Glocal Junctions

This research intended to cast a new light on questions of assimilation and integration conflicts that have shaped the study of European immigration countries’ policies. Whether they have developed affirmative policies or not, the countries of western Europe have all been immigration countries for (at least) a couple of decades.

The – partly international comparative –  research was focused on two highly actual and often highly politicized themes in the studies on immigrant populations, namely the interplay between (1) host societies’ normative expectations pertaining to the ‘newcomers’ integration and (2) the resulting conflicts surrounding recognition of diversity and equal participation rights as an interactive process.

Drawing on comparative perspectives and based on in-depth ethnographic fieldwork, this research shows that recognition conflicts, which occur in all immigration societies, are contextually constructed in social practices and take on specific shapes which depend on the dominant civil and political cultures of the various nation‑states.

From March 2020on, the corona pandemic accelerated politics and social processes in Germany in a way that made valuation difficult. The imple­mentation of an online pad to document the social transformation in times of Corona responded to this situation. The pad collects data on all politically and socially relevant aspects of the pandemic in an open process. Initially the Critical Geography Working Group, the Network of the Association for Critical Social Research (AkG) as well as of the Institute for Social Movement Studies (ipb) were invited to participate directly. The result is probably the most comprehen­sive collection of data, information and references to further projects on very different facets of the corona crisis in Germany. The collection, which was be continu­ously expanded, is intended to serve as a research infra­structure and provide the basis for accomp­anying research and future scientific analysis of the corona crisis. In order to structure, review the sources and archive the collectively created database, Daniel Mullis and Paul Zschocke initiated an independent website and a Zotero database.

Link to the homepage: www.coronamonitor-projekt.de

Link to the PAD: cryptpad.fr

Link to the Zotero database: zotero.org

Project duration: April 2020 – October 2022

The collaborative research project Ethnic Differences in Education and Diverging Prospects of Urban Youth in an Enlarged Europe (EDUMIGROM) was made possible by a 36 months-grant from March 2008 to February 2011 by the European Commission in its 7th Framework Program. Central coordination lies with the Central European Univerity in Budapest.

EDUMIGROM investigated how far educational policies, practices and experiences in markedly different welfare regimes protect ethnic minority youth against marginalization and eventual social exclusion, or else contribute to the reproduction of diverging prospects along lines of ethnicity. The reseach involves nine countries from among old and new member states of the European Union, including the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. Despite great variations in economic development and welfare arrangements, there seem to be similar negative outcomes for certain groups of second-generation immigrants in the Western half of the continent and Roma in Central and Eastern Europe. People affiliated with these groups tend to experience new and intensive forms of separation, social exclusion, and second-class (social) citizenship.

The project has critically examined the role of education in these processes of ‘minoritization’. EDUMIGROM aimed to study how schools operate in their roles of socialization and knowledge distribution agencies, and how they influence young people’s identity formation. The project has also explored how schools contribute to reducing, maintaining, or deepening inequalities in young people’s access to the labor market, further education and training, and also to different domains of social, cultural, and political participation. The results of macro-level investigations, a comparative survey and multi-faceted field research in local settings have provided rich datasets for intra- and cross-country comparisons and evidence-based policy making.

The project provides information on its research concept, methodology and partner institutions at its web site. The project publications, the newsletter as well as the Policy Briefs can also be downloaded there: www.edumigrom.eu 

Members of the German Research Team:

Frauke Miera
Rainer Ohliger
Gaby Straßburger
Meryem Ucan

Please find a complete list of all European cooperation partners at www.edumigrom.eu/participants.html .

Publications:

Please visit www.edumigrom.eu/publications  to obtain the latest publications, country analyses, policy briefs and the project's newsletter.

In 2017, the Ger­man Fe­deral Govern­ment adop­ted the policy guide­lines Pre­venting Crises, Mana­ging Con­flicts, Pro­moting Peace, whose prin­ciples are in­tended to serve as stra­tegic com­pass for Ger­many’s en­gage­ment in (post-)conflict and crises settings. But what rele­vance do these prin­ciples have in prac­tice? And how co­herent with them is Ger­man govern­ment action on the ground? The aim of the study “Policy co­herence for peace in prac­tice” was to eva­luate to what ex­tent and why Ger­man govern­ment action aligns (or not) with the prin­ciples set out in the policy guide­lines. Focusing on two case study countries – Mali and Niger – the study exa­mines in how far German co­opera­tion in both countries follows these guide­lines and which factors con­tribute to or in­hibit po­licy co­herence for peace. The study also ex­plores the per­ception of (in)co­herence on the part of lo­cal civil society in Mali and Niger. The study was con­ducted in colla­boration with Dr. Abdoul Karim Saidou from the Centre pour la Gouver­nance Démo­cratique (CGD) in Burkina Faso and Baba Dakono from the Obser­vatoire ci­toyen sur la Gou­ver­nance et la Sé­curité (OCGS) in Mali. Em­pirical in­sights drew on a kick-off work­shop as well as inter­views with re­presen­tatives from diffe­rent German mi­nistries and civil society orga­nizations in Germany as well as field re­search in Mali and Niger. The study was con­ducted on behalf of the Ad­visory Board to the Fe­deral Govern­ment for Civilian Crisis Pre­vention and Peace­building.

Project duration: November 2021 – December 2022

Debates around the governing of the European debt crisis, austerity and the worldwide political mobilization, beginning 2009, framed the point of departure of the project back in 2012. Especially the movements of the squares 2011 from Tahrir to Puerta del Sol, Syntagma, Rothschild Boulevard and Wall Street – to only name the most prominent ones – were inspiring for the early reflections.

