Abstract
Creative cities tend to generate higher levels of innovation and economic growth as well as be vibrant places to live. Many cities in the world have adopted the creative city label to realise these benefits. It is not certain, and in fact disputed by authors such as Richard Florida (2017), that creative cities will also show high levels of inclusion. Inclusiveness is a multi-dimensional concept that needs to be unbundled before its connection with creativity is firmly established. Various tensions can arise when cities decide to adopt both creative city and inclusive city branding and urban policy initiatives. This paper studies these tensions in formulating responses to two main questions: A) How can the concepts 'creative city' and 'inclusive city' be operationalised, measured, and related to each other? and B) How do cities that adopt these two city labels implement them in their city branding and policy initiatives? What can we say about the internal consistency of these brands and policies? We have chosen Dubai, Amsterdam, and Toronto as case studies since all three enjoy good reputations in both creativity and inclusion in their respective continents and contexts. Our study indicates that cities promise more than they deliver, that creativity matches some aspects of inclusion, but contradicts others. Moreover, in case of tension, creativity always prevails over inclusion, whereby economic interests come first, and only aspects of inclusion that add to or are at least not in conflict with creativity tend to be honoured. Finally, in each of the three cities, the 'couleur locale' can clearly be observed in terms of the aspects of inclusion that are emphasised, and which tend to be disregarded.