The Art of Living Together: Cities & Diversity

The International Creative City Columne #2: Charles Landry is an authority on creativity and its uses and how city futures are shaped by paying attention to the culture of a place. He helps cities transform their thinking so that they look at their potential imaginatively and can plan and act with originality. For 2010LAB.tv Charles Landry publishes a column on a two months basis:

Diversity where are you now?

There was and remains a dream of more liberal people that we can come together to share our differences in cities where by mixing and interacting they will become more creative and vibrant. The aspiration is rapidly turning into political dynamite in Europe. Angela Merkel announces that multiculturalism has failed; Nicolas Sarkozy expels Roma people from France, Switzerland forbids the building of minarets, far-right nationalist parties are on the rise. Where next for diversity?

The world is in motion. Yet we forget it was always so since time immemorial. To name a few there were the early Mediterranean migrations of 2000 years ago; the transatlantic slave trade, the biggest forced migration ever, took 11 million Africans to the Americas and 5 million to the Arab lands; there were the forced labour migrations from India and China mainly to the European colonies as well as the ‘great migration’ that saw 50 million Europeans move to the USA.
In fact we are all immigrant societies to some extent. It is just that time has eroded the differences.
 

Edinburgh Fringe Trip 2007; by Charles Landry

"Who do you think you are?"

I masquerade as British and am known as such, but I have 0% of British blood in me. An interesting British TV programme called ‘Who do you think you are’ explored many people including a staunchly British politician and the chairwoman of the English Society. Both it turned out were not that English or British. Through DNA testing it transpired that the latter in fact had some Roma and mongol blood in her. She was outraged and sued the TV company.

Remember too that less than 50 years ago to have a Catholic president in the USA was inconceivable until Kennedy came along. This shows how we absorb differences.
It seems too that we like certain migrants and not others. We want the talente and rich ones and not the poor and less educated. Yet the latter if given the chance may make the extraordinary happen, since it is acknowledged that they often be more motivated than the resident populations.

Today there are 214 million international migrants which equals 3% of the global population – a percentage that has barely moved since the 1960’s when it was 2.3%. Yet it feels like more because there are more people. Forgotten though is the vast shift in internal migration. 714 million at the last count as people are shifting from more rural areas to urban hubs. China is the extreme case with over 100 million people relocating in the last decade.
 

Migration is a complex subject

Behind these simple movements lies intense complexity. Nothing is straight forward. Some are poor and want a better life, some are day labourers, skilled professionals, students, talented entrepreneurs, knowledge nomads or asylum seekers. There is a blurring: some are temporary migrants and others are permanent, some legal others illegal, some skilled others unskilled, some are retirees and old, others are young in search for a better future, some look like you, but others look different.

There is the optimistic view which argues that we are getting new energies and insights. In this view all benefit: the migrant, the employers, the host country and even the sending country as remittances are sent home. The pessimistic view states it is a threat to national harmony, it causes a lack of cohesion and that it drains the sending country of its best talents or even that it will lead to a ‘clash of civilization’.
 

The view on migration differs

I have just returned from a European Chinese dialogue on ‘cities and diversity’ in Shanghai and the respective views differ sharply. The Europeans from a dozen or so different countries felt chastened, concerned and worried. They fear the tide is turning and that places are turning inwards and away from openness in spite of knowing that the economic future of Europe depends on connecting with the outside and especially India and China.

The Chinese group by contrast largely stated that they were a unified country without differences or problems, although later I picked up a book called the ‘56 ethnic nationalities of China’. What certainly was little discussed were the vast numbers of migrant worker with few if any rights. This is also diversity – part of the diversity of social groups.

"We are divers in many ways"

This reminds us too that we are diverse in many ways. Ethnicity, our look or skin colour is just one aspect. Our identities are shaped by how these multiple aspects come together. In my case I am a man, I have German roots, I studied in Italy, I have children, I live with my lively nature focused partner who influences me, my work involves much travel.......my sense of being and belonging is shaped by all these things.

Naples 2004; by Charles Landry

Diversity is an advantage

My colleague Phil Wood and I have for many years explored these complexities with the ‘intercultural city’ idea and whether and how it contributes to innovation and creativity. Our conclusions are quite simple. Initially homogeneity is simpler, it gets things done, we understand given assumptions. Yet from a creativity perspective it only takes us so far.
Our evidence suggests that places which prosper over the longer time are those which find a good alignment between their social and cultural differences and where they can create ‘a diversity advantage’ where relative harmony prevails. This is not easy and often tension prevails. Yet if you face the conflict and tension and inevitably the potential excitement of diversity innovation grows at an accelerating pace. This is why most large companies want a diverse workforce.
 

Multi- or intercultural? 

Naples 2004; by Charles Landry

The central question is: We know all bigger cities now are essentially made up of different cultures. They are multicultural, but most importantly are they intercultural? A multi-cultural perspective acknowledges and at times even celebrates difference. It can often, though, mean people lead separate or parallel lives. That can be fine as far as it goes. Yet, is it harnessing the full potential of the city. An intercultural perspective by contrast asks a different question: Are people interacting and mixing, sharing experiences, doing joint projects and making ‘their city’ one important part of their hybrid and multiple identities.
Culture moves centre-stage in this context. A more parochial local culture can hold people back and turn them inwards as they feel the threat of the ‘other’ and the ‘outsider’. A more confident culture, by contrast, that feels at ease with itself is not afraid of the ‘other’. It seeks and even relishes the engagement with the other. It has a sense that it can deal with any conflict as it emerges along the way.
 

Be open!

Openness is central to this process and openness too is the main pre-condition to be creative. Only when we are open can a culture develop strongly and in an adaptable way. It can then become resilient and sustain itself over time. A city with such a culture can future proof itself.
 

More from Charles Landry

• Charles Landry: "It is crucial to have low cost space available for both, working and living"
• The International Creative City Columne #1: Creativity @the crossroads

Related content

• Made in Marxloh - Sell in Turkey: Simon Evans on Duisburg-Marxloh
• Festival of the cultures - Duisburg-Marxloh opens the doors for MELEZ
• MELEZ - The train is rolling
• Creative Spaces / Places - What can Brussels learn from Toronto