Interdisciplinarity,Research Policies and Practices:Two Case Studies in Germany

Ursula Apitzsch and Irini SioutiJohann Wolfgang Goethe UniversitätFrankfurt am Main

February 2006

2

Introduction....................................................................................................................41. Methodological remarks and term definitions ...........................................................6

1.1 Definition of the term case study .........................................................................61.2 Definition of interdisciplinarity ...........................................................................61.3 Data collection and analysis process....................................................................6

2. Research policy and interdisciplinarity in the social sciences and humanities..........82.1 The German Research Foundation (DFG)...........................................................8

2.1.1 The DFG’s funding of the humanities and social sciences.........................132.2 Support for the humanities and social sciences from the private funding sector..................................................................................................................................142.3 The role of the EU research programmes ..........................................................152.4 Advisory bodies .................................................................................................162.5 Views on the situation in the humanities and social sciences: the political parties and advisory board .......................................................................................16

2.5.1 Situation of the humanities and social sciences..........................................172.5.2 The importance of the humanities: different political views on their function ................................................................................................................182.5.3 Proposed strategies to strengthen the social sciences and humanities: (inter)disciplinarity and recommended changes ..................................................19

3. The Volkswagen Foundation ...................................................................................223.1 Organisational structure and research initiatives ...............................................223.2 Peer review.........................................................................................................233.3 Support for the humanities and social sciences .................................................233.4 Migration studies ...............................................................................................24

4. Case study at the programme level ..........................................................................264.1 History, theme, and aim of the programme .......................................................264.2 Programme coordination....................................................................................274.3 Previous calls .....................................................................................................274.4 Funded projects ..................................................................................................284.5 Financial aid granted..........................................................................................284.6 The main criteria for approving proposals.........................................................294.7 Composition of the expert group .......................................................................294.8 Interdisciplinarity...............................................................................................294.9 Conclusion .........................................................................................................30

5. Case study at the project level .................................................................................315.1 Constitution process of the project ....................................................................315.2 Subject of the project .........................................................................................325.3 Theoretical conceptualisation ............................................................................325.4 Empirical study ..................................................................................................33

5.4.1 Status groups...............................................................................................335.4.2 Country comparison....................................................................................335.4.3 The sampling strategy .................................................................................345.4.4 Data collection methods..............................................................................345.4.5 Data analysis strategies ...............................................................................35

5.5 Organisation of the research group and communication process ......................365.6.1 Portraits of the coordinators........................................................................375.6.2 Co-operation partners..................................................................................38

5.7 Interdisciplinarity...............................................................................................385.8 Conclusion .........................................................................................................40

6. Conclusion: Interdisciplinarity, research policies and practices..............................41

3

Appendix 1...................................................................................................................43Appendix 2...................................................................................................................44Appendix 3...................................................................................................................45Appendix 4...................................................................................................................45Appendix 5...................................................................................................................47Bibliography ................................................................................................................53

4

IntroductionThis report on Interdisciplinary Research Policies and Practices is part of the European research project Challenging Knowledge and Disciplinary Boundaries through Integrative Research Methods in the Social Sciences and Humanities. The project is funded by the European Commission under Framework 6 (CIT2-CT-2004-506013) over a period of three years, and it has nine project partners from eight European countries: Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and the UK.

The focus of the project is an exploration of the many and diverse factors that sustain the fragmentation of the social sciences and humanities and that affect opportunities for interdisciplinary research in Europe. The aim of the project is to offer a practical proposal that might help to overcome the fragmentation between the social sciences and humanities, in the form of an integrated research methods module. This (prototype) module on integrated research methods training will be developed in the last phase of the project, and will be used in new interdisciplinary postgraduate and PhD training programmes being developed under the Bologna process (Griffin 2005).

