|Chapter title||Migration and Urban Governance - Challenges for Democratic Legitimacy?|
|Editors||Peters, B.G., von Maravic, P. and Schröter, E.|
Research and public debate have so far addressed the relationship between governance and migration essentially from an integrationist perspective, depicting migrants in a predominantly passive role as ‘recipients’ of, and respondents to, public policy. This view reflects the dominant paradigm of ‘political quiescence’, i.e. passivity, among immigrants, in the European literature on immigration. Migrant workers were considered to be apolitical and inherently apathetic. This raises the question how representation is defined – merely as the formal version through electoral processes alone, following official, institutionalised avenues of representation, or also informal participation and engagement. For public administration, this fuzzying of the rationality, legitimacy and targeting of its actions challenges established practices and self-perceptions. The ‘public’ has become less clear in its nature and thus demands and expectations, as well as articulation of its interests. ‘One-size-fits-all’ responses may no longer suffice.
Much of this view focuses on national governments setting national conditions for multi-culturalism and integration. Yet with the growing focus on sub-national levels of governance in competitiveness, the local arena has also gained growing attention as an important place for interaction between indigenous and migrant populations, where democracy becomes accessible to popular concerns.
|Keywords||migration, cities, democratic representation, competitiveness, governance|
|Book title||Politics of Representative Bureaucracy: Power, Legitimacy and Performance|
|Place of publication||Cheltenham, Glos|