Places where people come together — such as youth centers, libraries, neighborhood projects, clubs, and community centers — play a central role in social cohesion and democratic participation. The research project “Places of Democracy” examined how such places should be designed, what challenges they face, and what political framework is necessary to enable democratic engagement and participation.
The final report from the interdisciplinary research network at Frankfurt University of Applied Sciences (Frankfurt UAS) and the PRIF—Leibniz Institute for Peace and Conflict Research—is now available. The project examined the possibilities and limitations of spaces for democratic experience in local contexts. The researchers recommend that democracy-building be viewed as a regular task and supported over the long term. At the same time, they emphasize that existing democracy projects — which provide knowledge and facilitate networking — must not be cut back. The project was funded by the “Strengthening Democracy Research in Hesse” program of the Hessian Ministry of Science and Research, Art, and Culture.
Minister of Science Timon Gremmels emphasizes the significance of the project’s findings: “The findings of ‘Places of Democracy’ impressively demonstrate how important reliable structures and spaces are for democratic experiences. In this way, the research provides concrete impetus for policy and society and makes an important contribution to strengthening our democracy.”
The starting point for the study was the observation that democracy cannot be understood solely as a form of government or state. “Rather, democracy emerges where people come together in everyday life, negotiate interests, make decisions, and experience a sense of self-efficacy. Such processes take place in specific locations, but are coming under increasing pressure,” says Maximilian Pichl, Professor of Social Work Law specializing in democracy, participation, and the rule of law at Frankfurt UAS.
“The study shows that democratic participation is closely linked to social infrastructure. Places for encounter and participation do not arise on their own but require reliable financial and personnel conditions. Democracy-building should therefore be understood as an ongoing societal task and sustainably anchored in the regular structures of education, social work, and municipal infrastructure,” said Larissa-Diana Fuhrmann, an Associate Fellow at PRIF.
For the study, the research team conducted a multi-method study focusing on Hesse and the Rhine-Main region. The study centered on focus group discussions and expert interviews with professionals from associations, organizations, academia, political education, and democracy promotion. In addition, discussions were held with practitioners from the fields of social work and civil society projects, including the House for Democracy and Diversity in Hanau, the Open House of Cultures in Frankfurt, the Gallusgarten, and youth centers in Frankfurt am Main. The research findings were also discussed and further developed during a public symposium.
“The study makes it clear that there is great potential for democratic experiences at the local level. At the same time, our discussions reveal significant structural challenges. Many projects operate under precarious funding conditions, are dependent on temporary grant programs, and lack the resources to build long-term democratic spaces and relationships,” says Daniel Mullis, Associate Fellow at PRIF. Of particular note is the importance of permanently available spaces for interaction as well as professional guidance to facilitate democratic participation processes and balance power imbalances.
The final report from 'Places of Democracy' is available to download in German.