In the first year of the project we described and analysed the main forms of national, disciplinary, and paradigmatic fragmentation of the social sciences and humanities (see <http://hull.ac.uk/researchintegration/reports.htm>).1 In the second year we have been analysing national interdisciplinary research programmes that promote interdisciplinarity taking into account the policy level. In the German case, our partner team at the University of Oldenburg2 has been examining the main national research foundation in Germany, the German Research Foundation (DFG), while our team has been focusing on the Volkswagen Foundation (Volkswagenstiftung), the largest private research foundation in the field of the social sciences and humanities.

For our case studies on interdisciplinary research in Germany we decided to focus on the field of Migration Studies, often considered an interdisciplinary field of research. Historically, it has been related to various other disciplinary fields, e.g. history, sociology, literature, economics, psychology, etc. Today, it can be seen as changing between a transversal (cross-cutting) subdiscipline or a new hybrid discipline which can only be studied in a broader and more interdisciplinary manner.

Our report is divided into 6 main sections. In the first section we present some methodological remarks. In the second section we set the scene with a general account of research funding in Germany. In the third section we introduce the Volkswagen Foundation as an institution, and provide an overview of its organisational structure and the existing programmes for the social sciences and humanities. In the fourth and fifth sections we present our case studies at the programme and project levels. On the programme level, we focus on the Foundation’s ongoing interdisciplinary research programme on ‘Migration and Integration’. For a detailed analysis at the project level, we focus on one of the eight sponsored projects in this programme. In the last section

1 The website of the project is: <http://hull.ac.uk/researchintegration/reports.htm> The national reports and comparative reports from the first year of the project are available on this website.2 See the report by Rebecca Krebs and Silke Wenk (2006).

5

we discuss the dimensions of interdisciplinarity we have identified at the policy, programme, and project levels.

6

1. Methodological remarks and term definitions

1.1 Definition of the term case studyWe use the ‘case study’ as our main method in this report (Gillham 2000). What is a case? What does it represent? How many cases are necessary to make generally valid statements? Following the definition of Süßmann (2005), we understand the term ‘case study’ as:

Accounts which present what is depicted as a case; that is to say, they make it into something concrete and specific, something that points beyond itself to an abstract and general phenomenon (this may be a concept, a norm, a rule, a habitus, or a case structure).

In our case, it represents a specific type of institutional context which is representative of a certain field of interdisciplinary research practice in Germany.

We decided to focus at the programme and project levels on the field of Migration Studies and tried to give an account of the field from inside, starting from the particular case of one private research foundation. We identified different dimensions of interdisciplinarity in our research process. Therefore, we followed the logic of asking how interdisciplinarity is done at programme and project level.

1.2 Definition of interdisciplinarityWe used the different existing definitions of interdisciplinarity as heuristic frame concepts because we think it is important not to subsume the dimensions we have identified under theoretical definitions of what interdisciplinarity and/or transdisciplinarity is. However, generally speaking, we use the term here according the definition of Griffin et al. (2005): ‘interdisciplinarity’ is a term which ‘refers to the integration of discrete bodies of knowledge with each other to create new knowledge syntheses’. Interdisciplinarity therefore has two aspects: (1) a process where elements from different disciplines are integrated in a crossing of traditional disciplinary borders without any intention of challenging the borders of the disciplines, and (2) a critical position striving to challenge the borders of disciplines (Griffin 2005; Holm and Liinason 2005).

1.3 Data collection and analysis processFor our case studies, we used different methods and various types of material. In addition to official documents (letters, policy statements, guidelines, websites) we used narrative and semi-structured interviews. We started by collecting data and continued with interviews at the policy, programme, and project levels. We prepared a semi-structured questionnaire to collect data at programme level and used open and semi-structured interviews to identify the coordinators’ understandings of interdisciplinary research practice in the context of their individual fields (see Appendices 1-3). For the discussions and open interviews we used different sensitizing concepts as a way of providing the context.

7

When we consulted the interview partners we first informed them about the purpose of the research project of which the case studies are a part. All the interview partners agreed to participate, and we agreed not to quote them directly in the report. Usually, we recorded the data (interviews and discussions) and/or made additional notes during the interviews. We then transcribed the interviews. In cases where we did not record these, we used the summaries as material. For the analysis of our data we followed different procedures. For the narration analysis we followed the principles of sequential analysis (Rosenthal 1995) while for the analysis of the other material we used open coding procedures (Strauss 1994). However, our case presentations are guided by our analytic positions. For the presentation we have chosen a format in which we summarise our results and do not use direct quotes.

