Legacy of Slavery and Indentured Labour

Linking the Past with the FutureConference on Slavery, Indentured Labour,

Migration, Diaspora and Identity Formation.June 18th – 23th, 2018 , Paramaribo, Suriname

Org. by IGSR, Faculty of Humanities, IMWO, in collaboration with National Archives Suriname , NAKS, Federasi fu Afrikan

Srananman CUS, NSHI and VHJI.

Reterritorialization opportunities of immigrants in Lisbon – interculturality, social practices and formal constraints

Jorge Malheiros; Centre of Geographical Studies, IGOT – University of Lisbon

Lisbon is one of three oldest city capitals of Europe. In its more than 2000 years of continuous human occupation, the contact of peoples must be considered as an hallmark of its history, even if various moments of opening (such as the period of Imperial Expansion in the 1500) and of closing (e.g. the period of Salazar dictatorship between the 1930s and the 1960s) have succeed along this period. With democracy and decolonization in the mid-1970s, Lisbon recovered its sense of cosmopolitanism, first marked by a post-colonial element (the return of more than half million Portuguese from the novel Portuguese Speaking African Countries – the PALOP – in 1974-1976 – and the arrival of thousands of nationals of the novel African countries) and then by an increasing diversity of the presences, especially after the mid-1990s when the consolidation of the democratic regime and a favourable economic climate following the formal entry in the European Union (EU) contributed to a progressive growth in immigration. This ethnic diversity was even enhanced in the past 5-6 years, due to the explosion of touristic activities and tourist presences and also to the arrival of a new wave of immigrants, where Chinese and South Asians play a very relevant role, in addition to EU Citizens (Romanians, French…), other Europeans and the longer-established PALOP citizens and Brazilians.It is the cosmopolitanization process of Lisbon, in particular of the later 20 years that is the focus of this paper. This process has increased the transnational ties of the city population and has diversified the forms of “constrained” reterritorialization, both in residential and public spaces representing simultaneously a challenge for local social relations and an opportunity for landscape change and innovation in cultural practices and economic activities. Because positive interaction between established residents and newcomers presents some challenges, Lisbon authorities have widened and restructured the policy responses in the domains of proximity integration and interculturality and have created structures

1

(e.g. the Consultative Council for Interculturality and Citizenship - CMIC) and instruments (e.g. Municipal Plans for Integration) to implement it. In addition to these main goals, the promotion of the historical presence of immigrants and the recognition of their contribution to the city may be considered an additional goal. Nevertheless, the trajectory of the immigrants towards reterritorialization (reconstruction of the spatial sense of belonging+effective empowerment) as well as theirs full recognition as Lisbon citizens is a slow process, difficult to achieve.

Keywords: Reterritorialization, cosmopolitanism, intercultural strategies, municipal immigration policies

1. Immigrants in Lisbon: the making of a cosmopolitan metropolis

A chronicler of the 16th century defined Lisbon as a city of “multiple and various

peoples” “where foreigners exceed nationals”. In those days, in addition to the black

African population, which included mostly house and work slaves, but also an

increasing number of free individuals and families (Lahon, 1999; Henriques, Leite &

Fantasia, 2013) and has been estimated in approximately 10% of the total city

population, thousands of merchants and seafarers from several other places in Europe

had established in Lisbon. Some people born in India and Brazil, the other outer spaces

of the Portuguese Seaborne Empire (Boxer, 1981), were also living in Lisbon, the head

metropolis of this transcontinental system and certainly the most “African” capital of

Europe at the time.

The African element of Lisbon was present in the professions (e.g. the African fish

sellers and harbour workers), the names of streets and spaces (e,g, the neighbourood of

Mukambu or the streets of Pretas1 and Poço dos Negros2), the religious and cultural

contributions (the Fraternity of Our Lady of the Rosary of the Black Men or the roots of

Fado music) (Henriques, Leite & Fantasia, 2013) and even some city characters (e.g.

