soziale stadt - bundestransferstelle
besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf - Soziale Stadt"
   |
5.3 Community Living in the Districts
Socially integrative City's main emphasis is on developing self-sufficient community life in inner-city neighbourhoods, strengthening the ties between district inhabitants and creating an atmosphere of mutual acceptance and respect. The programme is designed to gradually enable inner-city districts to once again function as independent collectives.(1) The community living element of the project aims to improve residents' capacity to work cohesively and to forge social networks. In an effort to stem the growing isolation of community members from social structures like family, friendships, clubs and local activities, the programme works to promote self-help, personal responsibility, neighbourly interaction and networks.(2)
As evidenced by survey results, stabilizing and strengthening community living is a core aspect of the programme. Almost 60% of the areas have realized relevant measures and projects; among high-profile programme facets district community living ranks fourth.
Community living in programme areas: problems and potentials
Nearly half of project districts reported intra-community conflict. Though considered a mid-tier problem in every Socially Integrative City district, relationships between social and ethnic groups are described as strained and rich in conflict. The crippling conditions in the neighbourhoods lead to widespread dissociation and neighbourhood conflicts: conflicts between Germans and foreigners, between ethnicities and generational conflicts. "There are scattered cases of functioning neighbourhoods and social nets which assist in stabilizing day to day life. However, differing social and ethnic groups tend to segregate themselves from one another – this applies to children and youth as well"(3):
- Linguistic and cultural gaps between German residents and the portion of the population from immigrant families complicate understanding in pilot areas. In certain cases, such as Bremen-Gröpelingen, they speak of the development of parallel societies: "Turkish grocery stores, supermarkets, lawyers, travel agents, sports clubs, butchers, doctors and a Muslim funeral director provide a world in themselves." It is not necessary to speak German in Gröpelingen if you are not inclined to do so. A self-contained Turkish-speaking enclave exists alongside the German community."(4) Low-income German citizens often construe migrants as competition on the job market.(5) Conceived competition for housing and social envy caused by the welfare claims made by foreigners, asylum seekers and ethnic Germans from the former Eastern bloc are additional founts of hostility which awaken misgivings and animosity among German residents. "Foreigners" sometimes take the blame for economic and social crisis. Additionally, the presence of "outsiders" can result in a questioning of personal values, norms, customs and ways of life, leading to identity crises, in particular when individuals perceive their own living situation as insufficient. As a sort of protective mechanism foreigners are written off as unworthy of acceptance, as inferior, in order to bolster personal self-confidence.
- Inter-ethnic friction in districts is particularly prevalent among young people, as is the case in the pilot district of Hamburg-Altona-Lurup: "Conflicts between Turkish youth and young ethnic Germans from the former Eastern bloc are especially intense. Both attempt to crowd out other groups and cliques are symptomatic, whether it be at meeting places such as street corners, playing fields, playgrounds or at youth centres. Some ethnic groups consciously avoid certain facilities."(6)
- Youth behaviour in public and semi-public places often provokes generational conflict. Older residents have difficulty empathizing with the "hardships" of adolescents in their quarter: "They cannot comprehend the need for large gangs to loiter in public places ('Don't you have a home to go to?'). The rambunctious games annoy many adults; they accuse youngsters of delinquency or feel threatened and provoked by such goings-on and suspect activities.(7)
The exodus of more stable households – as has become evident in the pilot areas – has a pernicious impact on community life, in, for example, Leinefelde-Südstadt and Singen-Langenrain: "With so many families moving away, intact neighbourhoods dissolved, a loss rued by many residents."(8) "All in all, the loss of long-time residents and families has resulted in the deterioration of neighbourly relationships", Langenrain has become a quarter beset with inner tensions and aggression."(9) High rates of instability and transience have a negative impact on the quality of community life. In Neunkirchen-Innenstadt for example: "Transiency rates hint strongly that residents do not feel a sense of belonging. This has particularly malefic consequences for community living because distinctive and stable living environments rarely exist."(10)
Many onsite programme support teams (PvO) consider those living and working in the district as having a significant potential for community living. Particular emphasis is put on the districts' often underappreciated contribution to the integration of the whole city.(11) In the pilot areas in the former East Germany the neighbourhood networks which have remained intact - as far as socialist housing estates are concerned - have been identified as a further resource. Mainly constituted in the early years of construction in the GDR, a large part of these networks continue to act as a shore to communal living: "As is the case in several other housing estate communities, it was and is the long-time residents who are the backbone of the Südstadt . They are involved in a variety of community activities, enriching and stabilizing communal life."(12) However, in recent years we have observed a growing tendency towards worsening neighbourhood relationships due to the mass exodus of residents and the constant fluctuation of tenants and the resulting vacant units.(13) The onsite programme support teams consider the large number of nationalities represented in the pilot areas of the former GDR "as an opportunity for multicultural living in an urban sense."(14) In many instances social and familial (self-help) nets exist among various ethnicities. They impart a sense of belonging to immigrants, more firmly rooting them in the community.
