TY - JOUR
T1 - Rotterdam in the 21st century
T2 - From ‘sick man’ to ‘capital of cool’
AU - Custers, Gijs
AU - Willems, Jannes J.
N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s)
PY - 2024/7
Y1 - 2024/7
N2 - This City Profile presents a multi-disciplinary perspective on the development of Rotterdam, analysing its transformation from a “sick man” to the “capital of cool” between 1995-current. Our profile integrates insights from five policy domains and presents them as a new framework. First, Rotterdam witnessed the rise of the populist right and established a new safety regime through a zero-tolerance mentality. Second, Rotterdam's superdiversity initially triggered anti-migration sentiments, but has more recently been normalised. Third, state-led gentrification policies have uplifted Rotterdam's status and provided space for middle-class households, thereby restricting access for working-class households. Fourth, the local administration has initiated large-scale urban regeneration projects as new flagships in former port areas and the city centre. Fifth, the city has been using water safety improvements to guide urban development and to create an attractive city. Overall, these developments have contributed to Rotterdam's new, hip image. However, we argue this image is Janus-faced. The populist and repressive form of urban disadvantage management is highly politicised and considered discriminatory, whereas the new flagships and water-led urban development are depoliticised and technocratic. These two sides often operate autonomously from each other, but together they contribute to new divisions in Rotterdam.
AB - This City Profile presents a multi-disciplinary perspective on the development of Rotterdam, analysing its transformation from a “sick man” to the “capital of cool” between 1995-current. Our profile integrates insights from five policy domains and presents them as a new framework. First, Rotterdam witnessed the rise of the populist right and established a new safety regime through a zero-tolerance mentality. Second, Rotterdam's superdiversity initially triggered anti-migration sentiments, but has more recently been normalised. Third, state-led gentrification policies have uplifted Rotterdam's status and provided space for middle-class households, thereby restricting access for working-class households. Fourth, the local administration has initiated large-scale urban regeneration projects as new flagships in former port areas and the city centre. Fifth, the city has been using water safety improvements to guide urban development and to create an attractive city. Overall, these developments have contributed to Rotterdam's new, hip image. However, we argue this image is Janus-faced. The populist and repressive form of urban disadvantage management is highly politicised and considered discriminatory, whereas the new flagships and water-led urban development are depoliticised and technocratic. These two sides often operate autonomously from each other, but together they contribute to new divisions in Rotterdam.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85189906937&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cities.2024.105009
DO - 10.1016/j.cities.2024.105009
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85189906937
SN - 0264-2751
VL - 150
JO - Cities
JF - Cities
M1 - 105009
ER -