Francisca, a character built by the writer César Magarreiro representing a female black

slave of the 18th century that becomes known by her romances and fortune teller

activities or the Preta Fernanda, a black woman from Cape Verde which animated the

Lisbon society at the end of the 19th century and wrote a book about her own

experience). A continuous European presence has also left marks in the city, namely

1 Black Women.2 Poço dos Negros stands for the Negroes Well.

2

through the creation of religious and social structures, such cemeteries, churches,

schools and hospitals that served the specific needs of these communities.

Within this process, the visible and symbolic scenery of Lisbon built itself as a changing

and dynamic palimpsest that benefits from the contributions of the successive ethnic

groups that lived in the city, particularly between the 15th and the 18th centuries. The

economic and political decline of Portugal along the 17th century marks the beginning

of a regression in population diversity and cosmopolitism in Lisbon, only clearly

reversed after the 1970s with democracy and increasing openness in a context of post-

colonial relations that geopolitically led to the Foundation of the Community of

Portuguese-Speaking States (CPLP) and to the adhesion to the EU in 1986, all this

within the economic fabric of globalization.

After 1974/1975, about 60% of returnees from the former colonies in Africa settled in

the city of Lisbon and in the municipalities integrating the Lisbon Metropolitan Area. In

addition to these, Africans from Angola, Cape Verde, Guinea-Bissau and São Tome &

Prince started to settle in several neighbourhoods of the first peripheral ring, where was

possible to build informal housing or to rent cheaper flats. The geography of shanties

and informal neighbourhoods of Lisbon and specially of its periphery was mostly

generated by internal migrants but enlarged significantly with the African presence in

the 1980s. Recreation of some African social practices and spatial elements has become

frequent in certain neighbourhoods of the municipalities of Amadora, Oeiras, Cascais or

Loures, leading to processes of reterritorialization and scenery change. An Indian (and

Chinese) element was added to this process, both in residential neighbourhoods and in

some inner city spaces of Lisbon due to the arrival and settlement of Indian ethnics

(often twice migrants) and their offspring coming from Mozambique in East Africa. An

opposite geography corresponded to the continuous presence of Western Europeans,

mostly settled in bourgeois neighbourhoods of the consolidated centre of Lisbon (e,g.

Lapa) and also in the Restelo (Lisbon)-Estoril (Cascais) Sea Strip, that develops west of

Lisbon (Malheiros, 2000).

This progressively cosmopolitan Metropolitan Area with a diverse heart that

corresponds to the city of Lisbon, registered levels of socio-spatial segregation that were

below the ones observed in several Northern European cities (in United Kingdom, the

Netherlands, Belgium…) (Malheiros, 2002) and started to carry a clear mark of

3

otherness that has been enhanced in the late 1990s and early 2000s due to a

strengthening in immigration that brought to Portugal (and to Lisbon) a significant

number of Eastern Europeans (specially Ukrainians, Romanians, Moldovans, Russians

and Bulgarians but also from other places) and a second wave of Brazilians.

Table 1 – Foreign Legal Population and Annual Variation Rates - Portugal, LMA and city of Lisbon, 2008-2016

Area Ano 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Var. rate(%) 2008-2016

PortugalTotal (n.) 436.020 451.742 443.055 434.708 414.610 398.268 390.113 383.759 392.969

-9,9Var. rate (%) 3,61 -1,92 -1,88 -4,62 -3,94 -2,05 -1,63 2,40

LMATotal (n.) 224.089 230.334 221.353 217.779 211.217 205.309 203.650 198.217 197.199

-12,0Var. rate (%) 2,79 -3,90 -1,61 -3,01 -2,80 -0,81 -2,67 -0,51Municipalit

y LisboaTotal (n.) 42.396 43.777 43.142 44.128 44.367 44.972 48.225 49.780 53.470

26,1Var. rate (%) 3,26 -1,45 2,29 0,54 1,36 7,23 3,22 7,41

Source: INE, SEF, Estatísticas Demográficas 2008-2016 and CML-IGOT, Plano Municipal para a Integração de Imigrantes em Lisboa 2015-2017, vol.II - Diagnóstico da População Imigrante residente em Lisboa.

