Interculturalism: a policy instrument supporting social inclusion?

This chapter assesses critically if and in which sense intercultural policy can be regarded as an instrument to combat social exclusion. Cultural dialogue, conflict mediation and positive inter-group relations are often assumed as the corner stones of the intercultural policy approach, yet these measures can take different forms and involve different actors, thus revealing different understandings of interculturalism, which can be more or less oriented at contrasting social exclusion. On the basis of 30 case studies carried out in the context of the CLIP project on intercultural policy in European cities, this chapter will try to elaborate a typology of intercultural policy and assess the capacity of each type to address issues of social exclusion. Preliminary analyses on the CLIP reports show at least three different understanding of inteculturalism: as a symbolic policy or “celebrative interculturalism”, consisting of soft measures aimed providing opportunities for the improving of inter-group relations such as cultural festivals or art exhibitions at a city or neighbourhood level; as a participatory framework, aimed at empowering immigrant associations and fostering their participation in the public sphere and interaction with autochthonous organisations; as a conflict mediation and prevention strategy, consisting of measures aimed at supporting dialogue over controversial cultural practices and cohabitation issues. In terms of combating social exclusion, a combination of the second and third kind of intercultural policies seems to be necessary, in order to go beyond the mere symbolic appreciation of different cultures. To promote a process of empowerment and participation of immigrant groups and individuals which can represent a basis for conflict mediation and mutual understanding seems to be the main challenge for cohesive intercultural cities, pursuing at the same time cultural adjustment and social cohesion.