While climate change is a concern for people living in structurally weak regions, other issues have a higher priority: Social challenges and the fear of unjust consequences from socio-economic transformation and climate politics come first. This is the finding of the qualitative study “Disregarded: structurally weak but rich in experience” published by the Berlin think tank Das Progressive Zentrum in cooperation with the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. 

 

A Study on the Importance of Regional Perspectives for the Great Transformation

The study “Disregarded: structurally weak but rich in experience” shows how people in structurally weak regions in Germany view their own future as well as the future of their region and that of the entire country. It reveals the challenges and problems that most affect them. The role of politics and their trust in elected representatives was also a topic of discussion in the more than 200 door-to-door conversations in four structurally weak regions of Germany (Duisburg, Saarbrücken Regional Association, Bitterfeld-Wolfen and Vorpommern-Greifswald).

This study is particularly insightful not only because it is based on a qualitative analysis of these conversations. It also shows how those affected by the Great Transformation – the fundamental social and ecological shift necessary to address the climate crisis – can become co-creators of the future. In addition, the study provides answers to the question of how political actors can respond to the needs, experiences, and interests of citizens.

 

Read the study

 


Structurally weak regions at a glance

 

The study is based on 217 door-to-door interviews in four structurally weak regions across Germany: in Bitterfeld-Wolfen, Duisburg and Bochum, as well as in the Regional Association of Saarbrücken and in Western Pomerania-Greifswald.

Interviewers posed ten open questions. This gave respondents the opportunity to choose their own focus and develop their own views. A cluster analysis was then used to identify different interpretive patterns. The study was underpinned by an intensive research strategy. This allowed us to survey a group of people who are often talked about in the public debate, but whose voices are seldom heard.

 


The results of the study: three main narratives

 

Respondents in the four regions answered ten open-ended questions about their personal and regional future as well as that of society at large. The questions focused on wishes and concerns, but also on the perception of politicians’ ability to solve problems. As expected, the answers were as heterogeneous as the group of participants. Nevertheless, the many answers can be condensed into a few interpretative patterns that contain the central statements.

 

A majority of respondents recognise climate protection as one of the most important collective challenges. However, this does not mean that it also embodies a high priority in daily life. Instead, there is, for example, the longing for better local transport connections, modern infrastructure and the revitalisation of local cultural and leisure activities.

While the environmental and climate crisis is recognized as a national challenge, the respondents are concerned about one thing in particular when it comes to the future of their region: its decline. They are afraid of no longer belonging to society as a place, and of no longer being able to participate in its life as a person.

 

Although the majority of respondents claimed to have confidence in democracy, they also showed a pronounced skepticism toward their elected decision-makers.

 


 

Recommended Actions

Three recommendations can be drawn from the study

 

The climate crisis is perceived as a problem in structurally weak areas. Yet social needs take precedence. Therefore, climate policies should not further burden these communities but strengthen them through economic benefits. Many regions impacted by the ongoing transformation provide geographical advantages that could attract investments, such as large open spaces for the production of renewable energy. By claiming a stake in the profits, affected communities could reap the benefits of the transformation. The authors of this study also propose a diversification of investments to include industries associated with renewable energy, such as hydrogen production, e-mobility, battery production or heating pumps.

Additionally, the government could provide the funding for energy-efficient home renovations or solar/thermal heating systems, as well as for exchanging a gas-powered car for an electric alternative. These measures could further help those living in structurally weak regions to benefit from the transformation.

However, the study shows that the feeling of being disregarded is not solely a material issue. People living in structurally weak regions also suffer from a lack of representation. This should be countered by giving people a greater say in the future of their region.

The third recommendation refers to the relationship between voters and their elected representatives. While people in structurally weak regions strongly trust in democracy, politicians themselves are viewed more skeptically. Thus, politicians should approach their constituents and establish meaningful forms of dialogue.

 


 

Paulina Fröhlich is head of the Future of Democracy Programme at the Progressive Zentrum. Previously, she was press spokesperson at the initiative Kleiner Fünf, which developed the strategy of ‘radical politeness’ to counter right-wing populism. After studying geography, Islamic studies and water management at the universities of Münster, Cologne and Amman, she worked at the Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ) and Krah AG.


Prof. Dr. Tom Mannewitz is professor of political extremism and history of political ideas at the Federal University of Applied Administrative Science (Hochschule des Bundes) in Berlin. He previously taught political science research methods at Technische Universität Chemnitz. His areas of research range from democracy, populism and extremism, through political culture, to social science methodology. He studied politics and communication science in Dresden.


Dr. Florian Ranft is head of the Economic and Social Transformation Programme at the Progressive Zentrum. Previously, he was head of Policy and International Affairs at Policy Network, and senior research analyst at the Centre for Progressive Policy, both think tanks based in London. He was also a researcher and lecturer in political sociology and international relations at the Universities of Frankfurt and Greifswald.


Johanna Siebert This project was coordinated on the part of the Progressive Zentrum by Johanna Siebert, Junior Projectmanager in the programme division Economic and Social Transformation there. Previously, she worked as an educator in the NGO sector, and as a freelance researcher for the German Centre for Integration and Migration Research (DeZIM).


Jan Niklas Engels is responsible for the area Trend and Empirical Social Research within the Division for Analysis, Planning and Consulting of the FES. Previously he has worked for the FES in various capacities both in Germany and abroad, including as head of the FES’s Budapest office.


Interviewers:

Doorstep conversations were conducted by four interviewers Lena Hoseit, Gloria Leo, Sina Musfeldt and Karsten Valerius, who were recruited and trained within the framework of the study.

The authors and team would like to thank:

Ünsal Başer, Andreas Bredenfeld, Dr. Alexander Brehm, Ulrich Commerçon, Patrick Dahlemann, Dr. Andrä Gärber, Johannes Hillje, Wolfgang Höffken, Brigitte Juchems, Paul Jürgensen, Horand Knaup, Thomas Kralinski, Mareike Le Pelley, Nicole Loew, Dr. Dietmar Molthagen, Stefanie Moser, Dr. Christian Odendahl, Max Ostermayer, Norman Prange, Alexander Reitzenstein, Franziska Richter, Catrina Schläger, Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Schroeder, Matthias Schröder, Dr. Sabrina Schulz, Dominic Schwickert, Torsten Steinke, Prof. Dr. Jens Südekum, Dr. Ringo Wagner, Prof. Dr. Bernhard Wessels, Petra Wilke and Constanze Yakar for their helpful suggestions and constructive criticism.

 


 

Preceding Study 2018


➡️ Study 2018

➡️ Summary

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


This study was conducted by Das Progressive Zentrum in cooperation with the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.