Though the economic and financial downturn of the 2008/2009-2014 period has

contributed to reduce the number of foreigners in Portugal and in the Lisbon

Metropolitan Area (Table 1), this was not the case in the municipality of Lisbon. After

the relative stagnation observed between 2011 and 2013, the foreign legal population of

the city experienced a significant increase in the following three years, reaching

numbers much higher than in 2008 (Table 1). This rose the relative weight of the

foreigners in the total population of the city from 7,7% in 2008 to 10,6% in 2016 and

implied a diversification of the origins3 that has incorporated an element of

“Asianization”. In fact, the Asians, particularly Chinese and various South Asian

groups did not experience a decline nor in arrivals neither in the stock during the

recession period, contrary to the other non-EU foreigners. Concerning Lisbon, Chinese

3 The Brazilians, the main foreign resident group in the city, represented 28% of the foreigners in 2008 and only 16% in 2016. Further, the 5 top origins in 2008 corresponded to 55% of the foreign population; in 2016 the weight of these groups reduced to 44%.

4

have become the second foreign group in 2016 (after the Brazilians) and the Nepalese

registered the highest increase of the ten major foreign groups living in the city and

have become the fourth largest foreign community. Indians, Bangladeshi and other

minor Asian national groups have also seen important increases (Fig.1). In addition to

the Asians, the French have become the largest EU group after registering an almost

fourfold variation in the 2008-2016 period.

Figure 1 – Stocks of the main foreign legal national groups – 2008 and 2016

Source: Foreigners and Borders Office (SEF).

The geography of foreigners displayed by the 2011 Census data, the only ones available

at the sub-municipal scale, although slightly outdated, help us to understand some of

the motives behind the recent intensification of the foreign presence in Lisbon. After the

period of crisis, that was associated to a real estate bubble connected to a housing

market model based in homeownership of newly built flats, particularly in the

peripheries of Lisbon, with a high resource to credit, the real estate and housing market

resumed progressively but nowadays supported by a model with new contours. New

construction was largely replaced by rehabilitation of the old housing stock, especially

in the historical centres of cities such as Oporto and Lisbon. This process, fed by foreign

5

investment, is certainly contributing to the physical improvement of the housing but is

also generating significant social consequences. On the one hand, we assist to a

significant increase in housing prices, both in rental and sale markets, that is limiting the

access of less affluent groups to rehabilitated areas. Real estate funds and landlords are

now targeting the higher levels of the housing market and also tourist uses, namely

Airbnb’s, a process that is changing the social composition and the social uses of

various central areas, often involving the eviction of the former residents (Mendes, 2016

and 2017). As in other major cities of Europe, renoviction (renewal+eviction) is now a

process expanding in Lisbon.

This process is associated to immigration, not only in the domain of people flows but

also concerning capital flows. In 2009, Portuguese government has created a first

instrument (the status of non-usual fiscal resident) that attributes tax benefits for a

period of 10 years to foreigners establishing their residence in Portugal. Mostly EU

nationals are using this scheme and this largely explains the increase in the number of

French residents (and also of nationals from other Western European countries). In

addition to this, in October 2012 the government approved a second scheme for

foreigners (the Residence Permit for Investment – ARI), that allows medium and large

scale investors, that invest at least 0,5M. Euro in Real Estate in Portugal to obtain a

residence status that is extensive to the family members. According to the data of the

Foreigners and Borders Office (SEF), more than 95% of these investments, that

involved approximately 5 500 people, more than 60% Chinese, target the Real Estate

Market. This inflow of foreign capital, not only to the high levels of the housing market

but also to the rehabilitation of a significant amount of buildings in historical centres

and other consolidated urban areas, is overheating the market and distorting prices,

leading to speculation. Access to the city centre is becoming increasingly difficult to

less affluent groups, including lower class immigrants from Africa, Asia and Brazil.