District-related strategies for stabilizing and strengthening community living
Both experiences in the pilot areas and the database projects attest to efforts to mould more cohesive communities, in particular by encouraging neighbourhood encounters, stabilizing and organizing neighbourhood and social networks and through language-learning initiatives, conflict management and preventative measures.(15)
Meetings and exchanges, nurtured through opportunities for community encounters can, despite contrasting philosophies and ideals, contribute to awakening mutual understanding, mitigating conflicts and inspiring mutual interest in living and working side by side. Alongside selected community gatherings such as festivals and theatre and music events,(16) many areas have established permanent meeting and contact possibilities: communal and multi-purpose rooms in tower blocks, neighbourhood meeting places and community centres which often offer varying types of counselling, (women's) cafés and other community-based meeting places.(17) Some communities have been successful in appropriating rooms in child-care facilities and, more commonly, in schools.(18) This is due to the growing perception of these institutions, particularly the latter, as local cultural centres and gathering places.
Many of the activities have an intercultural focus.(19) They are meant to encourage communication and interaction between the district's ethnic groups. Intercultural meeting points and community centres, for example, frequently offer counselling and support services, including initiating and supervising self-help groups and organizing special projects for girls.(20) The latter is often the first chance many young female immigrants receive to meet their peers in private and exchange ideas and experiences, free from the watchful eyes of parents, and older siblings. Against the backdrop of common prejudices and stereotypes regarding other religions and cultures one aspect of the interculturally-targeted project (e.g. interreligious discussion groups, partnerships between religious congregations and international encounters) aims to achieve a more candid and tolerant social interaction between differing cultures and religions as a prerequisite for low-conflict coexistence in district communities.(21)
Cross-generational activities have, to date, been exceptions to the rule, although lessening friction between young and old would be an integral step towards bettering community life.(22) Additional, informal meeting points - most notably for young people - round out the institutionalized initiatives in many programme districts. Some examples include: public skateboarding facilities, basketball courts and so-called hang-outs (refuges, shelters, caravans, etc.).(23)
A considerable roadblock to intercultural understanding and therefore harmonious coexistence in the districts are immigrants' language difficulties. Low-threshold language learning initiatives play a significant role in improving language skills in disadvantaged areas, especially those courses which, unlike traditional community education and private language school courses, focus more pointedly on immigrants' surroundings and lifeworlds.(24)
Bickering among tenants and fights among children and youths can seldom be allayed without the intervention of an outside mediator. In such cases arbitrators and "conflict solvers" are called upon to engage in conflict management.(25) Area residents often receive special training qualifying them as conflict mediators for their quarters. Schools in disadvantaged districts also train pupils as intermediaries or "conflict guides" in order to nip potential acts of violence in the bud to the best possible extent.(26) Arbitrating and dealing with conflict are important building blocks of district preventative measures. Prevention measures constitute the basis of concerted efforts to counter the wide-ranging and complex causes of violence and crime. Individual institutions, such as the police, courts, schools and youth welfare organizations, are not capable of carrying out preventative work alone. This instead requires a broad social consensus involving, among others, independent bodies, clubs and parents. The need for joint action is the reason many local authorities have established interdisciplinary prevention councils.(27) These councils are regularly involved in district activities. Some underprivileged areas have comprehensive prevention schemes in place.(28) Yet another useful approach to tackling conflict among youth prone to violence, and also a way to build their self-esteem, is sport.(29) Sport can teach young people important social skills like fair play, team spirit, self-initiative and assuming responsibility, while offering them the opportunity to interrelate with peers.
|
Practical Example |
Figure 41/42 |
  |
|
|
Neighbourhood mediation The Schlichten in Nachbarschaften (Neighbourhood Mediation) project is under way in several Socially Integrative City areas. The programme is underwritten by Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich e.V. , whose mediation efforts on the one hand strive for social pacification or, at least, conflict de-escalation. However, formal acts of penal justice and social monitoring should take a back seat to social conciliation and integration. The project is as a low-threshold refuge for all who feel they are the victims or initiators of conflict. Project participants include a number of cooperating partners and many volunteers. Plakate zum Täter-Opfer-Ausgleich, Bremen, (Draft Tizian Bauer [left], Stefanie Schau [right]) |
|
Considered on the whole stabilization and the establishment of social networks represent an integral strategy for enhancing community living.(30) Despite increasing individualism and growing apathy regarding public welfare, several neighbourhoods already have a plethora of social networks, both informal and formal in nature. They include, for example, self-help initiatives and clubs. District conferences, forums, discussion groups, community offices and organizations have proved effective catalysts for reinforcing and advancing these networks.
