Super-diversity vs. assimilation: how complex diversity in majority–minority cities challenges the assumptions of assimilation

ABSTRACT 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.

[1]  W. V. Niekerk,et al.  Immigration as a Colonial Inheritance: Post-Colonial Immigrants in the Netherlands, 1945–2002 , 2006 .

[2]  R. Alba,et al.  Remaking the American Mainstream: Assimilation and Contemporary Immigration , 2003 .

[3]  A. Nuñez Employing Multilevel Intersectionality in Educational Research , 2014 .

[4]  J. Schneider,et al.  The European Second Generation Compared: Does the Integration Context Matter? , 2012 .

[5]  Richard D. Alba,et al.  Mexican Americans as a paradigm for contemporary intra-group heterogeneity , 2014 .

[6]  S. Vertovec Super-diversity and its implications , 2007, Celebrating 40 Years of Ethnic and Racial Studies.

[7]  M. Crul Snakes and Ladders in Educational Systems: Access to Higher Education for Second-Generation Turks in Europe , 2013 .

[8]  F. Meissner Migration in migration-related diversity? The nexus between superdiversity and migration studies , 2015 .

[9]  K. Arnaut Super-diversity: elements of an emerging perspective , 2012 .

[10]  N. Schiller,et al.  Locating migrant pathways of economic emplacement: Thinking beyond the ethnic lens , 2013 .

[11]  J. Schneider,et al.  Comparative integration context theory: participation and belonging in new diverse European cities , 2010 .

[12]  Chabier Gimeno Super-Diversity. A New Perspective on Integration , 2013 .

[13]  K. Crenshaw Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color , 1991 .

[14]  A. Portes,et al.  The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimilation and its Variants , 1993 .

[15]  K. Davis Intersectionality as buzzword , 2008 .

[16]  M. Waters,et al.  Segmented assimilation revisited: types of acculturation and socioeconomic mobility in young adulthood , 2010, Ethnic and racial studies.

[17]  Mette Louise Berg,et al.  Ethnography, diversity and urban space , 2013 .

[18]  S. Neal Commonplace diversity: social relations in a super-diverse context , 2016 .

[19]  N. Schiller,et al.  Beyond the ethnic lens: Locality, globality, and born‐again incorporation , 2006 .

[20]  F. Meissner,et al.  Comparing super-diversity , 2015 .

[21]  A. Portes,et al.  Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation , 2004 .