Research Institute for Social Cohesion (Forschungsinstitut Gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt/FGZ)

A comprehensive academic examination of the structures, dynamics and perceptions of social cohesion and belonging is therefore of essential importance for democratic societies to understand themselves. It makes important contributions to academic and public discourse on current social challenges and can point the way towards solutions in the search for ways to address them.

Although social cohesion is on everyone’s lips and is regarded as a vital resource for the successful shaping of our coexistence, on closer inspection it raises many questions: What actually constitutes social cohesion, particularly in democratic societies? What threatens it and, conversely, how can it be strengthened? What frictions endanger it? What are the social and political implications of polarisation and division? What should be done when sections of the population no longer see themselves as part of democratic society, feel marginalised or no longer support the existing political system, and how can we respond to this? To find answers to these and other questions, to strengthen research into social cohesion, and to place the debate on the state of cohesion on a broad scientific and empirical footing, the Federal Ministry of Research, Technology and Space (BMFTR) has been funding the establishment of the decentralised and multidisciplinary ‘FGZ – Research Institute for Social Cohesion’ since autumn 2018.

The call to establish such an institute is based on a resolution of the Bundestag.

Researchers from 8 universities and 3 non-university research institutions across 10 federal states are involved in the FGZ. These are the universities of Bremen, Frankfurt, Leipzig, Bielefeld, Konstanz, Hanover, Halle-Wittenberg, the Technical University of Berlin, as well as the non-university sites: the Sociological Research Institute in Göttingen, the Hans Bredow Institute for Media Research in Hamburg and the Institute for Democracy and Civil Society in Jena. The selection of the FGZ’s member institutes took place as part of a competitive process involving external experts.

The disciplines represented within the FGZ span the entire spectrum of the humanities and social sciences, ranging from sociology, political science, economics, finance and law, psychology, ethnology and education, cultural studies, media and communication studies, and computer science, to history, cultural geography, regional planning and landscape ecology. Key research areas include polarisation and populism, identities and regional experiences, media and conflict culture, anti-Semitism and hate crime, the future of the world of work, transformation, and issues relating to public goods and state institutions. These areas are explored within four thematic fields: Politics of Democratic Cohesion, Socio-economic Status and Distribution Systems, Infrastructures and Public Goods, and Cultural Dynamics of Cohesion.

The FGZ’s researchers work in an interdisciplinary and cross-site manner across four thematic areas relating to questions of social cohesion: ‘Politics of Democratic Cohesion’, ‘Socio-economic Status and Distribution Systems’, ‘Infrastructures and Public Goods’, and ‘Cultural Dynamics of Cohesion’.

Thematic area A, “Politics of Democratic Cohesion”, examines whether and how the state of social cohesion influences political processes and vice versa. The focus is on the question of how the crisis of democracy is linked to changes in cohesion: Is it a consequence of dwindling cohesion? Or is the loss of trust in democracy the cause of the crisis of cohesion? Reactions to crises are also being researched. Examples of democratic cohesion include trust in democratic institutions, the experience of participation, or fundamental democratic values such as tolerance and equality.

Thematic area B, ‘Socio-economic status and distributional orders’, investigates how inequalities threaten cohesion. At the same time, it examines how certain forms of cohesion themselves reinforce or justify inequalities. A particular focus is on the conditions that enable cohesion between different social groups. Processes of exclusion and distributional conflicts arising from socio-economic, ecological and cultural transformations or crises are also analysed. In particular, the drifting apart of social groups in terms of resources, status, values and networks influences the debate on social divisions. These developments have an impact on social cohesion. At the same time, new demands for equality challenge established structures of inequality, for example in relation to gender, region or ethnicity. This gives rise to tensions between inequalities and social cohesion, which are explored in this research area.

Researchers in research area C, ‘Infrastructures and Public Goods’, assume that infrastructures and public goods can generate binding effects for social cohesion as well as divisive effects, and are thus essential foundations of social cohesion. The state of public facilities such as hospitals, government offices, theatres, libraries and transport systems shapes social relationships and also says a great deal about societal priorities. This research area examines whether and how infrastructure and public goods are used to promote democratic cohesion.

Thematic area D, “Cultural Dynamics of Cohesion”, is based on the premise that meanings, symbols and narratives provide a framework for understanding the world, constructing identities and establishing rules of interaction. In this way, they help to bind individuals together within groups, social milieus and society. Shared bodies of knowledge, identities and values are contested or are increasingly eroding. Thematic Area D examines the significance they hold in both fostering and jeopardising social cohesion.