Research project fields

The research fields described below, in which the doctoral projects of the Research Training Group members are located, are deliberately broad in terms of their content, potential subjects of investigation and possible research questions and perspectives. The proposed Research Training Group is not intended to be a large-scale research program. It offers an open framework within which the scholarship holders are integrated with their qualification work, without specifying it in concrete terms, and supported in their work and research process.

This overarching sub-project builds on the current state of the theoretical debate (such as the exhaustion of the paradigm of corporatism or the discussion surrounding the concept of lobbying). In particular, from the perspective of interest groups in the welfare state, it asks how the changes that can be observed can be captured theoretically.

This sub-project is designed to be overarching. In recent years, new questions have arisen in the theory of associations and in the theories of interest representation. The theories are characterized by the exhaustion of the paradigm of corporatism and the discussion about the concept of lobbying. Judgements about association-based negotiation processes have become more critical and the certainty that a society organized through associations can achieve effective control has been lost.

The theory of associations and interest groups currently lacks an innovative conceptual approach with which the changes can be theoretically grasped. These changes concern the transformation of statehood, in particular the forms of state control, the change in the individual policy fields and the organizational change. Associations are multifunctional entities. However, in addition to the service function and social integration, the mediation of interests in the form of lobbying has moved to the center of attention in the academic discussion. The changes to be examined in this project from a theoretical perspective primarily concern the policy field of the welfare state.

The sub-project will build on the state of the theoretical debate (Czada 2000; Reutter 2005; Streeck 1987; 1994, Höpner 2007; von Alemann/Heinze 1979; Olson 1965, 1982) and, in particular from the perspective of the interest groups in the welfare state, ask how the changes that can be observed can be theoretically understood. With this task, the sub-project has a fundamentally orienting function for the Research Training Group. The theory project should also take up the empirical results of the other sub-projects and in particular address the issue of the articulation and conflict ability of weak interests (Willems/von Winter 2000; Offe 1969). However, changes in the established interest organizations and their effects on the design of welfare state benefit and security systems will also be examined. This concerns the shift in power resources between employers and trade unions (Pierson 2011: 9) as well as the changes within civil society or the organized left in all OECD countries (Häusermann 2010: 56ff.) and the cross-class welfare state alliances.

Changes in the labor market, family structures and gender roles have altered the risk profile of the welfare state. The study examines whether and how new interest organizations, actor constellations and welfare state arrangements are emerging.

The changes in the labor market, family structures and gender roles have changed the risk profile of the welfare state. According to Bonoli, the new risks are "the combined effect of family and labor markets events or developments" (2004: 5). These risks manifest themselves as welfare losses and poverty risks. They are concentrated on certain groups: above all (working) women, single parents and families with children, younger people, the low-skilled and people with discontinuous employment histories. Overall, these groups are particularly at risk of social exclusion (cf. Bude/Willisch 2006; Bude 2008).

It is women and families with children for whom reconciling work and family life is a pressing problem because the male-bread-winner model is increasingly disappearing and women are entering the labor market for various reasons (in Germany, these include changes in maintenance law and the changing educational behavior of women). Due to the changes in family structures and the growing participation of women in the labor market, early childhood care is becoming a growing problem. This exposes the group of low-income parents in particular to an increasing risk of poverty. This risk is further exacerbated for single parents (mostly women). They are under even greater pressure to reconcile childcare and participation in the labor market. In many cases, these single parents are poorly qualified and can only work part-time due to the care responsibilities. Another group affected by the new social risks are families and women who care for relatives and who are unable to purchase this care on the market due to a lack of financial resources. In general, women are more affected by the new social risks and exposed to a greater risk of poverty than men because their participation in the labor market is more discontinuous and their qualifications are devalued due to longer periods of absence to care for children and relatives. In addition, part-time employment and a lack of opportunities for promotion are frequently encountered.

