Data

General Issues
Immigration & Migration
Planning & Development
Specific Topics
Refugee Resettlement
Location
Konstanz
Baden-Württemberg
Deutschland
Links
Public Consultation on Refugee Placement (Konstanz, Germany))
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Public Hearings/Meetings
Traditional Media
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
Yes

CASE

Public consultation on accommodation for refugees (Konstanz)

December 3, 2019 Jens Lindemann
General Issues
Immigration & Migration
Planning & Development
Specific Topics
Refugee Resettlement
Location
Konstanz
Baden-Württemberg
Deutschland
Links
Public Consultation on Refugee Placement (Konstanz, Germany))
Start Date
End Date
Ongoing
No
Time Limited or Repeated?
A single, defined period of time
Communication of Insights & Outcomes
Public Report
Public Hearings/Meetings
Traditional Media
Staff
Yes
Volunteers
Yes

Public consultation processes were carried out with regard to two connecting accommodations for refugees in Konstanz. Efforts to involve citizens in a participatory manner were low, but articulated opinions were taken into account in the decision-making process.

This is a translation of the original article: https://participedia.net/case/4868

Problem and Reason

The number of refugees on the difficult path to Central Europe rose again in 2015. Germany is a key target country for many. [1] This development also affects the Lake Constance region and leads to a demand for more accommodation for refugees, both emergency accommodation and follow-up accommodation. These connecting accommodations are available for refugees who have already lived in communal accommodations for some time and who have finally been awarded a residence permit. Concerning the construction project of the connecting accommodation, the city administration of Konstanz is conducting a consultation process. Although its natural purpose is to involve citizens, many see the consultation process as a fake and protest against it.


[1] According to data from the Ministry of the Interior, the number of asylum seekers was 467,649 in 2015, compared to 202,834 in 2014 and even less in previous years.

Background and context

< The expansion of public participation in Konstanz is based, among other things, on the discussion in the Economic and Social Committee on March 18, 2015. The importance of a constructive dialogue with the citizens was emphasized by many municipal council members (Stadt Konstanz 2015a). Due to the higher number of refugees, the city administration was under a certain pressure in May 2015 to find suitable locations for new follow-up accommodation. Two locations for a total of around 110 people were discussed. In July 2015 it turned out that the Konstanz-Egg district and the Zergle area are favored locations. In order to gain time and enable local acceptance of the location decision, the city administration initially put a moratorium on further planning into force. Nonetheless, on July 23, 2015, the municipal council will vote on further technical preparation of the plans.

At the same time, the council members decided to introduce accompanying consultation procedures at the same meeting. This second draft decision was submitted by the Free Green List parliamentary group (FGL) (City of Konstanz 2015c). The public had concerns about the plans.

In Egg, the association “Egger Bürgergemeinschaft e.V.” be seen as the public voice of criticism. The main interest of the association is to keep the central green meadow with playground in the center of the small town as a meeting point. Many citizens in Egg state that the city administration is ignorant of their interests. In Egg, the initially planned location on the playground has been changed. The new and ultimately built-up location is the corridor path on the edge of the small settlement. The final decision for the development plan, including the decision to change the location in Egg, was made by the municipal council on October 22, 2015 (City of Konstanz 2015b). Citizen protests have also formed at the second location in Zergle. Here, the community of interest criticizes inadequate communication on the part of the city administration.

In addition, two further aspects are important for understanding the history and must be kept in mind.

First made one Changes in the law make it possible for parcels classified as public to be used for development with connecting accommodation. This was not the case before November 25, 2014. [1]

Furthermore, the state government of Baden-Württemberg provided public funds for the construction of exactly the kind of connecting accommodation that was being planned in Konstanz , to disposal. An application for this financial support was submitted by the city administration on April 9, 2015 (Schröpel 2015, p. 5), without any specific inquiries from the public in Konstanz or from the residents concerned. The promised funding amount for both construction projects was exactly 1,748,250 euros (City of Konstanz 2015b).

Both, the real demand for accommodation by refugees and the possibility of financial support at the state level, led to the unilateral action of the city administration .

The central research question of this study is: How is a consultation procedure carried out under such predetermined plans? This case study is of major interest to me as causal mechanisms of practical deliberative democracy can be exposed. The research gap lies in the fact that no case study has yet been written on this topic in Konstanz and that it is the city administration's first ever consultation process.

[ 1] For the legal sources, I can take a look at Section 9 Paragraph 1 No. 5 BauGB (building law and designation as non-profit area), BGBI 2014 Part 1 No. 53 (changes in planning law) and Section 1 Paragraph. 6 No. 13 BauGB (added aspect with regard to refugees and their accommodation) recommend.

