In recent academic and urban policy writings the term urban diversity is usually understood, or discussed within the context of, increasing ‘socio-cultural’ diversity in cities or is explicitly connected to debates over immigration and demographic change. Although policy agendas follow certain common trends ‘to deal with’ the consequences of diversity, there is a lack of evidence-based research on how representations of diversity are mobilised and implemented by institutions of governance operating at multiple scales and how these narratives relate to each other. Policy-makers are faced with new dilemmas over how to govern and manage cities that are becoming increasingly diverse, on the one hand, and increasingly ‘sensitive’ to certain channels of flows of people (such as refugees), on the other. In some cases, city authorities promote the idea of inclusive diversity as a mark of modernisation and tolerance. In others, its recognition may be seen as a threat to an imagined social order and is perceived to be fuelling neo-assimilationist policies in many European Union cities. This special issue aims to fill this gap by providing evidence-based research outcomes that tackle different dimensions of the governance of diversity in cities. The principal aim of the research project, named DIVERCITIES, that underpins this collection was to critically assess evidence concerning the range of socio-economic outcomes that may emerge from the presence of greater urban diversity. DIVERCITIES has shown that city policy agendas across Europe are often more ‘positive’ towards diversity than national policies and media reports. Moreover, local policy initiatives, mostly formed at the bottom-up scale, sometimes as a cooperation between state and civic actors and sometimes as purely private or even individual arrangements, address the actual needs of certain population groups by acting as bridge-builders between public authorities and target groups. This collection aims to provide a clear understanding of how diversity is understood, operationalised and dealt with at different scales of policy-making. In focusing on European examples, it provides an important addition to a literature that has become Anglo-American focused, both in terms of the concepts and policy interventions.

中文翻译：

---

管理城市多样性：多标量表示、当地背景、不和谐的叙述

在最近的学术和城市政策著作中，城市多样性一词通常在城市“社会文化”多样性日益增加的背景下被理解或讨论，或者与关于移民和人口变化的辩论明确相关。尽管政策议程遵循某些“处理”多样性后果的共同趋势，但缺乏基于证据的研究，以了解在多个尺度上运作的治理机构如何动员和实施多样性的表现以及这些叙述如何与每个其他。政策制定者在如何治理和管理城市方面面临着新的困境，这些城市一方面变得越来越多样化，另一方面对某些人口流动渠道（例如难民）越来越“敏感”。在某些情况下，城市当局提倡包容性多样性的理念，将其作为现代化和宽容的标志。在其他情况下，它的承认可能被视为对想象中的社会秩序的威胁，并被认为正在助长许多欧盟城市的新同化主义政策。本期特刊旨在通过提供基于证据的研究成果来填补这一空白，这些成果涉及城市多样性治理的不同方面。这个名为“多样性”的研究项目的主要目的是批判性地评估关于可能因存在更大的城市多样性而产生的社会经济结果范围的证据。多样性表明，与国家政策和媒体报道相比，整个欧洲的城市政策议程往往对多样性更为“积极”。此外，当地的政策举措，大多是自下而上形成的，有时是国家和公民行为者之间的合作，有时是纯粹的私人甚至个人安排，通过充当公共当局和目标群体之间的桥梁建设者来满足某些人口群体的实际需求。该系列旨在让人们清楚地了解如何在不同的决策尺度上理解、实施和处理多样性。在关注欧洲的例子时，它为已经成为英美焦点的文献提供了一个重要的补充，无论是在概念还是政策干预方面。通过充当公共当局和目标群体之间的桥梁建设者来满足某些人口群体的实际需求。该系列旨在让人们清楚地了解如何在不同的决策尺度上理解、实施和处理多样性。在关注欧洲的例子时，它为已经成为英美焦点的文献提供了一个重要的补充，无论是在概念还是政策干预方面。通过充当公共当局和目标群体之间的桥梁建设者来满足某些人口群体的实际需求。该系列旨在让人们清楚地了解如何在不同的决策尺度上理解、实施和处理多样性。在关注欧洲的例子时，它为已经成为英美焦点的文献提供了一个重要的补充，无论是在概念还是政策干预方面。