It is important to mention that a discrepancy emerged between our expectations and the facts we discovered in the field. We expected to find more conflict potential in relation to interdisciplinarity, and we suspect that the fact that we focused on a programme that had started recently influenced our results.

8

2. Research policy and interdisciplinarity in the social sciences and humanities3

In Germany, research is primarily financed from three sources: the state (Bund and the Länder), the German Research Foundation (DFG), and other research funding organisations in the private research sector. The legal and financial responsibility for research support is in the hands of the federal states (Länder). Public research support organisations have in Germany, for historical reasons, the legal status of associations, foundations, or non-profit enterprises formed under German private law.

2.1 The German Research Foundation (DFG)The DFG is the central organisation for research funding in Germany. It provides funding for all areas of research. It is responsible for funding research both in universities and in research institutions. The DFG has concentrated its profile in three main strategic areas: (1) it is committed to advancing the careers of young researchers, (2) it pays special attention to complex research issues by supporting interdisciplinarity and networking, and (3) it advances the internationalisation of research and worldwide co-operation(see: <http://www.dfg.de/en/dfg_profile/mission/index.html, 8.2.06>).

In organisational terms, the DFG is an association formed under private law. Its members include most German universities, non-university research establishments, scientific federations, and the academies of the sciences (Akademien der Wissenschaften). The DFG receives its funding from the federal (Bund) and state (Länder) authorities, which are represented in all decision-making bodies. Scientists and academics are in the majority on these bodies (see <http://www.dfg.de/en/dfg_profile/search, 8.2.06>).

The federal government provides 758.3 million euros per annum, the federal states 545.3 million euros, and the Donors’ Association for the Promotion of Science and the Humanities in Germany 2.2 million euros (as of 2004; see Table 1).

3 This section was written together with Rebecca Krebs and Silke Wenk, our partner team at the University of Oldenburg

9

Table 1: Origin of financial resources (DFG)4

In 2004, the DFG provided 189.4 million euros towards research in the humanities and social sciences, 482.3 million for the life sciences (medicine, biology, agriculture, forestry) 321 million for the natural sciences (geological sciences, chemistry, physics, mathematics) and 268.8 million for the engineering sciences (mechanical and industrial/thermal and process engineering; material science, electrical engineering and computer sciences, construction engineering and architecture) (see Table 2).

4 Sources (Tables 1-5): http://www.dfg.de/dfg_im profil/_zahlen_und_fakten/mittelverwendung/, 4.1.2006.

In mill. Euro %

Federal Government (Bund)Institutional funding of the DFGInstitutional funding of the DFG (separately financed)Special allocations for earmarked projects

746.6 4.9 6.8

57.1 0.4 0.5

Sum 758.3 58.0

Federal States (Länder)Institutional funding of the DFG Institutional funding of the DFG (separately financed)

540.6 4.7

41.4 0.4

Sum 545.3 41.8

Donors’ Association for the Promotion of Science and Humanities in Germany (Stifterverbund für die dt. Wissenschaft)Allocation of the EUAllocations from private sourcesDFG’s own income

2.2

0.1 0.5 0.7

0.2

-------- 0.1

Sum 3.5 0.3

Total income 1, 307.1 100.0

Plus carry-over funds from 2003 2.1

Total 1, 309.2

10

Table 2: Total research funding by area of research, 2001 to 2004 (in million euros)

In 2004, the DFG´s budget amounted to 1.31 billion euros. From the total budget, 740.2 million euros were spent on general research support, 360 million on inter-disciplinary collaborative research centres, and 72.4 million on interdisciplinary research training groups (Tables 3-5).

11

Table 3: Use of financial resources (DFG)

Table 4: DFG Collaborative Research Centres* 1997 to 2004.