Organization, support and financing

A budget of 50,000 EUR is for the implementation of the consultation process in the city Budget has been made available (City of Konstanz 2015c).

Participation, recruitment and selection

This case is a unique process of participation and thus the question arises as to which theoretical concept it is to be classified and what kind of classification is possible. The "Democracy Cube" is a suitable tool for this purpose. This differentiates between the three dimensions "method of selection of the participants", "communication and decision-making mode" and "authority and decision-making power" (Fung 2006, pp. 67-70). The first dimension can be classified as inclusive. In the informative meetings there were no restrictions on participation or any kind of selection mechanism. It is also possible to subscribe to an e-mail list and access to relevant documents is made possible. The selection dimension is therefore Open, Self-selection (Fung 2006, p. 68). In the case of Zergle, this assessment is more controversial because, due to local law provisions, only direct residents are allowed to formulate official objections.

Methods and tools used

Initially, the protest by well-organized citizens' groups promoted the general one Will for participation on the part of public administration. Self-organized site visits in Egg and formal and informal inquiries created an atmosphere of "lack of participation". Objections (in this case informal) against local administrative action were also brought up at the state level in Stuttgart. Then these initially diverse and informal protest strategies manifested themselves in a second, very formal reason. The strongest partner in the Konstanz municipal council, FGL, took the initiative and laid down the consultation procedure by means of a municipal council resolution as an accompanying element in the planning process. This proposal was accepted by a majority of votes (23-12-4) (City of Konstanz 2015c).

Another strategic aspect was suspected in the interview on Egg. The local citizens, i.e. direct neighbors of the refugees, are usually needed for further integration. A "quasi-consultation process" should not annoy the citizens of Eggs, so that they later do voluntary work in the integration process.

The motive for re-election always plays an important role in politics. After evaluating the interview on Zergle, this motif also plays a central role in the context of this case. Extensive opportunities for participation have a positive association in public. Of course, the majority of Konstanz residents are not directly affected by the follow-up accommodation projects, but many of those who are not directly involved can potentially gain a positive impression from the discussions. The implementation of more participatory procedures in Germany's southwest must also be viewed in the broader context of failed developments in the early phase of Stutgart 21 (Erler 2015, p. 11).

The process: process, interaction and participation

The city administration made the first plans for the locations in spring 2015. As a result, due to a mixture of formal and informal information, the first tensions in Egg and Zergle became noticeable. That is why there were informative and exploratory simple discussions with residents in Egg as early as June. These were very informal and can be seen as the starting point of the participation process, but not as the start of a consultation process. On June 9, 2015, a general information event for both locations took place in the Wolkenstein Hall of the cultural center. This was the first formal information from the city administration about the plans after the subsidies were applied for from the state government in Stuttgart on April 9, 2015. The resolution of the local council of July 23, 2015 then finally manifests the term "consultation procedure" (City of Konstanz 2015c). An exploratory discussion was carried out by the Commissioner for Citizens' Participation on August 25, 2015 with the main contact persons from Zergle, because the Zergle residents kept asking about the start of the consultation process. The aim of this discussion was to gain clarity about mutual expectations of the upcoming consultation.

At the end of August 2015, the parties represented in the municipal council held on-site meetings in Egg. However, these were not part of the official consultation process of the city administration. Rather, they were a response to well-organized citizen protests that municipal council members had addressed directly.

An information event exclusively for the Zergle case took place on October 12, 2015. First of all, the background was presented as correspondingly beneficial for advancing the planning and data on refugees was presented. Then there was the opportunity to ask questions as part of a moderated discussion.

A corresponding information event for Egg took place on October 26, 2015 in the multi-purpose hall Allmannsdorf and was directly linked to the second decision in the municipal council. In the opinion of the public city administration, the consultation process consisted of these two events (Schröpel 2015, pp. 11-12). [1]

In a second step, further consultations on decisions in the field of integration are planned.

The formal process of the consultation consists of two steps. First of all, there are the two information events mentioned and in a second step it is about the extent to which a neighborhood can contribute to the integration of the refugees. The basic idea of the consultation is based on an initiative of the local council.


[1] In the case of Egg, this can be substantiated by my own presence at the information event.

Influence, results and effects

Both partial cases in Zergle and Egg were never completely open proceedings. At all times, the direct influence of citizens on the decision-making process was intentionally reduced to a small extent. Nevertheless, effects can be observed in two different directions. When analyzing the effects, it is important to distinguish between the effects of the city administration and the affected district communities.