Evidences of increasing socio-spatial segregation seem to appear after a period of

declining segregation in the 1990s and early 2000s (Arbaci & Malheiros, 2010).

All these factors, associated to the specific benefits attributed to ARI holders (e.g.

foreigners with an ARI are obliged to spend only two weeks per year in Portugal

whereas foreigners with other statuses must live continuously for several months) and

6

also to the corruption scandals connected to the attribution process of these titles4,

justify a high level of social and political controversy and a recent Project of Law

presented by the Left Wing Block (Bloco de Esquerda – BE) to the Portuguese

Parliament proposes its abolition5.

This new panorama is contributing to change the ethnic and social composition of the

foreign population in Lisbon and also its geography. Nevertheless, the effects of this

very recent investment in real estate are progressive and therefore not fully visible in the

statistics, especially if the data we use to analyse the parishes of Lisbon date from 2011.

Additionally, the internationalization of Lisbon and the expansion of tourism are also

attracting other low and medium-skilled migrants working in commerce, horeca,

construction and personal services. Several of these arrived in the years before the

explosion of the recent rehabilitation process and were still able to find relatively old

and affordable flats in the inner city and its immediate extensions, as it happened with

Brazilians in the neighbourhoods of Anjos and Arroios or the Bangladeshis in Mouraria.

These areas are marked in darker colours in figure 2 and correspond to the highest

concentrations of foreign population. Due to the present renoviction process, an

eventual change in the ethnic (and social) composition of these areas seems to be

occurring, though its real extension is still to be determined. The parishes presenting a

second concentration level of foreign residents correspond to a traditional bourgeois

neighbourhood in the centre-west of the city where we find an over-representation of

West Europeans and to a northern parish with a high concentration of social housing

that received a significant number of Africans in the framework of the rehousing

projects of the 1990s and early 2000s that have led to the demolition of the Lisbon

bidonvilles (Fig.2).

Figure 2 – Percentage of Foreign Population in Lisbon Parishes (Freguesias) - 2011

4 Investor immigrant’ schemes are not an exclusive of Portugal and dozens of other countries all over the world offer similar titles. This process has been criticised by MPs of the European Parliament that not only consider it unfair to other migrants but also an open door to corruption. In the case of Portugal, is running a judicial process associated with ARI attributions involving 21 defendants (including an ex-minister of Internal Affairs) accused of corruption, embezzlement and influence peddling among other crimes. 5 This project entered the Parliament on the 14th of June 2018 and will be voted in the coming weeks.

7

Reterritorialization possibilities and the changing landscape of Lisbon

The issue of deterritorialization and reterritorialization has been extensively debated by

the Brazilian geographer Rogério Haesbaert (2004, 2007, 2017). Despite some

polysemic element that we may associate to the notion of deterritorialization, in a

simple perspective it corresponds to the loss of the bond with a certain territory that

implies a break in the identity ties with “our place”. In a society marked by a growing

mobility, deterritorialization processes are becoming more frequent but, as Haesbaert

states (2004, 2017), the simple migration of an individual does not imply, necessarily,

his/hers deterritorialization. In the words of Haesbaert, deterritorialization takes place

when the loss of territorial bonds is associated with a loss of power in terms of cultural

and social relations and references as well as political and even civic rights (Haesbaert,

2017). Labour migrants as well as asylum seekers represent good examples of

deterritorialized groups even if reterritorialization opportunities may occur. When

migrants give new uses and new meanings to certain spaces of destination they are

reterritorialization themselves, often combining formal and informal strategies. In

addition, the role of the authorities (also of the civil society groups and their

representatives) of the destination countries in assigning formal and substantive rights to

the migrants play a relevant role in providing opportunities for empowerment and

therefore for reterritorialization.

