On recent developments of
‘Diversity’
Prof. Dr. Steven Vertovec
Max-Planck-Institute for
the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity
On recent developments of ‘Diversity
I.
Diversity is not what it used to be:
changing social and political configurations
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse:
changing public discourse
III. Diversity of ‘diversity’:
how and why
IV. Conclusion
I. ‘Diversity is not what it used to be’
Over last 30 years or so, actual social and political
configurations have changed considerably;
therefore, need to re-think (in social science &
public policy) concepts and approaches
• From (so-conceived) population segments based on
class, region, and especially, large ethnic minority groups
• To far more complex, multiple, cross-cutting, selfidentified/mobilized categories of ‘difference’
I. ‘Diversity is not what it used to be’
Ia. Immigration and ‘Super-diversity’
Recent global migration patterns:
(A) ‘Diversification of diversity’
1950s-70s
large numbers from a few places
to a few places
1980s-now
small numbers from many places
to many places
(B) Variation in flows (by gender, human capital, age, space…)
(C) Complexification of migration channels / legal statuses
Observations in UK
West Europe
North Europe
Other Europe
South America
Other Oceania Australia
USA
New Zealand
Other Caribbean
South Europe
Jamaica
Canada
East Asia
Other South Asia
Eastern Europe
Other America
South America
India
North America
Bangladesh
South-Central Asia
Central Americ
Japan
Malay sia
Caribbean
Other Far East
Singapore
China
Hong Kong
Iran
Cy prus
Other Middle East
Other South and Eastern Africa
Zimbabw e
South Africa
Other Africa
West Africa
Keny a
Other Central and Western Africa
United Kingdom
Nigeria
Central and Western Africa
Southern Africa
South-East Asia
North Africa
West Asia
other Asia
Middle Africa
East Africa
Somalia
Other
Pakistan
North Africa
Other Eastern Europe
Poland
Non EU countries in Western Europe
EU Countries
Republic of Ireland
Super-diversity: Germany
Germany, in-migration 2006
Migrant legal categories
[restricted]
Frankfurt 2008
I. ‘Diversity is not what it used to be’
Ib. ‘Pluralization of society’
Identity Politics / Movements
Especially since 1970s, following civil rights movement
• Social mobilization around discriminated collective
identities based on race/ethnicity, religion, gender,
sexuality, disability, age [categories claimed as ‘intrinsic’?]
– ‘In their wake, identity politics has become a fixture on the political
landscape’ (Kenny The Politics of Identity 2004: 3)
Eurobarometer 2007
Köppel,Yan & Lüdicke 2007:
Cultural Diversity Management in Deutschland hinkt hinterher
– „Dies heißt, jedes Unternehmen ist gefordert, nach dem jeweiligen
nationalen Rahmen sowie der lokalen Gesellschaft ein bedarfsgerechtes Konzept von Diversity Management zu entwickeln.“
I. ‘Diversity is not what it used to be’
Ic. Combined Anti-discrimination
EC AmsterdamTreaty 1997 - Article 13
• ‘Article 13 represented a quantum leap forward in the
fight against discrimination at EU level in that it
empowered the Community to take action to deal with
discrimination on a whole new range of grounds,
including racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, age,
disability and sexual orientation.’
• ‘…provides a more effective basis for addressing
situations of multiple discrimination’
– EC Green Paper 2004, p.5
UK – since October 2007
• Merger of Equal Opportunities Commission, the Commission
for Racial Equality and the Disability Rights Commission
• For ‘upholding both human rights and tackling discrimination
against women, ethnic minorities, the disabled or on grounds
of religion, age or sexual orientation.’
• Patricia Hewitt, Secretary of State for Trade and Industry:
“As individuals, our identities are diverse and complex. People don't define
themselves as just a woman, or black or gay and neither should our equality
organisations. People and their problems should not be put in boxes.”