It is very unlikely that comparable projects will be carried out again in a similar manner. Even if skeptical and disappointed residents may not believe such statements, a learning effect from this case can be observed in the public administration. In particular, the administration should end the misleading use of the term "consultation". Decisive actors in the city administration are therefore questioning their own definition of the term. In the future, socially mixed models of accommodation for refugees will also attract greater attention.

The process of introducing guidelines for citizen participation in Constance can be seen as a further effect in the direction of the city administration. One of the main aspects of the guidelines is to emphasize information at an early stage. Another change that the guidelines intend to implement is a list of planned projects about which concerns can be raised before a decision is made. This is to be implemented in 2017.

Due to late and unsatisfactory answers, the residents affected improved their level of organization quickly and continuously. Mutual expressions of solidarity also created a stronger community among the residents. As a common denominator, a climate of distrust of the statements of the city administration emerges again and again. A close and effective cooperation, which the city administration and residents strive in principle, seems to be prevented. A significant number of the citizens of Egg and Zergle see the need to enforce their demands on their own responsibility if the city administration does not provide satisfactory answers. The social movements against the connecting shelters are formed primarily because they do not see the accountability of local political actors fulfilled. A negative atmosphere is particularly noticeable in Zergle. On the other hand, there is the argument that citizen participation in local politics is a voluntary task of the municipalities. The city administration is already under democratic control. She is also primarily obliged to this and not to the suggestions or instructions that are sent by individual citizens via e-mail.

In Egg, the position of the connecting accommodation has been changed from the village center to the area of the corridor. At first glance, this decision seems to be an effect of the consultation process, which was previously only defined as informative events. Although no specific consultation measures have led to the change, the city administration provided a certain opportunity for participation through the information events, part of which consultation was accepted. After more detailed inquiries, however, it turns out that the protests would have been perceived one way or another, regardless of the consultation process. It can therefore be rejected that the consultation process itself made a decisive contribution to the decision to move. At the new location in Flurweg, pollution for nature is to be expected, but this never played a role in the participation and decision-making process.

Initially motivated and committed residents in Zergle felt discouraged and became more and more skeptical. In this case, the main reason for this was a deficit in the implementation of the consultation process. In this case, the attitude has changed from an initially positive to a very skeptical, even defensive one. One effect here is that legal action is also considered in response to failed consultation. A planned structural change can also be viewed as an effect of the protest. The demand for a freely available common room as an invitation for social interaction was central in the case of Zergle.

As an interim conclusion, it stands out that two different views of what constitutes a consultation procedure are decisive for this case. On the one hand, comprehensive and professionally presented information was seen as a central element of the consultation. On the other hand, there is the understanding of the citizens concerned, who expect a real influence on the political decision-making process.

Analysis and findings

Nothing less than the consideration of whether the general public is suitable for direct governance leads to the question of how great the influence of individual affected citizens should be on a political decision. This principle of participation can be classified between the overarching concepts of law and ethics, which have always shaped the political process in different ways (Gerhardt 2007, p. 14). The understanding of the term “participation” differs in political science and in general linguistic usage. While a political scientist tends to associate the term with a certain possibility of exerting influence, everyday language uses “participation” in the sense of simply participating in something else (Nève, Olteanu 2013, p. 13). In any case, participation must be seen as a central part of the formation of public opinion and the political decision-making process. These principles are fundamental to our democratic system, which is constantly challenged, for example by risky decisions or digitization (Hebestreit, Korte 2015, pp. 23-24).

An undefined number of cases of Participation can be accepted in the context of deliberative democracy. Its main characteristics are equal participation, mutual respect and well-founded argumentation (Rosenberg 2007, p. 2). The aim of a single case analysis is to identify certain assumptions that can be related to a larger number of units (Gerring 2004, p. 352). This can be done in case-focused or theory-focused investigations. Following the definition by Rohlfing (2012, pp. 1-2), the goal of the case-focused type is to better understand the individual case under investigation with the aid of theory. On the other hand, the theory-focused type claims to derive new theoretical elements from the investigation of a case (Rohlfing 2012, pp. 1-2). The way in which cases are selected from a broader “universe of cases” (Seawright, Gerring 2008, p. 294) has a decisive influence on the possible conclusions. The range of possible selection mechanisms ranges from simple methods that are based on the representativeness of certain phenomena to more complex "most similar" or "most different" selection methods that compare several cases (Seawright, Gerring 2008, pp. 295, 297- 298).