The growing number of employees in the low-wage sector and in temporary work as well as people with low qualifications are exposed to current and especially future welfare losses in old age. Their jobs are particularly vulnerable to economic cycles and they are not insiders, who enjoy special protection, but outsiders.

According to Bonoli (2004), what all these groups have in common is that they were not sufficiently taken into account by the old welfare state because it was grouped around the male core workforce along the socio-economic conflict dimension between capital and labor. Nevertheless, the economic and social changes not only bring disadvantages for women, they also open up opportunities. However, these opportunities depend not only on individual resources and abilities, but also on the dominant patterns of conflict, the institutional conditions and the possibilities for articulating political interests. Investigating whether and how new interest organizations, actor constellations and welfare state arrangements emerge is a central concern of the work in this sub-project.

The municipalities, their umbrella organizations, welfare associations, advisory boards and self-help groups act as actors (not only) at municipal level. What significance do individual interest organizations have for the decision-making and implementation of municipal social policy? What concepts are they developing in view of the growing importance of the local level for the welfare state?

The municipalities are among the most important players in the welfare state: they are active in the areas of labor market policy (job centers), welfare policy, child and youth welfare, health promotion, policy for the elderly, assistance and policy for the disabled, as well as integration and education policy. They provide a wide range of social services (youth welfare, addiction counseling, family counseling). The growing importance of the municipality for social policy is a result of the trends towards decentralization and socialization of the social sphere, spatial orientation and the instrumentalization of the local level for social policy objectives. This means that all forms of local governance are gaining in importance. Municipal social policy is still to a large extent implementation policy, in which mandatory services are provided on behalf of higher political levels. It is therefore only possible to speak of an independent municipal social policy to a limited extent (Dahme/Wohlfahrt 2011: 10).

The sub-project deals with the political stakeholders in the field of municipal social policy. First of all, the central municipal associations (German Association of Cities, German Association of Districts, German Association of Towns and Municipalities) at federal and state level should be considered. These and the Federal Association of Municipal Umbrella Organizations pool the interests of the municipalities and represent them vis-à-vis the federal government and at European level. In the area of welfare state policy, the main aim is to ensure that mandatory services - the provision and financing of social services as well as child and youth welfare - are not expanded further and that local authorities are given leeway for voluntary services. From this perspective, we will ask which welfare state concepts these associations have developed and advocate in view of the trends described and the growing importance of the local level for the welfare state.

With the welfare associations (Caritasverband, Arbeiterwohlfahrt, Rotes Kreuz, Diakonisches Werk, Paritätischer Wohlfahrtsverband), this sub-project focuses on a further group of advocacy organizations. As independent providers of social services, they enjoy priority over public and commercial providers and therefore provide the majority of social services. In addition to this service function, the welfare organizations also have the function of generating commitment (volunteering) and take on the advocacy of interests (Bogumil/Hortkamp 2006: 165). At this level, the aim is to examine how the welfare associations bring these interests to bear in their cooperation with the social administration and how the articulation of interests is changing in the face of increasing economization - not least due to the EU's competitive requirements - and the emergence of commercial providers and interest positions (cf. Heinze/Schmid/Strünck 1997). This applies both where cooperation is institutionalized, particularly in the area of child and youth welfare (§§ 71, 80 SGB XII) and in areas where cooperation "only" takes place on the basis of legally regulated contractual structures (particularly SGB XI, SGB XII).

At the same time, other forms of interest representation have emerged, both in the form of self-help groups and in the form of senior citizens' advisory councils, disability representatives or poverty projects. The scope and the relationship between them are important for the dynamics of municipal social policy. It is also possible to analyse the significance of individual interest organizations for the decision-making and implementation of municipal social policy, which is still underexposed in social policy research.

Trade unions and employers' associations were instrumental in establishing social security systems. But what power do they have to shape social policy in view of the many erosion trends?

