. At the same time, there is a discussion among scholars about interpretations of inclusion. What is an inclusive city? Is it a city that is accessible to everyone? A city without inequality? A city where everyone feels at home? There are no unequivocal answers. Everyone interprets the inclusive city differently. But it does touch on essential issues. This article elaborates on policies for an inclusive city of the municipality of Amsterdam. I will critically assess the effects of three policy areas aimed at inclusion in deprived neighbourhoods. I will show that the results are not so unequivocal because of obstacles in the system world and the realities of everyday life. Finally, I will indicate what this means for the approach of various practitioners who deal with the principle of inclusion.
MULTIFILE
Now, that the European cities are overcoming the recent economic challenges, they accelerate the development of major housingschemes to accommodate their growing urban population. Amsterdam for instance, sets out to construct 50,000 new homes by 2025. Parallel to this, the City Council presented a new regeneration and urban optimisationprogram in 2017, to reinforce existingneighbourhoods with relatively weak socio-economic status. If these housing policies are to maximise on opportunities, they need to anticipate the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Paris Climate Agreement, and local socio-environmental challenges, into a single cohesive, sustainable solution. Currently, literature indicates that large scale spatial developments, have a tendency to move away from social and ecological ambitions during the course of the planning process. Moreover, ambitions tend to be short term “fixes” where they could be striving for long-term systemic solutions. What is needed, are practice proven comprehensive development strategies tosecure pathways for inclusive and integrated development. Those strategies are spatial and programmatic governance arrangements. Employing a comparative analysis method, we follow and compare the redevelopment of three deprived boroughs across Amsterdam. In collaboration with communities, we are able to construct a “Design Thinking” approach for urban spatial development, using different types of arrangements. This is in reflection and collaboration with the municipality of Amsterdam and a wide variety of skilled experts. The arrangements are tested in practice, following a plan-do-check-act cycle. The research project takes an in-depth look at the Amsterdam case and presents the first set of arrangements for planning more cohesive, urban spatial development and the preliminary strategies we see emerging.
The Sport Empowers Disabled Youth 2 (SEDY2) project encourages inclusion and equal opportunities in sport for youth with a disability by raising their sports and exercise participation in inclusive settings. This SEDY2 Inclusive (Online) Focus Group Guidance aimed to develop an easy-to-use guidance document on how to deliver inclusive focus groups to attain the authentic views, wishes and feelings of children and youth with a disability about inclusion in sport in practice. This guidance document was produced in order to support other practitioners in conducting inclusive focus groups. The focus group guidance can easily be adapted to cover other topics and can also be used effectively with all (young) people.
