Government Rationales and the territorial stigmatization of the Danish ghetto
Author
Waaddegaard, Ida Ries
Term
4. term
Education
Publication year
2019
Submitted on
2019-05-31
Pages
59
Abstract
This thesis examines Denmark’s 2018 strategy One Denmark without Parallel Societies – No Ghettos by 2030, which seeks to eliminate all designated ghettos by 2030. Using Carol Bacchi’s What’s the Problem Represented to Be? (WPR) approach for critical policy analysis, a Foucauldian governmentality lens, and the concept of territorial stigmatization, the study analyzes how the strategy discursively constructs certain ‘problems’ and their solutions. It focuses on how parallel societies, ‘non‑Western background’, ‘bad parenting’, and crime and insecurity are represented as core issues, and how responsibility is individualized. Based on a close reading of the policy text and a critical discussion of data from three ethnographic studies of affected housing areas, the thesis argues that the strategy articulates a dominant discourse portraying ghetto areas as unwanted and unsafe places marked by failed integration, and draws a sharp opposition between the ‘ghetto’ and Danish society. At the same time, ethnographic perspectives reveal more nuanced and complex everyday lives than the policy’s problem representations suggest, including experiences of safety, diverse parenting practices, varied encounters with crime, and the internalization of stigma. The thesis challenges taken‑for‑granted assumptions in the strategy and shows how political problem representations can contribute to territorial stigmatization and produce governing effects in daily life.
Denne afhandling undersøger den danske regerings strategi fra 2018, Et Danmark uden parallelsamfund – ingen ghettoer i 2030, med det erklærede mål om at afskaffe alle ghettoer inden 2030. Med udgangspunkt i Carol Bacchis WPR-tilgang til kritisk policyanalyse og et governmentality-perspektiv inspireret af Michel Foucault, samt med inddragelse af begrebet territorial stigmatisering, analyserer studiet, hvordan strategien diskursivt konstruerer bestemte ‘problemer’ og løsninger. Analysen fokuserer især på, hvordan parallelsamfund, ‘ikke‑vestlig baggrund’, ‘dårlig forældreskab’ samt kriminalitet og utryghed fremstilles som kerneproblemer, og hvordan ansvar i høj grad individualiseres. På baggrund af en nærlæsning af strategiens tekst og en kritisk drøftelse af data fra tre etnografiske studier fra de berørte boligområder argumenterer afhandlingen for, at strategien artikulerer en dominerende diskurs, der fremstiller ghettoområder som uønskede, usikre steder præget af mislykket integration, og som tegner en skarp modsætning mellem ‘ghetto’ og det danske samfund. Samtidig viser de etnografiske perspektiver et mere nuanceret og komplekst hverdagsliv end strategiens problemrepræsentationer tilsiger, herunder oplevet tryghed, forskellige forældrepraksisser, varierende erfaringer med kriminalitet samt internalisering af stigma. Afhandlingen problematiserer dermed selvfølgelighederne i strategiens antagelser og viser, hvordan politiske problemrepræsentationer kan bidrage til territorial stigmatisering og have styringseffekter i hverdagen.
[This apstract has been generated with the help of AI directly from the project full text]