Cities differ widely in how they integrate migrants, even within the same nation state, and this local dimension in integration policies is understudied. One model that a growing number of cities in both Western Europe and North America have been trying out is setting up immigrant councils and other institutional structures to integrate immigrants. Such representation of immigrant interests in local bodies –has accordingly gained more importance. In this paper, we consider two such local consultative bodies focused on immigrant issues in Norway. Drawing on Smith's concept of ‘democratic innovations’ this paper explores the innovative potential in increasing immigrant's political opportunity structure through such institutions and discusses the democratic potential of such boards. The value of consultative bodies like these as a part of cities integration policy is disputed. Much of this contention has to do with their institutional design, as some may end up being ‘institutional ghettos’, while others become catalysts for enhanced participation. We therefore explore how the local context influences the design and performance of such bodies.

城市在融合移民的方式上差异很大，即使是在同一个民族国家内，融合政策中的这种地方层面也没有得到充分研究。西欧和北美越来越多的城市一直在尝试的一种模式是建立移民委员会和其他机构结构来整合移民。移民利益在当地机构中的这种代表因此变得更加重要。在本文中，我们考虑了两个专注于挪威移民问题的当地咨询机构。本文借鉴史密斯的“民主创新”概念，探讨了通过此类机构增加移民政治机会结构的创新潜力，并讨论了此类董事会的民主潜力。像这样的咨询机构作为城市一体化政策的一部分的价值是有争议的。这种争论在很大程度上与他们的制度设计有关，因为有些最终可能成为“制度贫民窟”，而另一些则成为提高参与度的催化剂。因此，我们探索当地环境如何影响此类机构的设计和性能。