The "old" welfare state developed along the workers' question, with the line of conflict between capital and labor and their powerful interest groups. The dynamics of this conflict gave rise to institutional structures that shaped society and were able to safeguard against the risks arising from the capitalist mode of production. Power resource theory (Esping-Andersen 1990; Korpi 1983) has used this formative conflict as a theoretical explanation for the emergence of the welfare state. To this day, the socio-political positions of trade unions and employers' associations shape central areas of welfare state security systems (Paster 2010; Döhring/Koch 2003). The organized interests of capital and labour are a defining feature of the German model (Czada 2000). In the political design of industrial relations (collective bargaining autonomy, labor market policy, co-determination, employee protection rights), they have a significant influence on the design of welfare state security systems. As central social security systems in Germany are linked to the employment relationship, the behavior of the collective bargaining partners has a significant influence on the further development of the welfare state and on the responses to the new welfare state risks. In addition, both organized interest groups are active in the self-governing organizations of the social security systems and influence the social policy positions of the political parties.

The aim of this sub-project is to determine what power both interest groups still have to shape social policy in view of the erosion tendencies that can be observed in both camps. In particular, the scope and shaping power of corporatist arrangements, in which both have played a formative role in developing the German model over decades, will be examined. This sub-project aims to provide empirically saturated findings on the contribution of the two interest groups to the functioning of the social security systems and the further development of the welfare state. As the male-dominated standard employment relationship is becoming less and less influential, it is important to examine the extent of the responsibility of companies and their interest groups for the ever-growing marginal workforce and how trade unions are dealing with the growing participation of women in the labour market and the shift towards a service society. Another challenge is labor migration. This is a challenge both for the trade unions as national interest groups and for the welfare state as a national solidarity organization (Bommes 1998; Treichler 1998, 2002). A central question of this sub-project will be to examine the extent to which the social partners have lost influence on the shaping of the welfare state and whether social policy in Germany has been nationalized.

The area of personal services is growing. The importance of patient organizations and self-help is increasing. How does this change the lines of conflict within the social and healthcare professions, but also between service providers and clients?

The changes in the welfare state mean that the area of personal services is growing continuously. The expansion of this form of social services can be seen in the areas of early childhood education and care, but also in services beyond the medical profession in the field of healthcare policy. Traditionally, the position of medical service providers in health policy and social law structures has been very pronounced, particularly through the associations of statutory health insurance physicians. Beyond the established medical professions, the collective representative power of these service groups appears to be rather weak. The nursing professions in particular have been working for decades through their professional associations to professionalize their profession and gain greater influence in social law structures (see most recently Igl 2010). However, there are clear tendencies towards division, particularly in the healthcare professions. For example, compared to the industrial sectors, trade union representation of interests in the social sector remains difficult. On the other hand, the question of who represents the interests of service providers is not the only one that arises. The recipients of services, users and clients (from small children to people in need of care and patients) must also be taken into consideration. Depending on the subject matter, different organizations or specific coalitions of interests can be found here.

In general, the importance of patient organizations and self-help in the healthcare system is growing (cf. Gellner 2008). Cooperation between the pharmaceutical industry and self-help groups as well as changing coalitions between the medical profession and patient organizations show that the lines of conflict in the healthcare system are dynamic under the existing cost pressure. Changing values and information technologies are creating new patient groups that are self-confident and well-informed and challenge the defining power of the medical professions both individually and collectively (cf. Helmert 2005; Murray et al. 2003).

The aim of this sub-project is to reconstruct the changing lines of conflict within the social and health professions and to analyze the transformation of interest representation in this sector. In addition to the individual and collective representation of interests of providers and service providers, the influence of client organizations on conflict constellations and coalition building will also be considered.

Education policy is a new welfare state policy field in Germany. Therefore, there are only a few organizations that represent education policy interests in a welfare state direction. The question is not only what these are, but also to what extent established actors are taking up the new welfare state policy dimension.