The consultation process in Konstanz does not include any specific consultation processes that one would expect after reading newspaper articles and publications on the city's website for the first time. Important decisions regarding the connection accommodation had already been made with the application for funding and the first decision in the municipal council, before the so-called consultation even took place. The lack of serious consultation efforts at an early stage can simply be explained by the fact that the funds were awarded according to the principle of “first come, first saved”. This gives the city administration a strong incentive to make decisions unilaterally and without extensive participation. Nevertheless, a strong effect of the consultation on the political process can be observed. The main effect in Egg is the change in the choice of location, which represents a significant change in the project. It is surprising how great the public's influence was, even though the consultation was so small. This can be explained by an actually unconvincing, illogical first choice of location and a high level of organization of the local protest initiative.

In the case of Zergle, the changes are less visible at first glance. First of all, the introduction of the common room should be mentioned. Furthermore, an increasingly negative attitude has spread among the public. If it seems so illogical to enable citizens to participate and at the same time to drive the project forward with their own administrative authority, why did the administration act accordingly? This can be understood taking into account the causal mechanism of politicized decisions in response to the first protests. At the same time, it was clear from the start of the consultation process, but not openly communicated, that no serious decision-making options were envisaged as part of the process. In order to achieve one of the main goals, namely acceptance for refugees arriving in the future, more participatory processes must be followed. Perhaps in the course of this case the opportunity to find a generally accepted approach to citizen participation through a successful first project was given away.

The development of guidelines for citizen participation can be seen as a potential learning effect for the city administration. These are intended to prevent the same mistakes from being made again. Nevertheless, it remains unclear whether those responsible in the city administration can act more effectively in the future. The general conditions for a consultation process were extremely poor. Unsurprisingly, it is very challenging, if not impossible, to carry out a successful participation process through previously decided projects. This ambivalence is reinforced if - as in this case - the citizens' high expectations of the decision-making options are included. The failure of the consultation procedure regarding the connection accommodation in Konstanz will also be related to the fact that it was the first such procedure in Konstanz. Currently, a change in the approach of the city administration to the issue of follow-up accommodation can be observed in principle, since decentralized accommodation in smaller residential units in the entire city area is sought.

Due to the failed consultation process, there are high expectations of future public participation projects. The point in time at which the interviews were carried out can be seen as a main weakness of my analysis. At the time the first phase of the consultation process was in progress, which may have skewed my results. A methodological improvement can be made for the coding scheme. For example, a single code could be introduced for the guidelines for citizen participation. Further research could also examine the citizens' groups with regard to xenophobic tendencies. Both initiatives definitely do not base their arguments on a racist worldview. However, they could be used for campaigning by individuals with appropriate tendencies. With regard to this aspect, it should be noted that the unsuccessful consultation process was in any case not to be blamed by the refugees.

In summary, this case shows failed communication and conflicting expectations on the part of the protesting citizens and the local authorities. & Nbsp; This had a decisive influence on the entire situation. We should not forget that cases like this only exist because of civil war, political persecution and violence, because people are forced to flee and face a failing European migration policy.

See also

< a href = "https://participedia.xyz/method/5058" target = "_ blank"> Participatory Urban Planning

Referenzen

Federal Ministry of the Interior (2016) : Asylum and refugee policy in Germany. Federal Ministry of the Interior. Berlin. Available online at https://www.bmi.bund.de/DE/themen/migration/asyl-fluechtlingsschutz/asyl-fluechtlingspolitik/asyl-fluechtlingspolitik-node.html

Bundestag (9/23/2004 ): Building Code. BauGB, revised 2414. Source: Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection.

Bundestag (11/20/2014): Law on measures in building planning law to facilitate the accommodation of refugees. In the Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (Ed.): Federal Law Gazette 2014 Part I No. 53, published in Bonn on November 25, 2014. Cologne: Bundesanzeiger Verlag.

Erler, Gisela (2015): Demokratie -Monitoring Baden-Württemberg: Citizen participation strengthens democracy. In Baden-Württemberg Foundation (Ed.): Democracy Monitoring Baden-Württemberg 2013/2014. Studies on Democracy and Participation. Wiesbaden: Springer VS, pp. 11-16.

Fung, Archon (2006): Varieties of Participation in Complex Governance. In Public Administration Review (Vol. 66, Special Issue: Collaborative Public Management), pp. 66–75. Available online at http://www.jstor.org/stable/4096571.

