Abstract
During the twentieth century, London transformed from an imperial into a global city. The settlement of post-colonial immigrant groups arriving after World War II, and the subsequent labor migration has constantly challenged conventions and traditions regarding race, ethnicity, national identity and culture. Great Britain developed a pluralistic model to manage postcolonial migration flows, without explicit interest in assimilating them into British culture, as was the case in France. Indeed, contemporary London, as a global and multicultural city, is in part a product of its transnational relations and its postcolonial challenges. Postcolonial immigration created a metropolis where racial and ethnic struggles against the colonial heritage influenced the relationship between the native population and immigrants. Thus, the city’s historical changes can be interpreted in the light of immigration and political processes undertaken to promote and guarantee the coexistence of a broader diversity. The implementation of multiculturalism has enabled ethnic communities to maintain language, culture and identity and facilitated their integration into the framework of a strong civil rights tradition.
London is home to two million people who were born abroad, more than 300 different languages are spoken there and the city has thousands of groups that represent migrant and ethnic communities. Although translating the prevailing circumstances into participation structures appears to be quite difficult, the approach towards integration policy in London is quite simple: equality of opportunity. The key to this approach is the process of getting people involved in governance.
Vermeulen et ál 2007.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The pragmatic spirit of the common law is expressed in some exceptions granted to ethnic communities as in the case of turbans used by Sikhs, who, at their own risk, are exempt from the requirement to wear a protective helmet on a construction site or while riding a motorcycle. Other exceptions related to the religious traditions of Muslims and Jews were also introduced (Modood and Berthoud 1997).
- 2.
As shown by Modood and Berthoud (1997), the most successful British immigrants were Africans, Asians and Chinese, in some cases even exceeding the level of the white population in wages, education and independent economic activity. The population from Pakistan and Bangladesh (mainly women) are the least advantaged, being less economically active, with poorer housing conditions and an income that represents half the national average. In the middle of these two groups are Indians and Caribbean’s that show mixed results: women have an economic input in many cases greater than that of white women, but men and women combined appear to have nearly double the unemployment rate than the white population. The Caribbean population has the lowest level of independent economic activity, while the Indians have one of the highest.
- 3.
The British Point-based system was created in 2008, which included different categories. However, low-skilled migration was not included considering that this would be covered by the migration of Eastern European countries already part of the European Union. The temporary migration of workers was included under specific conditions. This system was renewed in 2012 following the Canadian model.
Bibliography
Bauböck, R., & Faist, T. (Eds.). (2010). Diaspora and transnationalism. Concepts, theories and methods. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Bertossi, C. (2007). European anti-discrimination and the politics of citizenship. Britain and France. New York: Plagrave Macmillan.
Bieder, H., & Mullins, D. (2004). Empowering communities, improving housing: Involving black and minority ethnic tenants and communities. Birmingham: University of Birmingham, Centre for Urban and Regional Studies.
Borkert, M., Bosswick, W., Heckmann, F., & Lüken-Klaßen, D. (2007). Local integration policies for migrants in Europe. Dublin: European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions.
Coleman, D., & Salt, J. (1996). The ethnic group question in the 1991 census. In D. Coleman & J. Salt (Eds.), Ethnicity in the 1991 census, Vi. London: HMSO.
Düvell, F. (2005). Active civic participation of immigrants in the United Kingdom. Oldenburg: European Research Project POLITIS. Country report.
Eade, J. (2000). Placing London: From imperial capital to Global City. Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Friedmann, J. (1986). The world city hypothesis. Development and Change, 17(1), 69–83.
Furbey, R., & Macey, R. (2005). Religion and urban regeneration: A place for faith? Policy and Politics, 33(1), 95–116.
Grillo, R. (2010). British and others. From ‘race’ to ‘faith’. En S. Vertovec & S. Wessendorf (Eds.), The multiculturalism backlash. European discourses, policies and practices. New York: Routledge.
Hammond, K. (2015). London is the place for Me. Black Britons, citizenship and the politics of race. New York: Oxford University Press.
Hamnett, C. (2003). Unequal City: London in the global arena. London: Routledge.
Hampshire, J. (2005). Citizenship and belonging. Immigration and politics of demographic governance in Postwar Britain. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Joppke, C. (1999). Immigration and the nation-state. The United States, Germany, and Great Britain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joppke, C. (2010). Citizenship and immigration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Joppke, C., & Morawska, E. (2003). Toward assimilation and citizenship: Immigrants in liberal nations states. New York: Palgrave. MacMillan.
King, A. (1991). Global cities. Post-imperialism and the internationalization of London. London: Routledge.
Kirp, D. (1979). Doing good by doing little: Race and schooling in Britain. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Mcghee, D. (2005). Intolerant Britain?: Hate, citizenship & difference. Berkshire: Open University Press.
McLeod, M., Owen, D., & Khamis, C. (2001). Black and minority ethnic voluntary and community organizations: Their role and future Develoment in England and Wales. London: Policy Studies Institute.
Modood, T. (2006). British Muslims and the politics of multiculturalism. In T. Modood, A. Triandafyllidou, & R. Zapata-Barrero (Eds.), Multiculturalism, Muslims and citizenship. A European approach (pp. 37–56). New York: Routledge.
Modood, T. (2013). Multiculturalism (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Modood, T., & Berthoud, R. (1997). Ethnic minorities in Britain: Diversity ad disadvantage. London: Policy Studies Institute.
Peixoto, J. (2005). A Socio-political View of Internacional Migration from Latin America and the Caribean: The case of Europe. Expert group meeting on Internacional migration and development in Latin America and the Caribbean. México: United Nations Secretariat, Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affaires.
Sassen, S. (1996, March/April). Cities and communities in the global economy. American Behavioral Scientist, 39 (5), 629–639.
Vermeulen, F., Stotijn, R., & Lemberg, K. (2007) Successes and challenges of local integration policy. IMISCOE: Working paper-Conference report.
Vicente Torrado, T. (2006). La inmigración Latinoamericana en España. México: Departamento de Asuntos Económicos y Sociales, ONU.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pardo, F. (2018). London, Global City and “Superdiversity”. In: Challenging the Paradoxes of Integration Policies. Migration, Minorities and Modernity, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64082-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64082-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-64080-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-64082-2
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)