GÖT_F_01 Qualitative Panel: Milieu-specific Practices of Threatening and Strengthening Social Cohesion

Objectives/ Research Questions

In this sociostructural, transversal research approach, not only practices of cohesion but also its endangerment over time are investigated using households from different milieus. The qualitative panel study is initially scheduled to last four years and will be designed and conducted in close cooperation with the Bremen section. It makes an empirical-analytical contribution to the social practice of social cohesion in a methodologically innovative way, focusing on the working and living worlds of households (micro- and meso-level) as well as socioeconomic factors and the infrastructures and public goods that enable or endanger social cohesion (macro-level). The guiding questions are as follows:

• What explicit or implicit attitudes towards social cohesion do the various status groups and milieus show in their conduct of life?
• In which social relationships and networks and in which institutional contexts does lifestyle take place?
• Which own or other observed practices of the conduct of life result from these personal ideas and social contexts? Which of these practices can – especially in times of crisis – have a threatening or strengthening effect on social cohesion? In which way is this perceived and how is it reacted to? Or are the negative or positive effects on cohesion unintended effects?

The panel survey allows for a systematic comparison not only between different milieus but also between respondents from the same milieu and the ideas of successful cohesion that are practiced there, some of which are conflictual, some of which are consensus-based. By establishing a qualitative household panel in selected regions of Germany, which includes different occupational status groups and social milieus (local upper classes, middle class, precariously employed, or unemployed), the analysis of social practices in their interactions between different areas of life (work, family, neighbourhood, etc.) and in their changes over time (as expectations and planning for the future and as reactions to and adjustments to changes) will be made possible. On this basis, it can be specifically investigated which intended and unintended effects social practices in different status groups and milieus have on the strengthening and threatening of social cohesion. At the same time, the panel method makes it possible to record and follow reactions (and the underlying changes in attitudes) to unforeseen events (e.g. corona pandemic) in private, work-related, or social areas. At the Göttingen section, the qualitative panel survey focuses on the interaction between working and living worlds as well as the partly conflictive sociostructural positioning of various occupational and social status groups and possibly the associated processes of de-solidarization.

Thematic Reference to Social Cohesion

In the panel study, the respondents are considered not only as individuals but also in their collective references as members of the household, family members, work colleagues, or neighbours. From these relationships and networks, their attitudes towards social cohesion and their practices that weaken or strengthen it are examined. In addition, the actions of the interviewees are viewed holistically in the qualitative panel as a diachronic and synchronic conduct of life. In contrast to other surveys, social practices and attitudes are not surveyed from the respective moment and in a sphere-specific isolation – for example, as political commitment separate from consumer action or professional career aspirations.

Special attention is paid to two types of inter-milieu relations that are important for social cohesion:

(1) How strongly do social milieus in families, friendships,  neighbourhoods, associations, labour organizations, families, educational institutions, civil society organizations, and media discourse spaces connect and mix – and to what extent do they seal themselves off from each other and understand each other less and less?

(2) How great is the perceived or even specifically sought-after competition with other milieus for social status – and what cross-milieu solidarity exists? Both relations are also determined by institutional contexts that can be shaped politically.

Just as social cohesion thus results from practices of the conduct of life, these practices are shaped by the nature of the social cohesion that exists. It is precisely this micro-macro connection that is at central for our analysis. In what way is sociality reflected in the individual conduct of life, and, conversely, does it emerge from its manifold figuration? The meso-level is by no means faded out but has an indispensable significance in the form of social structures that shape and enable action – for example as work organizations, welfare service providers, political parties, or citizens’ initiatives.