Gerhardt, Volker (2007): Participation. The principle of politics. Munich: Beck. Available online at http://www.gbv.de/dms/faz-rez/FD120070122882559.pdf

Gerring, John (2004): What Is a Case Study and What Is It Good for? In The American Political Science Review (Vol. 98, No. 2), pp. 341–354.

Hebestreit, Ray; Korte, Karl-Rudolf (2015): Participation and political decision-making. Political participation in the context of current decision-making expectations in politics. In Lothar Harles, Dirk Lange (Eds.): Age of Participation. Paradigm shift in politics and political education?

Schwalbach / Ts .: Wochenschau-Verlag (Wochenschau Wissenschaft), pp. 20–36.

Meuser, Michael; Nagel, Ulrike (1991): Expert interviews - tried and tested many times, little thought: a contribution to the qualitative methodological discussion. In Detlef Garz, Klaus Kraimer (Eds.): Qualitative-empirical social research. Concepts, methods, analyzes. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, pp. 441–471.

Nève, Dorothée de; Olteanu, Tina (2013): Political Participation Beyond Conventions. In Dorothée de Nève, Tina Olteanu (Eds.): Political participation beyond conventions. Opladen: Budrich, pp. 11–26.

Pfanner, Sandra (2016): Additional accommodation for refugees: seven new locations in planning. In: Südkurier , 02/20/2016. Available online at https://www.suedkurier.de/region/kreis-konstanz/konstanz/Anschlussunterkuenfte-fuer-Fluechtlinge-Sieben-neue-Standorte-in-Planung;art372448,8533367

Rohlfing, Ingo (2012): Case studies and causal inference. An integrative framework. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan (Research methods series). Available online at http://site.ebrary.com/lib/allti-tles/docDetail.action?docID=10621832.

Rosenberg, Shawn W. (2007): An Introduction: Theoretical Perspectives and Empirical Research on Deliberative Democracy. In Shawn W. Rosenberg (Ed.): Deliberation, Participation and Democracy. Can the People Govern? Basingstoke [England], New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1–15.

Scherrer, Aurelia (2015): Egger Bürger suggest alternative locations for refugee homes. In Südkurier , 7/21/2015. Available online at http://www.suedkurier.de/region/kreis-konstanz/kon-stanz/Egger-Buerger-haben-alternative-Standorte-fuer-Fluechtlingsheim-vor;art372448,8016667

Schröpel , Martin (2015): "Anschlussunterkunft im Zergle". Documentation of the citizen information in the community center St. Martin on October 12, 2015. City of Constance. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.de/rathaus/05751/index.html?lang=de&down-load=NHzLpZeg7t,lnp6I0NTU042l2Z6ln1acy4Zn4Z2qZpnO2Yuq2Z6gpJCFfIF2fmym162ep-Yb6 p> Seawright, Jason; Gerring, John (2008): Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research. A Menu of Qualitative and Quantitative Options. In Political Research Quarterly (Volume 61, Number 2), pp. 294–308.

Spencer, Liz; Ritchie, Jane; O'Connor, William (2003): Analysis: Practices, Principles and Processes. In Jane Ritchie, Jane Lewis (Eds.): Qualitative research practice. A guide for social science students and researchers. Repr. Los Angeles, Calif .: SAGE, pp. 199–218.

City of Konstanz (2010): Marketing strategy Zergle II. Pilot project Gaining space through interior development. Edited by City of Konstanz. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.de/rathaus/medienportal/mitteilungen/01644/

City of Konstanz (2015a): Information template: Citizens' Dialogue "Engaged Neighborhoods - Lively Cities". City of Constance. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.sitzung-online.de/bi/to020.asp?TOLFDNR=1003982

Stadt Konstanz (2015b): Minutes of the public meeting of the municipal council / foundation council on October 22nd .2015. City of Constance. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.sitzung-online.de/bi/to010.asp?SILFDNR=1000371

City of Konstanz (2015c): Minutes of the public meeting of the municipal council / foundation council on 23.07 .2015. City of Constance. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.sitzung-online.de/bi/to010.asp?SILFDNR=1000367

City of Konstanz (10/21/2015): Refugees: Council decides on locations for Connection accommodation. Constancy. Available online at http://www.konstanz.de/rathaus/medienportal/mitteilungen/08468/in-dex.html

Links

https://www.suedkurier.de / region / district-constancy / constance / decision-refugees-come-to-the-Hoernle-district administrator-brings-more-tennis-hall-into-play; art372448,8575698

Notes

Cover picture : Oliver Hanser / SÜDKURIER