In mill. Euro %

For general research support For Collaborative Research CentresFor Research Training GroupsFor the Emmy Noether ProgrammeFor the Leibniz ProgrammeFor Research funding from special allocationsFor DfG Research Centres Administrative expenses

740.2 359.9 72.4 33.3 15.1 10.4 28.0 48.7

56.6 27.5 5.5 2.6 1.2 0.8 2.1 3.7

Total expenses 1,308.0 100.0

plus carry-over funds from 2004 1.2

Total 1,309.2

12

Table 5: DFG Research Training Groups* 1997 to 2004

13

2.1.1 The DFG’s funding of the humanities and social sciences

The DFG is the most important agency in Germany for the funding of the social sciences and humanities in universities and research institutes. In 2004 alone, it provided 190 million euros for the social sciences and humanities, which was 15% of total funding (Winnacker 2005; see Table 2 and Table 6).

Table 6: Level of funding* by research area ** 2001 to 2004 (in million euro)

Funding for social science and humanities research by the DFG takes the form of different research types, individual grants, and interdisciplinary programmes, e.g. collaborative research centres (Sonderforschungsbereiche) and research training groups (Graduiertenkollegs) (see Krebs and Wenk 2006: section 2). The DFG pays special attention to supporting interdisciplinary research and networking through different initiatives, e.g. the collaborative research centres and research training groups.

The most prominent example of this effort to support cross-disciplinary research is what is known as the excellence initiative (Exzellenzinitiative) of the Bund and the Länder. This has given rise to some controversy, and aims to advance top-level university research with a total budget of €1.9 billion for the period 2006 through 2011 (<http://www.dfg.de/en/coordinated_programmes/excellence_initiative/general _information.html, 20.12.2005). This budget will be split along three lines of funding:

graduate schools to support young researchers clusters of excellence to support world class research institutional strategies to support top level university research.

14

The programme provides for a two-stage application procedure. The result of the first stage which was announced in January 2006 shows that only 10% of the projects that are eligible for the second stage have been chosen from the humanities and social sciences (http://www.dfg.de/forschungsfoerderung/koordinierte_programme/exzellenzinitiative/index.html). This result caused the German Wissenschaftsrat (Science Council) to reflect on the problem that the concept of the excellence initiative might not be very well suited to the humanities and social sciences (on this point see section 1.5.5).

The DFG supports the humanities through explicit measures at research policy level, the humanities research funding initiative (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 35). According to the Wissenschaftsrat’s report, entitled Recommendations on the Development and Promotion of the Humanities, the humanities’ proportion of total research funding from the DFG rose from 7.7 to 9.2% between 1990 and 2003. This increase is attributed to the growth in the number of grants in the coordinated cross-disciplinary programmes (the collaborative research centres and research training).

2.2 Support for the humanities and social sciences from the private funding sectorThere are several foundations in Germany which support humanities and social science research. The largest private foundation is the VW Foundation, which provided 21.8 million euros to support the humanities and social sciences in 2004 alone (on this point see section 3). In addition to the VW Foundation, the Fritz Thyssen Foundation is of special importance for the humanities and social sciences. In 2003, this foundation supported the humanities and cultural studies (Geistes- und Kulturwissenschaften) with grants amounting to 7.5 million euros. Support for the humanities from the private funding sector by the Gerda Henkel Foundation is also important, because it exclusively supports projects in the humanities. In 2004, this amounted to some 4.4 million euros. These three main foundations support different areas of research with different strategies.

The VW Foundation is oriented towards programmes and interdisciplinarity. In addition to support for individuals, this foundation supports cross-disciplinary and international co-operation and infrastructure for institutions, such as the Hanse Wissenschaftskolleg in Delmenhorst. The Fritz Thyssen Foundation supports the social sciences and humanities with different types of support: academic projects, fellowships, conferences and subsidies. A focus of the funding strategy is the special emphasis on publication subsidies (<http://www.fritz-thyssen-stiftung.de/). The Foundation has different thematic focuses in its funding policy: (1) History, Language and Culture, (2) State, Economy and Society and ‘cross sections’, (3) Image and Imagery, and (4) International Relations. Even if the thematic focuses 1 and 2 here seem to imply some kind of separation between the humanities and the social sciences, the need for interdisciplinarity is explicitly stressed in the Foundation’s funding policy. In 2003, the Foundation provided a total of 11.95 million euros for project fellowships (Fritz Thyssen Foundation Annual Report 2003/ 2004: 342).

