Developing a research approach from Amsterdam Zuidoost. We are committed to using our presence in the area to contributea) continuing promoting interest in, and acquiring knowledge of, Zuidoost; b) respecting and embracing its versatility and c) eliminating barriers in its layout.In all three elements, we adopt the metaphor of a guided tour that provides a physical and mental map to share. We relate such a map to anexisting tradition of what we like to call ‘translators’ of the area, people suchas guide Jenny van Dalen, or architect Peter Dautzenberg. These are peoplewho recognised the beauty of places such as the Bijlmer before others, andwho taught many to appreciate (and conserve) them. In this sense, theirwork has contributed to a revalorisation of Bijlmer heritage and to a morewidespread awareness of its value.However, there are also concerns that this revalorisation could result inexcessively lucrative operations that may be detrimental to the currentresidents of Zuidoost. The renovation of the Amsterdamse Poort and thetransformation of the emblematic ‘Zandkasteel’ (Sand Castle) building intoluxury apartments has been met with mixed feelings, as these works couldaffect accessibility and increase prices throughout the area. More than ever,especially in relation to point ‘b’ above, concerted efforts need to be made toensure that investments will improve collective public spaces and will buildon an inclusive and diverse cultural and historical awareness.More specifically, The Bijlmer has now acquired legitimacy and cannot simplybe demolished. Its history is also linked to the many newcomers that broughtnew rhythms to the city of Amsterdam.We are convinced that Zuidoost’s sustainable plans and metropolitanambitions will only succeed if they also include, reflect upon and safeguard this versatility.In cooperation with Carla Hoffschulte
Citizens have responded to newcomers in the Netherlands with acts of solidarity and programmes to support integration, often in response to increasingly restrictive government policies. In a previously published study by the primary author, a critical discourse analysis was conducted of texts used in mandatory government integration programmes. Findings showed that texts discursively construct the “modern Us” the “unmodern Other” and a hierarchical relationship between the two, recreating in practice racialized categories reminiscent of colonial times. Considering the role citizen initiatives play in integration, it is important to also understand their discourse on integration. A critical discourse analysis using Bacchi’s What’s the Problem Represented to Be? approach was conducted on texts used in citizen initiatives for integration in the Netherlands. Additionally, as part of a larger institutional ethnography, ethnographic data was gathered on their day-to-day work. These data were analyzed through a theoretical lens inspired by occupational science, governmentality and post/decolonial studies. Initial findings show dominant discourses found in formal integration programmes being actively reproduced in citizen initiatives. Additionally, findings display concepts of ‘successful’ integration, the “Us”, and the “Other” being discursively shaped by promoting ‘modern’ occupations as part of ‘successful’ everyday life. Occupational science is a field with particular interest in social transformation projects, projects often based in the informal sector. Understanding how dominant discourses are reproduced in informal programmes provides important perspectives on their impact on everyday life, demonstrating the importance of remaining critical of discourses in projects operating in the peripheries.
MULTIFILE
European civic integration programmes claim to provide newcomers with necessary tools for successful participation. Simultaneously, these programmes have been criticised for being restrictive, market-driven and for working towards an implicit goal of limiting migration. Authors have questioned how these programmes discursively construct an offensive image of the Other and how colonial histories are reproduced in the constructions seen today. The Dutch civic integration programme is considered a leading example of a restrictive programme within Europe. Research has critically questioned the discourses within its policies, yet limited research has moved beyond policy to focus on discourse in texts in practice. This study presents a critical discourse analysis of texts used in the civic integration programme and demonstrates that they participate in multiple discursive constructions: the construction of the Dutch nation-state and its citizens as inherently modern, the construction of the Other as Unmodern and thus a threat, and the construction of the hierarchical relationship between the two. The civic integration programme has been left out of discussions on decolonisation to date, contributing to it remaining a core practice of othering. This study applies post-colonial theories to understand the impacts of current discourse, and forwards possibilities for consideration of decolonised alternatives.
