After a summary of several contributions in this volume, we focus on certain problems and omissions in the debate about citizenship and the position of migrants in Dutch society. First, nearly all the contributions are related to the level of theoretical concepts or policy proposals, neglecting the level of social behaviour and important changes of social reality. Second, all authors acknowledge the fact that the moral dimensions of citizenship have become more important, yet nobody seems to be interested in a scientific explanation of this remarkable fact. In response to these omissions we try to understand why the Netherlands has changed from an open society into a community struck by xenophobia. One explanation might be that the intensity of social interaction has increased considerably. Another explanation is related to the fact the level of education has grown, creating a higher expectations of 'normal' behaviour. Together these tendencies undermine the ('typical Dutch') tradition of tolerance or deviant behaviour generally and for 'strange' behaviour of migrants specifically.

In public debate on immigrants' political ties with their country of origin, two assumptions prevail. The first assumption is that many immigrants engage in transnational political activities. The second is that forms of transnational citizenship are an impediment for the development of local citizenship. However, so far little research has been done on the importance of, and the relationship between, local and transnational citizenship. In this article, we focus on local and transnational forms of active citizenship, here understood as the total of political practices and processes of identification. Our study, conducted among middle-class immigrants in Rotterdam, indicates that the importance of active transnational citizenship should not be overstated. Among these middle-class immigrants, political practices are primarily focused on the local level; political practices directed to the home country appear to be quite rare. If we look at processes of identification, we see that a majority of the middle-class immigrants have a strong urban identity. Many of them combine this local identification with feelings of belonging with people in their home country. These local and transnational identifications seem to reinforce, rather than impede, each other.

This article examines conflicts in public space in terms of the underlying 'symbolic order'. Using the case of the wild fires on New Year's eve in the city of The Hague it explores the role of the local government in managing the latest manifestation of this 'tradition' of fires in the neighbourhoods. The analysis illuminates a framing in terms of 'old' and 'new' fires in which the earlier fires were well understood as relating to a neighbourhood culture and the new fires, attributed to young migrant youths, are not. It is pointed out that there is a wide variety of attributions that now inform the response of local government. As an alternative it is suggested to invest in understanding the symbolics of fire setting and appreciate the fact that the 'parochial' sphere that was characteristic for neighbourhoods some decades ago, can no longer be assumed. It is suggested that the fact that different actors hold distinct frames is crucial for understanding the conflict.

Over recent years, we have seen a steady increase in the number of security officers and city supervisors in Dutch urban areas. However, despite the mounting presence and visibility of these auxiliary patrols, little is known about how citizens perceive and value them. A questionnaire held among a sample of 761 residents of Amsterdam shows that citizens have mixed opinions. Many people are accepting or neutral about the occurrence of security officers and city supervisors in urban space, but at the same time lack a clear idea of their quality and professionalism. This somewhat ignorant and laconic attitude raises the question whether people underestimate the potential consequences of omnipresent quasi-police. It is argued that more repressive approaches may generate substantial conflicts with the general public. Furthermore, safety and security may become 'consumer goods' in the sense that people are quite happy to leave their responsibilities to paid policing professionals – a position which promotes the rise of a 'culture of control'.

To live in a safe neighbourhood is to live in a neighbourhood where one knows what to expect and can navigate the public space. This article argues that issues of public safety in urban disadvantaged neighbourhoods are often understood as depending on crime and social control; but it may well be that whether or not people feel safe depends just as much on the degree of public familiarity of the context in which they live – and consequently on their abilities to know who to trust and distrust – as it depends on the usual suspects of crime rates, social cohesion, broken windows and collective efficacy. Using empirical data from four neighbourhoods in Rotterdam, the Netherlands, the article shows that data may substantiate this claim, formulates some policy recommendations and proposes an agenda for further research.