Acceso usuarios
Gwen van Eijk
Exclusionary urban policies have repeatedly been interpreted as ‘urban revanchism’ —strategies aimed at attracting gentrifiers and tourists at the expense of marginal andminority groups. This article scrutinizes the claim that exclusionary policies are drivenby economic insecurities and motives to attract capital. Rotterdam serves as an extremecase through which I examine who supports exclusionary policies, and for what reasons.The case study shows that urban policies are intertwined with ideas aboutmulticulturalism and integration. This suggests that concerns about national unity alsoplay a role, and that de-concentration (and creating mixed neighbourhoods) is, likecitizenship, a strategy for inclusion, which, in effect, logically excludes people. I arguethat insecurities that stem from concerns about national unity and demands for socialorder should be acknowledged as additional drivers of exclusionary policies and thelatter cannot be reduced to economic motives. I conclude that current theories of urbanrevanchism need to incorporate a more complex notion of ‘safety’ and of ways in whichinsecurities produce strategies of exclusion and inclusion.