|
Practical Example |
Figure 43 |
 |
|
|
The Lurup Forum in Hamburg-Altona-Lurup "Everyone who wants to contribute to improving the quality of life in Lurup is welcome to the Lurup Forum – with questions, hints, ideas, willingness to participate, dormant capabilities, activities and proposals”. This is our invitation. The forum convenes on a monthly basis and is organized entirely by local players. The forum unites contributors from diverse community organizations and initiatives along with politicians and administrators to jointly deliberate on existing district projects and activities and discuss new ideas for the continuing growth of the district. |
|
(1) ARGEBAU, p. 6 ff. 
(2) Christa Böhme and Ulla-Kristina Schuleri-Hartje, “Zusammenleben in Stadtteilen mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf“: Soziale Stadt info 8 (2002), p. 5.
(3) Beer/Musch, "Stadtteile ...", p. 63.
(4) Bremische Gesellschaft für Stadterneuerung, Stadtentwicklung und Wohnungsbau mbH, Kultur vor Ort e.V. (ed.), 13 x Gröpelingen. Streifzüge durch einen Stadtteil im Aufbruch, Bremen 2000, cited from Franke/Meyer, p. 18.
(5) Cf. the example Frinken/Rake/Schreck, p. 33.
(6) Breckner/Herrmann/Gonzalez/Läpple, p. 46.
(8) Martina Buhtz, Heike Gerth, Margit Lindner and Rotraut Weeber, Soziale Stadt Leinefelde–Südstadt, Programmbegleitung vor Ort, Endbericht , Berlin 2002, p. 30.
(9) Krings-Heckemeier/Heckenroth/Geiss, p. 17 f.
(10) Jacob/Herz/Mazak/Pauly, p. 19.
(11) Frinken/Rake/Schreck, p. 33.
(12) Buhtz/Gerth/Lindner/Weeber, p. 31.
(13) Knorr-Siedow/Jahnke/Trostorff, p. 21; Cathy Cramer and Ulla-Kristina Schuleri-Hartje, Programmbegleitung vor Ort im Modellgebiet Schwerin–Neu Zippendorf, Berlin 2002, p. 23.
(14) Delia Schröder and Manfred Werth, Bund-Länder-Programm “Soziale Stadt” für Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf. Ludwigshafen-Westend. Abschlussbericht der Programmbegleitung vor Ort, 2002, p. 27.
(15) Cf. regarding this and the following: Böhme/Schuleri-Hartje, Zusammenleben.
(16) Cf. the numerous festivals and cultural events in the pilot areas and the following database projects (sozialestadt.de): Stadtteilfest "MITEINANDER" in Rosenheim - Lessingstraße/Pfaffenhofener Straße.
(17) Cf. e.g. the neighbourhood meeting place in the pilot area Schwerin-Neu-Zippendorf (Cramer/Schuleri-Hartje, p. 32) along with the following database projects (sozialestadt.de): Stadtteil- und Familienzentrum in Offenburg–Stegermatt, Senioren-Kaffee-Nachmittag in Rosenheim - Lessingstraße/Pfaffenhofener Straße, Begegnungsstätte Kinderhaus "Wi-Wa-Wunderland" in Eisenhüttenstadt - 7.Wohnkomplex Süd; Bürgerhaus am Georg-Dreke-Ring in Prenzlau - Igelpfuhl; Café BAFF in Darmstadt - Eberstadt/Süd.
(18) For an example with child-care facilities see the project Öffnung von Tageseinrichtungen für Kinder im Modellgebiet Gelsenkirchen–Bismarck/Schalke-Nord (Austermann/Ruiz/Sauter, pp. 32, 66), and for schools the following database project (sozialestadt.de): Evangelische Gesamtschule Gelsenkirchen-Bismarck in Gelsenkirchen–Bismarck/Schalke-Nord.
(19) In most cases the intercultural focus is not limited to the target group and aim of the initiatives but also incorporates the employment of ethnic personnel.
(20) Cf. e.g. the immigrant centre in the pilot area Gelsenkirchen-Bismarck/Schalke-Nord (Austermann/Ruiz/Sauter, p. 33) and the following database projects (sozialestadt.de): MIKELE: Miteinander-Inter-Kulturelle-Elternbildung-Ludwigsburg-Eglosheim in Ludwigsburg - Eglosheim II; Bayouma-Haus in Berlin-Friedrichshain - Boxhagener Platz; Interkulturelles Kontaktbüro in Leipzig - Leipziger Osten.