For a long time, the policy field of education was not considered part of social policy in continental welfare states, particularly in Germany. Similarly, education policy as an element of welfare state security systems is missing from the comparative welfare state literature (Esping-Andersen 1999; Castles 1993). In recent years, the integration of education policy into the welfare state has become a central issue both at the theoretical-conceptual level and in practice. This is linked to the concepts of the activating, preventive and investing welfare state (Allmendinger/Nikolai 2010; Giddens 2000; Schroeder 2012), whereby the aim is to create opportunities to better adapt to the changing conditions of the labor market through education, training and further education. Educational poverty and the difficulties of acquiring knowledge in the face of the dynamics of the Research society are regarded as new social risks in a welfare society in which more emphasis is placed on labor market participation and personal responsibility (Olk 2007). This is particularly evident in an international comparative perspective. However, this also makes it clear that social policy cannot be replaced by education policy and that it is not only the level of education spending that is important, but also its distribution.

This sub-project is not primarily concerned with the link between education and social policy, but with the question of how and by which groups and organizations education policy interests are articulated. Since education policy, at least in Germany, is a new welfare state policy field, there are few interest organizations that represent education policy interests in a welfare state direction. Rather, education policy interests are among the weak interests (Clement 2010) and are often represented by professional and occupational interest groups. Therefore, this project will also focus on identifying interest organizations that represent educational and socio-political interests. At the same time, the organizations of the cross-class welfare state compromise (Pierson 2011; Häusermann 2010; Schmidt 1996) trade unions, employers' associations and parties representing employees and middle class interests will be examined. The question here is to what extent they take up this new welfare state policy dimension and draft policies with which a connection between social and education policy can be achieved.

The design of welfare state policy is increasingly influenced by decisions made at EU level. But is there already a European social policy? To what extent does this affect the strategies and Europeanization of welfare state interest groups and in what form do they make themselves felt at the European level?

Although welfare state policy has always remained the domain of the member states, many decisions concerning the welfare state are taken at EU level. The EU has therefore become another important political level for welfare state policy. Anti-discrimination legislation, the free movement of workers, the establishment of gender mainstreaming, equal pay and gender equality and the integration of migrants are just some of the EU issues that have a significant influence on the design of national welfare states. In addition, there are the programs and subsidies of the European Social and Structural Funds, through which the federal states promote regional development and social projects (Falkner 2007).

This sub-project examines the question of which welfare state interest groups make their presence felt at the European level and in what form. It is known from association research that not all associations manage to be present at this level. The hypothesis is that only actors with strong resources succeed in doing so. In addition, this project will ask to what extent European social policy already exists, what effects this has had on the Europeanization of German welfare state interest organizations and their strategies (Rucht 2002) and whether transnational European networks of social policy stakeholders have been established (Wasner 2008). Linked to this is the question of the extent to which the EU Commission has taken over the function of representing welfare state interests in place of the lack of interest representation organizations. It will also be asked in which welfare state areas the EU Commission has become active and has thus contributed as a regulatory actor to the transformation of the German welfare state. One example of this could be the issues in the area of gender policy, where the German welfare state has conservative traits.

Knowledge production and expertise based on the division of labor are important for the development of the welfare state. What role do foundations, think tanks, scientific institutes and political advisory institutions play today in the development of the welfare state agenda? What means and media instruments do they use?

The production of knowledge based on the division of labor and the provision of expertise play an important role in the development of the welfare state. Traditionally, they are not only provided by the ministerial administration and departmental research institutions, but also by external, scientific actors. The formation of "epistemic communities", which are made up of actors from academia, associations, ministerial bureaucracies, political parties and the media, is by no means a new development. This is shown by the examples of the Verein für öffentliche und private Fürsorge (Association for Public and Private Welfare), established in 1885, or the Verein für Socialpolitik (Association for Social Policy), founded in 1873. However, the importance of policy advice and scientific expertise, both at the level of policy-oriented advice and strategic policy advice, is growing rapidly and is increasingly playing a role in the enforcement of interests.