The Foundation supports projects which, under the influence of Anglo-Saxon research, could be called ‘cultural studies’ and which seek to establish

15

interdisciplinary contact with the social sciences. Special attention is also paid to research projects which are based on co-operation with the natural sciences, particularly with the cognitive neuro-sciences. However, at the same time the Thyssen Foundation continues to support the research traditions of the ‘classical’ arts disciplines (<http:www.fritz-thyssen-stiftung.de/03foerderbereiche/geschichte_en.htm>, 6.6.2005).

Both foundations want to strengthen the position of the humanities. This is illustrated by a recent initiative (launched in 2005) of both foundations, promoting the humanities by a funding initiative called ‘Pro Humanities’ which has a particular focus on individual research. This initiative is motivated by the importance of the humanities and social sciences for the European process of unification and for the construction of a European education and research system(<http:www.volkswagenstiftung.de/foerderung/foerderinitiativen/ku...>6.6.2005) (see section 3).

The Gerda Henkel Foundation supports research in what it terms the ‘Historical Humanities’ (Historische Geisteswissenschaften), especially in the fields of history, art history, archaeology, historical Islamic studies, and history of law (see:< http://www.gerda-henkel-stiftung.de/content.php?nav_id=174&language=de> 4.2.06).

In 2004 the Foundation granted a total of 4,43 million euros for 247 research projects(academic projects and Ph.D. fellowships). In 2004, 45.6 % of the grants were in history, 24.5% in art history, 14% in archaeology, 5.3% for interdisciplinary projects, 5.1% for ancient history, 3.4% for Islamic science, 1.3% for the history of law and 8%for other subjects (<http://www.gerda-henkel-stiftung.de/foerdermittel.php?nav_id=178&language=de>, 4.2.06).

2.3 The role of the EU research programmesEuropean Union research programmes have up until now played a very minor role in support for research in Germany in the social sciences and humanities (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 93).5 Because of the history of the programmes, European research policy with its framework programmes focuses mainly on socio-economic and technical research. Thus the ongoing 6th Framework contains, apart from the social science-oriented topic ‘Citizens and governance in a knowledged based society’, mainly natural science and technical science-oriented topics and supports these areas. The humanities are obviously excluded. The explicit support for and integration of the humanities and social sciences in the 7th Framework has been advocated at the national level by both the Wissenschaftsrat and the DFG(Wissenschaftsrat 2006, Winnacker 2006).

Even though it is noticeable that a lot of the projects funded under the ‘Citizens and governance in a knowledged based society’ programme have German coordinators,(see <http:www.europa.eu.int/comm/employments_social/ socio-economic_

5 According to an expert interview conducted in January 2006 at the European liaison office of the German research organisations (KOWI).

16

research/docs/ FP 6_synopsis.eu.pdf>) in general the European programmes have not so far been very important for national research promotion in Germany.6

2.4 Advisory bodies Two advisory bodies are responsible for priority-setting and the coordination of strategies for science, research, and education on the national level, the Wissenschaftsrat and the Bund-Länder Commission. The Wissenschaftsrat is made up of representatives from the Federal Government and the state (Länder) governments. It is an advisory body for political decision-makers and an instrument of cooperative federalism designed to promote scientific work in Germany. The Wissenschaftsrat issues statements and recommendations, and prepares reports which primarily concern the two major fields of science policy: (1) ‘the scientific institutions (universities, universities of applied sciences and non-university research institutions), in particular their structure and performance, development and financing’, and (2) ‘general questions relating to the system of higher education, selected structural aspects of research and teaching as well as the strategic planning and assessment of specific fields and disciplines’ (<http://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/Aufgaben /aufg_org.htm>, 8.02.06). The Bund-Länder Commission For Educational Planning And Research Promotion is the ‘permanent forum for the discussion of all questions of education and research promotion which are of common interest to the Federal and the Länder governments’ (http://www.blk.de, 8.2.06).

