De la representación al derecho a existir socialmente Soy un joven paisa residente de la Comuna 13, soy una de esas voces valientes

It is clear that the increasing ethnic, religious and cultural diversity associated with migration represents an opportunity for cities, because it enhances cities’ economic performance and international competitiveness. At the same time, however, increased ethnic and religious diversity challenges intergroup relations and raises new issues for local politics in CLIP cities.

General picture

Within the 31 CLIP cities in this research module, urban intercultural relations are ambiguous. On the one hand, it is possible to identify a peaceful coexistence. This is characterised by limited and partial cooperation between different ethnic, religious and cultural groups, pragmatic and friendly relations between these groups, only a small number of major and violent conflicts, a low degree of radicalisation from both sides and an emerging legal framework of anti- discrimination.

On the other hand, however, there appears to be a low involvement of migrants in the governance of intercultural policy, insufficient resources for migrant organisations and a lack of personal intercultural competences on both sides. There is also strong spatial segregation (‘parallel communities’) in many cities, dissatisfaction on both sides over specific issues, a lack of awareness regarding relevant topics in several cities, as well as perceived tensions between various ethnic and religious groups.

In a number of cities with available surveys, there is a perception of pragmatic and friendly relations between different ethnic and cultural groups. Surveys in some cities also show good social interaction between natives and culturally different groups. However, when interpreting these results, one should consider that evidence is available for only 20% of the CLIP cities.

Many cities report a widespread perception of existing discrimination in relation to important structural dimensions of quality of life such as employment, housing and education. In some cities, reportedly good intercultural relations go hand-in- hand with perceived and experienced discrimination. The importance of discrimination is confirmed by wider survey evidence such as FRA’s EU-MIDIS study.

However, while day-to-day conflicts are a part of intercultural relations, major and violent conflicts rarely occur. Nevertheless, imported conflicts from migrants’ countries of origin are shown to play an important role in nearly 20% of the cities.

Issues of intercultural relations

Besides socioeconomic issues that were considered crucial for social cohesion, a number of additional issues and demands have a high priority in intergroup relations in CLIP cities. The CLIP case studies confirm that issues related to intercultural relations are of high importance on the policy agenda of most local authorities. Out of a set of 15 important issues affecting intercultural relations, the interviewees in CLIP cities have highlighted on average between seven and eight issues of importance for their own city. In a total of seven (22% of cities) multi-issue cities, 10 or more of the issues affecting intercultural relations were mentioned: these cities are Antwerp, Stuttgart, Sundsvall, Terrassa, Turin, Valencia and Vienna.

A far-reaching agreement is apparently evident in nearly all CLIP cities, which is that discrimination towards migrants, ethnic and religious groups (30 cities), and religious aspects and resources for migrant organisations are important issues for intercultural relations (27 cities each). Nevertheless, language, media reporting and specific issues like burials and provision of space for migrant organisations are of importance in more than 75% of the cities. The relatively least important issues for the CLIP cities are gender issues related to intercultural relations, food provision due to religious needs, imported conflicts and the use of public space.

Overall, there appears to be agreement on the importance of the main issues affecting intercultural relations between the different groups – migrant and faith organisations, city officials, NGOs and experts interviewed. Nevertheless, there are differences regarding the importance of the specific dimensions of most issues. For example, with regard to the issue of place of worship, for migrants or faith organisations this issue is combined with challenges related to ‘recognition’, ‘visibility’ and sufficient room for prayer, whereas for the city administration practical issues like traffic, parking and noise as well as the feelings and worries of the native population and local electorate are important.

It should be noted in this context that at least some agreement between the main stakeholders is a necessary but not sufficient condition to start an exchange on the abovementioned issues and to develop relevant intercultural initiatives and policies.

Satisfaction and dissatisfaction

The level of satisfaction and dissatisfaction varies in relation to the different issues and between the various stakeholders. Overall, however, it should be noted that there is a weak empirical basis.

Regarding satisfaction, the following can be said:

■ on contentious issues related to faith and to recognition and contacts with ethnic and religious organisations, between a third and half of the cities report some level of satisfaction on both sides;

■ higher levels of satisfaction are reported with regard to recognition (half of cities) and contacts with the majority society than regarding faith issues (a third of cities);

■ no information is available related to issues of gender, public space and safety, language and media reporting.

Regarding dissatisfaction, a number of observations can be made:

■ the widest ‘soft’ dissatisfaction among ethnic and religious organisations in nearly half of the cities relates to recognition and contact with the city; in those cities, requests have been made that more be done by cities on the basis of existing activities. In a minority of cities (15%), migrant organisations are very dissatisfied;

■ dissatisfaction with faith and media issues can be found in around a third of the cities. Both sides have similar levels of dissatisfaction but regarding different dimensions and for different reasons.

■ concerns about and dissatisfaction with the use of public space and personal safety as well as on gender issues are relevant in 20%–25% of cities.

Religious issues

While many migrants are not religious, religion is of importance for others. Since migrants’ religions often differ from those prevalent in the immigration country, migrants bring along new practices and needs with regard to religion. This creates challenges in all CLIP cities. These challenges encompass the issues of burials, religious education, religious dress codes and food. At present, the issue of religious buildings seems to be the most significant challenge for cities: the planning and construction of religious buildings requested by migrants currently challenge intergroup relations in 17 CLIP cities, most notably where the building in question is a mosque. The debate concerns, on the one hand, the question of

acceptance of the religion and, on the other hand, the questions of funding and space.

As far as intercultural relations are concerned, there is a particular Muslim focus prominent in cities with a high proportion of migrants with a Muslim background. A high proportion of Muslims is not only important in relation to faith issues but also regarding general issues of intercultural policy such as labour market discrimination or access to housing. Overall, the results show that practical issues related to burial grounds and religious education are more important than highly symbolic issues like representative mosques or dress codes. There are indications of some pragmatism on both sides. Also, satisfaction and dissatisfaction levels on important symbolic issues are fairly balanced.

The importance of religious issues varies greatly between the cities, if one considers that five issues have been included in the research. There are seven multi-issue cities (where four issues or more are mentioned by respondents): Antwerp (where 16.6% of residents are Muslim), Breda (5.4%), Stuttgart (8.1%), Sundsvall (no data available), Turin (2.9%), Valencia (1.7%) and Vienna (7.8%). As the results show, there is no direct relation between the multi-importance and the percentage of Muslims in the city. At the other extreme are seven cities in which no or only one issue has been mentioned (Istanbul, Malmö, Prague, Tallinn, Turku, Wrocław and Zeytinburnu).

Following this discussion of needs and issues in intergroup relations, the report now turns to the political responses of cities towards these needs and issues.

3 – Patterns of intercultural