The products of the "epistemic communities" (terms, narratives, justifications, policy concepts, problem identifications and descriptions, agenda setting) are playing an increasingly important role in political consulting and lobbying. The definition of interests and social problems by scientific, ministerial and other experts is proving to be central, especially for interests that are weak in terms of their ability to organize and resolve conflicts (Ruß 2005). However, such expert networks can also be decisive for structural issues at the core of the welfare state arrangement - as shown by the pension reform in Sweden, for example (Martier 2008). Added to this is the importance of the media and sub-publics, which are used by "epistemic communities" as channels of influence. Under the conditions of a media society, ideas and catchy concepts play an increasingly important role in asserting interests. In policy field analysis, the concepts of the argumentative turn (Fischer/Forester 1993; Fischer 2003; Saretzki 2007) are a reaction to the growing importance of this fact.

This sub-project will examine the role that foundations, think tanks, academic institutes and policy advisory institutions play today in addressing the welfare state agenda. Can special features, breaks or continuities in knowledge production be identified? It will also be important to look at the interaction between established welfare state actors and these new organizations. In particular, it is important to ask whether these actors are in a position to set new issues in the process of welfare state transformation and how they behave when lobbying for their interests. Above all, we will examine the means and media instruments they use to influence the political agenda of the welfare state. From a policy field analysis perspective, welfare state discourse coalitions and their effect on social policy decisions can be examined.

Methodological and theoretical approach, research design

The broad research perspective of the Research Training Group in terms of content and subject matter makes it possible to use a variety of methodological and theoretical approaches in the individual dissertation projects. From theory-based document analysis to the collection of own empirical material through qualitative (expert) interviews to quantitative methods for the statistical evaluation of existing data sets, different methodological approaches or a mix of different methods can be applied. Teaching the necessary theoretical and methodological skills is an elementary component of the study program.

In quantitative empirical welfare state and social policy research, secondary analyses can be based on a variety of data sets such as the General Population Survey (ALLBUS), data from the Federal Statistical Office and the state offices (e.g. microcensus), statistics from the Federal Statistical Office and the Federal Statistical Office. Microcensus), statistics from the Federal Employment Agency, the Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP), the IAB Establishment Panel, the WSI Works Council Survey, the IAQ Age Transition Report, the WSI Collective Bargaining Archive and the WSI Wage Survey, the ZSi Social Indicators Monitor as well as data from Eurostat, OECD or the ILO (laborsta). Both SPSS and STATA are available at the University of Kassel for the evaluation of existing data sets. Programs such as MAXQDA can also be used for qualitative data analysis of interviews or documents.

It is an essential element of the proposed Research Training Group to use different data sets, research methodological approaches, data collection and evaluation procedures when working on the individual dissertation projects. The same applies to the theoretical embedding of the research projects. Here, we can refer to a variety of approaches from association and organizational research, pluralist (Fraenkel), corporatist (Schmitter; Lehmbruch; Süllow) or lobbyist approaches, actor-centred institutionalism (Mayntz/Scharpf), (power) resource (Esping-Andersen; Korpi) and mobilization theory (Olson; Hirschman; Tarrow), theories of (comparative) welfare state research (Pierson; Schmidt; Siegel), policy research (multiple-streams approach, Kingdon; policy-cycle or phase models), government activity research (Castles; Schmidt), the concept of path dependency (Pierson; Thelen; Collier) or the political opportunity structure (Tilly; McAdam; Zald; Krisi). The broad spectrum of theoretical and methodological approaches enables different research perspectives, such as comparative case studies, individual organizational studies, the analysis of political decision-making processes, control instruments and influencing factors in social policy as well as actor or network analyses. The fellows thus have the opportunity and the task of independently developing their own research design in the context of the broad framework provided by the Research Training Group through the research fields described above, and are supported in its implementation by the accompanying study program.