South fan groups, which we recorded

South fan groups, which we recorded on video. During these events, interviews were conducted and lifestyle elements, clothes, personal identity markers, and accessories were collected and catalogued by Museum Rotterdam staff. We issued four periodicals containing articles on the background of local Roffa groups, which were distributed freely to the inhabitants of the district 5314. The Internet played an important role in the Roffa project. A Facebook-like website was set up, where the Roffa youth posted their own pictures and web logs, and created their own virtual Roffa 5314 world. The results of this program were presented in a neighborhood exhibition hall and curated by members of 5314. This project attracted national attention and was considered a ground-breaking participation project from a modern urban heritage point of view.18 The neighborhood documentation project is another example of our changing approach to local heritage. It operated by the mantra: one must look behind the scenes in order to know how people actually live. The project concentrated on the transnational western part of town, an area that contrasts sharply — physically, socially, as well as culturally — with the modern inner city. From the 1960s onwards, Rotterdam’s western area offered abundant cheap homes for low-income households, often migrant families from the Mediterranean. From the mid-1970s the left-leaning city government targeted these areas for an urban renewal scheme, in essence the renovation of existing housing stock and the building of socially acceptable new homes. The central idea was building for the neighborhood, which implied not only improvement of housing conditions, but also a renewal of the physical, social and cultural environment. We selected one of these neighborhoods for the pilot project. The pilot started with statistical data assembled by the Centre for Research and Statistics of the municipality of Rotterdam. This centre gathers rafts of relevant statistical data: demographic patterns, ethnicity, types of households, migration and emigration figures, public health, labor and housing conditions, welfare related data (average incomes, rents of real estate prices, social provisions, level of education), and so on. This representative dataset helped us to place the household studies in an urban context. Streets and households in this neighborhood were selected at random. For instance, the pilot project started with the selection of every 10th household in four randomly chosen streets. We invited these households to participate in the documentation project, which was introduced in the local newspaper and advertised in free copies of the neighborhood press. The interviews concentrated on 11 topics. Apart from vital facts (name, address, number of family residents), several questions about migration history and living conditions were listed. We analyzed household data and compared with the