Cohesion in Crisis?
In recent years, we have observed an unusually high frequency of new crises. Social cohesion appears to be challenged in two ways: It is both under threat and called upon as a resource for coping. The responses of those affected to accelerated change range from affirmation to criticism and rejection. Deeply rooted patterns of thought and habitual ways of acting are proving increasingly fragile. In short, there is no script for managing acute crises. Confidence in the ongoing progress of modernization – and in the possibility of a better future – appears to be diminishing. But can there be “cohesion” without a shared sense of direction? Can cohesion itself offer orienting guidance?
What Is “Cohesion”?
As our past debates have shown, the concept of social cohesion is often analytically vague and normatively ambivalent. We therefore draw two conclusions:
- We study cohesion as a combination of attitudes, practices, social relationships, institutional structures, and the discourses through which societies reflect on themselves. Our concept of cohesion is thus intentionally broad and open. It captures the diversity of empirically observable discourses and structures of cohesion and reflects different scholarly approaches in an interdisciplinary framework.
At the same time, we see it as a pressing task to develop a normatively substantive concept of social cohesion – one that acknowledges the pluralistic and conflictual character of democratic societies. RISC is intended to serve as a forum for such critical discussion. This includes both scholarly relevance and practical transferability.
The concept of democratic cohesion to be developed will be one of several possible understandings of social cohesion. We construct typologies of these differing conceptions through comparative research. These comparisons span national societies and world regions, as well as various forms of local or milieu-specific cohesion within societies.
What Are Our Guiding Questions?
The following overarching guiding questions are central to our research and transfer program. They are also to be explored in their interrelations:
How is social cohesion endangered in times of transformation? Also, how does cohesion function effectively under such conditions?
When can cohesion be considered democratic? How – and through what mechanisms – does democratic cohesion exist in global comparison and in competition with alternative models?
Which Research Areas Do We Study?
In the second funding phase, we group our diverse epistemological and methodological approaches under the following four research areas: