C_02 Social Infrastructures in the Neighborhood Nexus: Perceptions and Practices of Social Cohesion in Urban Space

Sections:: Bielefeld, Hannover
Disciplines:: Geography , Sociology , Psychology , Pedagogy
Belongs to:: Local dimensions of cohesion (C: Infrastructures and Public Goods)

Abstract

How do social infrastructures influence social cohesion in neighborhoods, and what role do differing political frameworks play in this process? By comparing Hanover and Singapore, this work package examines social infrastructures and their effects on local coexistence.

At the center of the work package are neighborhoods as local forms of cohesion and social infrastructures as instruments for fostering them. We are interested in whether centrally planned and regulated infrastructures generate forms of cohesion that differ from those emerging through democratic negotiation processes between state and civil society actors.

We ask how these forms of cohesion differ and whether political concepts for strengthening cohesion can be transferred across contexts. Methodologically, we approach these questions through the Regional Panel, a survey conducted in twelve municipalities in Germany. In addition, we draw on international case studies based on interviews and observations.

Using quantitative methods, we analyze local differences and regional variation in cohesion across different spatial types. Qualitative methods are used to examine perceptions of, and practices within, social infrastructures and how these shape everyday life in local neighborhoods. The complementary approaches and contrasting study regions are intended to identify which forms of social cohesion emerge, are shaped, and can be fostered in particular contexts.

Transfer Activities

We involve citizens and local actors on site in the research process. Our aim is to co-produce knowledge about social cohesion through exchange in social infrastructure settings such as libraries and neighborhood centers. Through participatory and artistic projects, we seek to raise awareness of cohesion and to support active local collaboration.

This work package (WP) examines how social infrastructures influence social cohesion in neighborhoods and how differing state and municipal frameworks for infrastructure provision affect cohesion at the local level. Through an international comparison between the city of Hanover and the city-state of Singapore, the WP analyzes how cohesion policies are developed and implemented at different levels and how they are socio-culturally embedded in the perceptions and practices of various actors. Particular attention is paid to differing responses to cohesion policies in terms of exit, voice, and loyalty.

The WP further asks whether the state-planned and top-down implementation of social infrastructures produces forms of cohesion that differ from those generated by infrastructures emerging from democratic negotiation processes between state and civil society actors. In doing so, it addresses the guiding question of the research area concerning the binding and divisive effects of public goods and infrastructures, focusing on different political modes of provision.

The core concepts of the WP are neighborhoods as local forms of cohesion and social infrastructures as the means through which neighborhood cohesion emerges. Neighborhoods, understood as locally grounded points of reference, also foster cohesion at the societal level and render it experientially tangible.

The internationally debated concept of social infrastructure links physical space with social organization and local order, which together shape how people interact and live together. The “mechanisms” of this reciprocal relationship are examined in greater depth through the Regional Panel and case studies—quantitatively by incorporating diverse spatial types that reveal regional variation within Germany, and qualitatively through the comparison of urban neighborhoods in the differing political and cultural systems of Hanover and Singapore.

Social infrastructures offer opportunities for integration that enable the development of social capital and social cohesion. To prevent infrastructures from becoming exclusive as demands and expectations change, negotiation processes regarding their design and use in space are essential (HAN_F_02).

The WP also examines how the cohesive effects of social infrastructures differ depending on whether they emerge through civil society participation or are established and regulated by the state. Are more participatory contexts more likely to produce democratic forms of cohesion that continuously and reflexively question the rules of coexistence, while state-orchestrated cohesion policies tend to generate more conventional forms of cohesion? This analysis is made possible through the comparison of social infrastructures in Hanover and the city-state of Singapore, which has pursued an active, top-down cohesion policy through community centers since the 1960s. Through this perspective on cohesion policies, the WP is closely linked to Research Area A.