8

As far as Lisbon is concerned, the growing presence of immigrant businesses with its

associated symbolics (the red porches of the Chinese restaurants and the red lettering of

the Japanese ones, the increasing number of Bangladeshi greengrocers or the

multiplication of African and Brazilian hairdressers and beauty experts) changes the city

landscape and widens its commercial offer, but is not the best example of

reterritorialization though it contributes to increase the economic power of the migrants

(Oliveira, 2010).

Figure 3 – Tag claiming for the Right to Mobility and Housing (Lisbon, Marquês do Pombal, 2017)

Actually, reterritorialization of immigrants is limited by the normalization associated to

contemporary urban planning and also by the imposition of the value of exchange of

urban space over its value of use in the context of the contemporary financialized

society (Santos & Robertson, 2016). Within this process, not only residential and

commercial spaces become business assets but also public spaces used for social

relations are transformed in merchandises, namely when located in historical centres or

its vicinity. Therefore, reterritorialization of immigrants via reappropriation and

9

resignification of public space is becoming increasingly difficult. Nevertheless,

symbolic resistance emerges in certain tags and graffiti (Fig.3) claiming for the right to

housing or representing black freedom fighters such as the Guinea-Bissau leader

Amilcar Cabral. Also the continuous use of certain squares or streets by specific groups

of immigrants, such the Largo de São Domingos (in the historical centre of Lisbon) by

Guinea-Bissau people or the Poço dos Negros, in the west inner city, by Cape Verdeans,

represents a form of weak reterritorialization. However, in the area of Martim Moniz-

Mouraria, the “backyard“ of the bourgeois and reference city centre (the Rossio square),

the transformation taking place since the 1970s that intensified in the later 20 years has

transformed this space in the social and relational place of the city for non-EU migrants.

This is the area with the highest concentration of immigrant shops, where non-EU

people meet and search for specific goods. Additionally, in the later 15-20 years more

and more immigrants, particularly from South Asia, have found residence here. This

transformation of Martim Moniz-Mouraria made it the symbolic “immigrant space” of

Lisbon, a place connected with otherness and recognised as such by natives and

migrants (Gésero, 2014). In a survey conducted in 2000, CapeVerdean immigrants

classified this space as beautiful, quiet and positive whereas Hindus saw it as central,

commercial and used by immigrants/blacks/gypsies and white Portuguese considered it

commercial, downgraded and used by immigrants/blacks/gypsies (Malheiros, 2001).

These differences are clear about the immigrant symbolic appropriation of Martim

Moniz and also about the positive meaning it had for migrants, particularly the African

group, but also the Hindu one, that valued it in economic terms more than in social or

residential ones.

The recent transformation of Martim Moniz that is associated to the town hall

investment in public space and organization of intercultural festivals as well as the

renewal process that goes hand in hand with touristification enhanced its cosmopolitan

nature. Nowadays, tourists, immigrants and some locals meet here daily and Martim

Moniz has become an original and lively city place. Nevertheless, the intensification of

the renewal process is generating evictions and contributing to disrupt the local social

fabric that is also being affected by touristification. Also in this case, immigrants’

reterritorialization may apparently be at risk.

10

Figure 4 – Immigrants demonstrating in Avenida da Liberdade, Lisbon (25th April 2017)

Temporary forms of reterritorialization also take place when migrant groups occupy the

public space and make political claims either targeting their situation as immigrants

(Fig.4) or specific political issues taking place in their homelands. Though these public

events have an ephemeral nature they are meaningful because they show that immigrant

communities and their organised structures find the strength and the legitimacy to

occupy the public space and send messages to the non-immigrant majority. The cases

related to homeland issues are particularly interesting because they represent the

appropriation of the public space of the “local”, the one with the power, and its

transformation in a public space that continues what is taking place at home.

Transnational networks are at work in these cases, expressing processes of

multiterritoriality.

Local policy responses: interculturality, diversity promotion and opportunities for reterritorialization?