(21) Cf. the example of the Islamic-Protestant discussion group in the pilot area Flensburg-Neustadt (Frinken/Rake/Schreck, p. 33) and following database project (sozialestadt.de): Cay-Saati im Bürgertreff in Rosenheim - Lessingstraße/Pfaffenhofener Straße, Südstadtladen - Integration im Stadtteil in Nürnberg - Südstadt; Interkulturelle Frauengruppen in Berlin-Schöneberg - Schöneberger Norden; "Verstehen lernen" in Duisburg - Marxloh.
(22) Cf. for further details: Junge Gröpelinger treffen Gröpelinger älterer Generationen in the Bremen-Gröpelingen pilot district (Franke/Meyer).
(23) Cf. Beer/Musch, "Stadtteile ...", p. 91; Stefan Geiss, Julia Kemper and Marie-Theres Krings-Heckemeier, Programmbegleitung des Bund-Länder-Programms “Soziale Stadt” – Modellgebiet “Halle-Silberhöhe”, Sachsen-Anhalt, Endbericht , Berlin 2002, p. 44; Breckner/Herrmann/Gonzales/Läpple, pp. 140, 146 and 155; Krings-Heckemeier/Heckenroth/Geiss, p. 39.
(24) Cf. e.g. the following database project (sozialestadt.de): Deutschkurs für Frauen in Rosenheim - Lessingstraße/Pfaffenhofener Straße.
(25) Cf. e.g. the pilot project Integrative Konfliktregelung durch Gemeinschaftskonferenzen in Hamburg-Altona–Lurup (Breckner/Herrmann/Gonzalez/Läpple, p. 64), the following datenbase projects (sozialestadt.de): KOM - Kommunikation im Kiez in Berlin-Kreuzberg - Neues Kreuzberger Zentrum/ Wassertorplatz; Schlichten in Nachbarschaften in Bremen-Blumenthal - Lüssum-Bockhorn; Nachbarschaftskonfliktvermittlung in Frankfurt am Main-Goldstein - Wohnsiedlung Im Heisenrath/Am Kiesberg; Interkulturelle Nachbarschaften in Hannover - Mittelfeld; Konfliktvermittlung in Dortmund - Nordstadt; Mülheimer Dialog in Köln - Mülheim s well as the numerous examples in: Stadt Dortmund, Stadtplanungsamt, Stadterneuerung, Ministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, Qualifikation und Technologie und Ministerium für Städtebau und Wohnen, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (Hrsg.), Konfliktmanagement in Stadtteilen mit besonderem Erneuerungsbedarf, Dortmund 2002.
(26) Cf. e.g. the Schüler-Schlichter-Modell (Pupil Mediator Model) in the pilot area Leipzig East (Böhme/Franke, p. 42).
(27) Since the beginning of the 1990s German municipalities have established almost 2000 crime prevention councils and discussion groups. They are supported by both the prevention councils of the Länder and the DFK (German Crime Prevention Forum), jointly founded in May 2001 by the federal government and the Länder .
(28) As is the case in Hammer Norden; cf. Ministerium für Arbeit, Soziales und Stadt Entwicklung, Kultur und Sport des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (North Rhine-Westphalia Ministry of Labour, Social Affairs and Urban Development and Culture and Sport) (ed.), Stadtteile mit besonderem Erneuerungsbedarf. Ressortübergreifendes Handlungsprogramm Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf 1998, p. 73.
(29) In North Rhine-Westphalia the Land programme Werkstatt Sport was initiated as a follow up programme to Jugend mit Zukunft ins nächste Jahrtausend – Bewegung, Spiel und Sport mit – Mädchen und Jungen in Stadtteilen mit besonderem Erneuerungsbedarf (from 1997 to 2000). Apart from this the federal programme Sport mit Aussiedlern (now: Integration durch Sport) has been in progress for more than a decade.
(30) Cf. e.g. the network Füreinander-Miteinander (For Each Other, With Each Other) in the pilot area Cottbus-Sachsendorf-Madlow (Knorr-Siedow/Jahnke/Trostorff, p. 38 ff.), the umbrella organization Forum 2000 Gelsenkirchen-Bismarck/Schalke-Nord e.V. in the pilot area Gelsenkirchen-Bismarck/Schalke-Nord (Austermann/ Ruiz/Sauter, p. 70) and the following database project (sozialestadt.de): Stadtteilunterstützungsnetzwerk (SUN) in Bamberg - Südwest.
| |
|
Translated from: Soziale Stadt - Strategien für die Soziale Stadt, Erfahrungen und Perspektiven – Umsetzung des Bund-Länder-Programms „Stadtteile mit besonderem Entwicklungsbedarf – die soziale Stadt", Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik 2003 |
Im Auftrag des BMVBS vertreten durch das BBR. Zuletzt geändert am 03.08.2005