Two aspects lay in the core of the research project: First, an in depth analysis of the history, conflicts and motivations of the political struggles during times of crisis; second, to propose a theoretical perspective to think relationally the political constitution of space and the spatial constitution of politics. The main theoretical references therefore were on the one hand the political Ontology of Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe as well as of Jacques Rancière and on the other hand Henri Lefebvres Production of Space. The argument is, in short, that the conflicts, which developed around the European debt crisis, were not only fought out in spatial practices, but that spatial contradictions and conflicts are an important aspect of understanding the conflicts in and over society. The analysis of these spatialized conflicts then is understood as an analysis of the constitution of society itself.

The case studies were located in Athens, Greece and Frankfurt, Germany. In Athens, where the crisis developed with great force and with devastating social consequences, hundreds of thousands of people participated in demonstrations, occupations, the movement of the squares, strikes and in the social solidarity movements. In Frankfurt, the mobilisation was far less wide-ranging. Nevertheless, Blockupy, an alliance of groups and individuals ranging from radical leftists to more modest civil society groups and parties, managed to organize annual days of actions between 2012 and 2015 – most prominent the protest against the opening of the new headquarters of the European Central Bank in Frankfurt in March 2015. In Athens, the research focussed on the heterogeneous and manifold cycle of the political mobilization between 2008 and 2015.

The aim was to examine the linkage of different modes of politics: on the one hand very fast and dense moments and on the other hand the strategic building of alliances and groups, whereas in Frankfurt the main focus was laid on the actions of the more or less clear definable Blockupy alliance. The research based on participatory observation, cartographical work and expert interviews as well as on an analysis of political pamphlets, call for actions, local newspapers, parliament decisions and police reports. The project was led by the idea of a reciprocal confrontation of empirical work with theoretical reflection wherefore especially Adele Clarke with her Situational Analysis gave an important guideline.

This project was conducted with a funding from the federal pact for research and innovation (Leibniz Competition): It investigated security sector reform (SSR) initiatives by way of globally circulating norms (set forth by the UN, NATO or OSCE codes of conduct) in various contexts and from the perspective of their effect on the intended transformation of security culture.

The norm of localizing reform processes

Over the last twenty years, SSR efforts have developed away from state-centered approaches for institutional reform and towards multi-sector conceptions that aim at contributing to life and development in a broader sense. In this context, the significance of approaches that adapt to local conditions for successfully achieving sustainable processes of reform are highlighted as a general norm. However, the perceptions, needs, interests and goals of the various parties involved at the local level can vary greatly. In order to draw out the resulting tensions and their consequences, this project focused on SSR-related interactions in various contexts from the perspective of those involved locally. Relevant initiatives, dialog forums and (re-)positionings of local actors were assessed in terms of how they take up, transform or wholly undermine the normative goals behind the reform efforts. In order to evaluate the impact of the power relations in the existing security institutions the sample combined cases of countries with strong security institutions but deficient or lacking democratic control (Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey) with cases that are rather marked by weak or dysfunctional state security forces, leading in practice to alternative structures and self-help (Guinea-Bissau, Nigeria).

The resonance of global models in producing security

This study aimed at comparative analyses of the actual translations that global norms experience: Through their anchoring in norms, which impacts are achieved by the propagated models, for instance those protecting “human security” in various reform arenas related to security culture or with the functionaries they directly affect? Which dynamics can be observed in regards to the (re-)generation of action-guiding norms aimed at producing “security”? How can local particularities – if any at all – serve as resources in the reform processes? Intensive research was conducted in the reform arenas of the selected cases between 2012 and 2016 to follow these questions. A summarizing report is available for download here: https://www.leibniz-gemeinschaft.de/en/about-us/leibniz-competition/projects-2012/2012-funding-line-5/

Since NATO celebrated its 70th birthday in 2019, discussions about the future of the alliance have intensified in its member states. Underlying this debate was not only the sharp criticism of the alliance articulated by then-US president Donald Trump. French president Emmanuel Macron’s diagnosis of NATO’s “brain death” is also indicative of deep fissures, such as the increasingly divisive role played by Turkey in the Atlantic alliance.

The inauguration of Trump’s successor, Joe Biden, marked a potentially important turning point in the debate. On the one hand, observers expected the US to adopt a more positive stance toward multilateralism and alliances, opening a window of opportunity for the further development of NATO; on the other, important problems and challenges remain. One key issue was Biden’s project of a Global Summit for Democracy, which could push NATO – as an alliance of democracies – toward an increasingly global role.

Against this background, and based on the assumption that the alliance will remain the central frame of reference for the joint organization of military security and defence, the PRIF study undertook a comprehensive mapping of the key strands of discussion and diverging political positions on these issues taken within NATO member states.

Project duration: December 2020 – March 2021

This research project grappled with one of the crucial problems of the modern world and Inter­national Relations: genocide. By examining specifically how the memory of the Holocaust and the Arme­nian Genocide was leve­raged for national security, politics and gover­nance, this project contributed to over­looked links bet­ween the memory of past crimes and nation-building in the age of the Cold War. With an eye towards the ‘diplomacy of genocide’ this project sought to explore such links in the under­studied context of memory, politics and governance: how have Cold War fears and related East-West pola­rization, and thus national security concerns, shaped perpe­trator nation-states to deny or acknow­ledge their past crimes?

Since the upsurge of right-wing and racist violence in the 1990s, civil society monitoring of far-right activities has become increasingly impor­tant and en­compasses a broad spectrum of actors. The practice of monitoring by anti-fascist grass­roots initiatives, municipal coun­selling centres and victim coun­selling centres as well as nationally operating foun­dations differs from the moni­toring of the extreme right by state agencies. The project exa­mined which practices and problem des­criptions characterize civil society monitoring. In addition, it was be asked what impact civil society monitoring has on the activities of the far right and the ambi­guously structured field in which civil society and extreme right actors move in equal measure.