The municipality of Lisbon has implemented strategies to deal with its immigrant

population at least since the early 1990s, decade when the Municipal Council for

11

Immigrants and Ethnic Minorities was established (1993). This council, which

nowadays integrates several immigrant associations, immigrant support organizations

and anti-racist structures, started to provide advice to the Lisbon city council on

immigrant issues in the 1990s. After a period of reduced intervention, when the

structure was disregarded by the Lisbon Town Hall, it gained a new life after 2008/2009

when it was restructured under a new name: the Municipal Council for Interculturality

and Citizenship (CMIC). This has meant more than just a new designation because it

explicitly assumed interculturality has a pillar of Lisbon immigrants’ integration policy,

following the national strategy of immigrant’s integration. Intercultural policies

emphasise the construction of bridges between the various groups that integrate society,

privileging the idea of positive interaction. The issues of communication and training

are central in the intercultural ideological apparatus that values the understanding of

difference and the contact with diversity (Camilleri, 1993). Though rejecting the

multicultural visions of difference promotion and political recognition of the group

specificities and cultural rights in a process that may lead to cultural reification and

fragmented societies, interculturality also has its hindrances. The search for dialogue

and consensus around disputed issues such as the “fight” for limited resources may lead

to the soft (and eventually unattended…) imposition of the perspective of the main

group. In addition, interculturality may be a weak option to correct specific group

disadvantages that claim for recognition policies or even circumstantial temporary quota

policies.

An analysis of the activities of the CMIC in the last 10 years shows a relative deficit of

meetings (in some cases below one meeting per year) and an apparent emphasis in the

more folklore and celebratory side of interculturality, issue that was even mentioned by

one of the representatives of the organizations in December 2009. The realization of the

Intercultural Festival TODOS has taken a lot of energy of the organizations represented

in CMIC and sometimes other key issues such as racism, deficit of political

participation and support to housing problems have not been enough attended.

However, the Municipal Forum for Interculturality has promoted discussions of

relevant topics such “intercultural education” or “human rights in times of crisis” and

the commemorations of the Celebration of the International Day Against Racism has

enabled relevant discussions about the legal framework existing in Portugal and its

effective application.

12

In addition to the CMIC and the aforementioned initiatives, Lisbon has elaborated its

first Municipal Plan for the Integration of Immigrants (PMIIL 2015-2017). This Plan

considered three intervention areas: 1) Citizenship and Participation; 2) Employment &

Entrepreneurship and 3) Diversity. Included 67 measures and both the elaboration

process and the implementation of the plan involved partnerships between the

municipality, immigrants associations, religious organizations, foundations, NGOs and

Universities. Even if a complete balance of this Plan is still to be finished and divulged,

the participated process of elaboration and the partnership involved are good examples

of collaborative processes in the domain of planning for improving the living conditions

and rights of immigrants and assuming them as very valuable resource of the city.

Unfortunately, some of the energy present in the Plan production was apparently lost in

the implementation stage, the partherships were less active, the municipal responsible

suffered some changes and the initial ambition was partially lost.

If these structures and measures contribute to put the immigrants issue in the political

agenda of Lisbon and enhance the intercultural policies of the city, its reading as an

avenue towards sustainable reterritorialization presents several limitations.

Concluding Remarks

The cosmopolitan condition of Lisbon has been enhanced along the present decade due

to an increase in the number of tourists and foreigners, particularly EU citizens (e.g

French), Chinese and South Asians. This increasing diversity represents an added value

for the city but it is also challenging its social relations and the access to urban space

because intense real estate investment that uses foreign capital is contributing to expel

lower classes and even working immigrants of certain areas of the city centre and even

of the inner. Though the effective extension of this very recent process is still largely

unknown, it certainly hinders the reterritorialization process of these immigrants,

producing powerlessness, limiting their access to the city and preventing the

establishment of new bonds with the place of settlement.

