Abstract

The concept of the "Essener Modells Quartiermanagement" (Essen neighbourhood management model) has been used as an integral part of urban development in Essen for over three decades. Its origins are closely linked to the principles of action and attitude of the "Fachkonzept Sozialraumorientierung" (specialist concept of social environment orientation), which was established in the 1980s by Professor Wolfgang Hinte at the “Institut für Stadtteilentwicklung, Sozialraumorientierung und Beratung” (Institute for District Development, Social Environment Orientation and Counselling) at the University of Duisburg Essen (cf. Hinte 2012: 667). When comparing different cities, there are various definitions and forms of application for the term "district management". The Essen model defines distinct spheres of action (cf. Fürst/Hinte 2020: 82), in particular the intermediate level, which acts as an interface between administration, politics and district residents. These intermediary actors, also known as district moderators, take on a mediating role by bringing together the different interests, logics of action and working speeds of the various spheres (e.g. district, administration, politics). In accordance with the principles of social environment orientation, they should act on the basis of the will of the citizens and across different target groups and administrative areas (cf. Hinte 2005: 9).

Social inclusion moves away from a rigid understanding of inclusion that refers exclusively to people with disabilities and encompasses all people (and groups of people) who have experienced discrimination (cf. Kuhlmann et al. 2018: 12). When different social categories interact within these people (or groups of people) and reinforce each other's experiences of exclusion, this is referred to as intersectionality (cf. Winker et al. 2015: 14). Social inclusion is understood "both as a goal and as the means of achieving it" (Schütte 2012: 104).

The doctoral study examines the intermediary level of the Essen model in its function as an implementing authority for socially inclusive structures, cultures and practices. The aim is to derive criteria for social inclusion through district management based on the Essen model from the (non-)existent empirical knowledge of district moderators. The relevance of the project lies in the theoretical insights gained into the roles and potential of intermediary actors and in the expansion of the state of research on intermediary practice with regard to social inclusion.

References

Fürst, Roland; Hinte, Wolfgang (Hg.) (2020): Sozialraumorientierung 4.0: Das Fachkonzept: Prinzipien, Prozesse & Perspektiven. Wien: utb GmbH.

Hinte, Wolfgang (2005): Intermediäre Instanzen in der Gemeinwesenarbeit: Die mit den Wölfen tanzen | stadtteilarbeit.de. Essen. Available online at: https://www.stadtteilarbeit.de/gemeinwesenarbeit/grundlagen/intermediaereinstanzen-der-gemeinwesenarbeit-die-mit-den-woelfen, last checked on 01.04.2024.

Hinte, Wolfgang (2012): Von der Gemeinwesenarbeit über die Sozialraumorientierung zur Initiierung von bürgerschaftlichem Engagement. In: Werner Thole (Ed.): Grundriss Soziale Arbeit. Ein einführendes Handbuch. 4. Edition. Wiesbaden: VS, Verl. für Sozialwiss, 663-647.

Kuhlmann, Carola; Mogge-Grotjahn, Hildegard; Balz, Hans-Jürgen (2018): Soziale Inklusion. Theorien, Methoden, Kontroversen. Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer.

Schütte, Johannes D. (2012): Soziale Inklusion und Exklusion: Norm, Zustandsbeschreibung und Handlungsoptionen. In: Ernst - Ulrich Huster, Jürgen Boeckh und Hildegard Mogge-Grotjahn (Eds.): Handbuch Armut und Soziale Ausgrenzung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 104–121.

Winker, Gabriele; Degele, Nina (2009): Intersektionalität. Zur Analyse sozialer Ungleichheiten (2., unchanged Edition 2010). 1. Edition. Bielefeld: transcript-Verlag.