-“multiculturalism had had its day because people now had
multiple identities”
Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz
(AGG) [Antidiskriminierungsgesetz ] 2006
• „Ziel des Gesetzes ist es, rassistische Diskriminierungen oder
jene, die wegen der ethnischen Herkunft, des Geschlechts, der
Religion oder Weltanschauung, einer Behinderung, des Alters
oder der sexuellen Identität erfolgt sind, zu verhindern oder zu
beseitigen. „ (§ 1 AGG)
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse
A common conceptual rubric – ‘diversity’ – and
a related set of discourses has arisen to singlehandedly grasp and address the emergent
social and political configurations
• Not surprisingly, ‘diversity’ has come to mean a
variety of things in a variety of quarters
Public discourse today
parallel to situation in early 1990s
Multiculturalism was everywhere…
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Multicultural Mathematics (1993)
Medical Practice in a Multicultural Society (1988)
Dance: A Multicultural Perspective (1986)
Multicultural Pharmaceutical Education (1993)
Counselling and Psychotherapy: A Multicultural Perspective (1993)
Managing Substance Abuse in a Multicultural Society (1994)
Marginality: The Key to Multicultural Theology (1995)
Marketing in a Multicultural World (1995)
Multiculturalism: Criminal Law (1991)
Multicultural Public Relations (1995)
Multicultural Manners: New Rules of Etiquette (1995)
Since early 2000s…
• Ubiquitous public criticism of
(presumed) ‘Multiculturalism’
• Leading to death of ‘M-word’
- But not retraction of policies
• ‘Integration’ is now key word
- But not ‘assimilationist’ because
strongly linked with ‘Diversity’
By 2009
Diversity is everywhere
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Understanding and Managing Diversity (2008)
The Diversity Scorecard: Evaluating the Impact of Diversity on
Organizational Performance (2003)
Global Diversity: Winning Customers and Engaging Employees Within
World Markets (2006)
Cultivating Diversity in Fundraising (2001)
Diversity, Oppression, Change: Culturally Grounded Social Work (2008)
Drama and Diversity (2000)
Diversity in Counseling (2003)
Diversity and the Recreation Profession (2008)
Diversity in Early Care and Education(2007)
Cultural Diversity in Health and Illness (2008)
Intentional Diversity: Creating Cross-Cultural Relationships in Your
Church (2002)
Cultural Diversity: A Primer for the Human Services (2006)
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse
‘Diversity’ and Business
2008: Equality and Human Rights Commission,
Trades Union Congress, Confederation of British Industry
“The potential rewards of
diversity are significant: an
organisation that recruits its
staff from the widest possible
pool will unleash talent and
develop better understanding
of its customers. It will also
enable it to spot market
opportunities.”
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse
Diversity and Public Institutions
UNESCO World Report 2009
Cultural Diversity: ‘The meanings
attached to this catch-all term are
as varied as they are shifting.’
• ‘…a new approach to cultural
diversity – one that takes account
of its dynamic nature and the
challenges of identity associated
with the permanence of cultural
change.’
– Shift from conservation of cultures
• In light of ‘general trend towards
the emergence of dynamic and
multifaceted identities.’
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse
‘Vielfalt’…
“Vielfalt statt Einfalt”
II. ‘Diversity’ is diverse
‘Diversity’ and
German Business
Süß & Kleiner 2005:
Diversity-Management in
Deutschland:
Ergebnisse einer
Unternehmensbefragung
III. Diversity of ‘Diversity’
discourse in policy & practice
– ‘promoting Diversity’
display of visible difference as equal opportunities
– ‘celebrating Diversity’
exhibit self-promoted cultural difference
– ‘managing Diversity’
maximize positive potential value difference
– ‘integration and Diversity’
immigrant difference is good, but within limits
III. Diversity of ‘Diversity’
Why/how shift to ‘diversity’?
• Turn against group identities (as ‘Parallel Societies’)
– Unwillingness to ‘essentialize’/stereotype group members
• Turn toward individual difference(s) / ‘multiple identities’
– Individualization? Privatization? Neo-liberalism?
• Economic/Political efficiency? (bunching differences)
– Equalizing (trivializing?) all differences?
• Tide of ‘Rightism’? (changing mode of public recognition)
• Crass tokenism? Fear of lawsuits? (public expectations)
• Social science re-tooling around complexity
-- likely: unevenly combined influence of all of these…
IV. Conclusion
‘Diversity’’s sheer ambivalence / multi-valence
accounts greatly for its current success in
public, business & academic discourse
– “All things to all people”
Flaws, vagueness, vogueness – yes
But, in light of changing socio-cultural configurations,
better to have such a term, policies & programmes
than not to…
Max-Planck-Institute for the Study of
Religious and Ethnic Diversity
Max-Planck-Institut zur Erforschung multireligiöser und
multiethnischer Gesellschaften
Hermann-Föge-Weg 11, D-37073 Göttingen, Germany
tel. +49/0 551 4956-0, fax +49/0 551 4956-111
www.mmg.mpg.de