Despite this, immigrants develop weak and ephemeral forms of reterritorialization when

they claim public space for their practices and their protests and also when they make a

systematic use of certain squares and streets, a process that leads to shared uses (with

the locals) and reappropriation. The city council, with its consultative body for

13

immigration issues and its pro-interculturality plans (the second Plan is about to start)

and measures that valuate the presence of the immigrants and try to improve their access

to urban resources and to a positive relation with the autochthonous population, also

plays a role in enhancing citizenship and, as a consequence, facilitating

reterritorialization. Nevertheless, the strength of the market within the logic of

financialization with the support of international capital flows, namely the real estate

market, may prevent or even disrupt the reterritorialization processes that immigrants

develop, apparently in a relatively favourable local political context.

References

Arbaci, S. & Malheiros, J. (2010), “De-Segregation, Peripheralisation and the Social Exclusion of Immigrants: Southern European Cities in the 1990s”. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, vol.. 36, nº 2, pp.227-256.

Boxer, C.R. (1981), O Império Colonial Português (1415-1825), LIsboa, Edições 70.

Camilleri, C. (1993), “Les conditions structurelles de l’interculturel”. Revue Française de Pédagogie, n.53, pp.43-50.

Gésero, P. (2014), Configuração da Paisagem Urbana pelos Grupos Imigrantes: o Martim Moniz na Migrantscape de Lisboa. Lisbon, Observatório das Migrações.

Haesbaert, R. (2004), O Mito da Desterritorialização: do “fim dos territórios” à multiterritorialidade. Rio de Janeiro, Bertrand Brasil.

Haesbaert, R. (2007), “Território e Multiterritorialidade: um Debate”. GEOgraphia - Ano IX, n.17, pp.19-45.

Haesbaert, R. (2017), “Desterritorialização/territorialização” in Cavalcanti, L.; Botega, T.; Tonhati, T and Araújo, D. Dicionário Crítico de Migrações Internacionais. Brasília, Editora UnB, pp.213-216.

Henriques, I.C.; Leite, P.P.; Fantasia, A. (2013). Lisboa cidade Africana: Percursos de Lugares de Memória. Lisboa, Marca d’ Água: Publicações e Projetos.

Lahon, D. (1999). O negro no coração do império. Lisboa, Ministério da Educação, Secretariado Coordenador dos Programas de Educação Multicultural.

Malheiros, J.M. (2000), “Urban Restructuring, Immigration and the Generation of Marginalised Spaces in the Lisbon Region” in King, R.; Lazaridis, G. and Tsardanidis, C. (eds.), Eldorado or Fortress? Migration in Southern Europe. London, Macmillan Press, pp. 207-232.

14

Malheiros, J. (2001), Arquipélagos Migratórios: Transnacionalismo e Inovação. PhD Thesis in Geography presented to the University of Lisbon (unpublished).

Malheiros, J. (2002), “Ethni-cities: residential patterns in Northern European and Mediterranean Metropolis - implications in policy design”. International Journal of Population Geography 8, pp. 107-134 (Chichester, Wiley).

Mendes, L. (2016), “What can be done to resist or mitigate tourism gentrification in Lisbon? Some Policy Findings & Recommendations”, in Glaudemans, M.; Marko, I. (eds) – City Making & Tourism Gentrification. Tilburg: Stadslab. pp.34-41.

Mendes, L. (2017), “Tourism gentrification in Lisbon: Neoliberal turn and financialisation of real state in a scenario of austerity urbanism”, in David, I. (eds) – Crisis, Austerity and Transformation: How Disciplining Neoliberalism is Changing Portugal. London: Lexington.

Oliveira, C. R. (2010), “The determinants of immigrant entrepreneurship and employment creation in Portugal”, in Open for Business. Migrant Entrepreneurship in OECD Countries, Paris: OCDE, pp. 125-148.

Santos, A, C.; Robertson, M. (2016), "Definancialising well-being: the case of housing", FESSUD Working Paper Series, 1778.

15