2.5 Views on the situation in the humanities and social sciences: the political parties and advisory board

In the following we will concentrate on the political discourse on policies towards the humanities. Our main focus is on how the political parties and the Wissenschaftsratsee the situation, role and future tasks of the humanities.

On 11 May 2005 a public hearing was organised by the Committee for Education, Research, and Technology Assessment (Ausschuss für Bildung, Forschung und Technikfolgenabschätzung) of the German Bundestag. The subject was the current situation of the humanities and social sciences in Germany (Situation der Geistes-, Sozial- und Kulturwissenschaften in Deutschland, 11 May 2005 Paul-Löbe-Haus Berlin). The objective was to strengthen the social sciences and humanities (Geistes-, Sozial-, und Kulturwissenschaften stärken - Koalitionsfraktionen). This discussion had been largely initiated by the Bündnis 90/Die Grünen member Ursula Sowa, who belonged to the Education and Research Committee (Bildungs-und Forschungsausschuss) of the (former) German government (cf. Gollnick 2005: 1). The idea proposed was to initiate new interdisciplinary research colleges to support young scholars working in the social sciences and humanities (ibid.: 1). A panel of experts (Bredekamp, Frühwald, Nida-Rümelin) was invited. Three main points were addressed in the hearing:

the current situation of the disciplinary fields mentioned above, 6 According to an expert interview conducted in January 2006 at the European liaison office of the German research organisations (KOWI).

17

their importance, and proposals to strengthen these fields.

The Wissenschaftsrat (advisory body to the Federal Government and the State [Länder] governments) published a very detailed overview of the current situation of research in the humanities in January 2006.7 This paper not only describes the current situation, but also formulates recommendations for future policy concerning the humanities. In the following we summarise and discuss the positions of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (Alliance 90/The Greens), and CDU/CSU (Christian Democratic Union/Christian Socialist Union) parties, as well as the position of the Wissenschaftsrat and the policies it has recommended.

2.5.1 Situation of the humanities and social sciences

The role of the humanities in a changing societyIn addition to a reference to conflicts (in May 2005) over federal higher education policy, all three press releases analysed by us point to recent university reform processes and social changes, together with financial problems, as major factors causing difficulties for the social sciences and humanities. The press release of Bündnis 90/Die Grünen refers to the panel of experts, who maintained that the disciplines are not in crisis in methodological terms but are seriously challenged by the changes in German universities, and are coming under growing pressure to legimitate themselves in the eyes of society. Katharina Reiche, the CDU/CSU spokeswoman responsible for education and research, stated that the humanities and social sciences have difficulties in coping with the reformed university system, which is organised along criteria formulated for the application-oriented disciplines of the technical sciences. Increasingly, the humanities and social sciences are coming under pressure to legitimate themselves in terms of a comparison with the natural and technical sciences. The CDU/CSU opposition differed from the position of the government by identifying another challenge for the disciplines, that is the Bologna process and the introduction of junior professorships.

The Wissenschaftsrat too pointed to the question of legitimation regarding the humanities. Additionally, it highlighted the fact that what has been called ‘the crisis of the humanities’ is connected to a change in their role in society. The paper states that the crisis cannot be related to the actual quantity of research and teaching in the humanities (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 11). Instead, the humanities have in recent decades lost both their role as ‘national legitimation agency’ and the role they played in the 1960s and 1970s as ‘democratisation sciences’ (Demokratisierungswissenschaften). In the past, this gave them greater weight in the public sphere (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 10).

The attempt to reformulate the Geisteswissenschaften as Kulturwissenschaften or cultural sciences, which has also been broadly discussed due to the publication in 1991 of a volume entitled Geisteswissenschaften heute,8 was also a reaction to a 7 This can also be considered as a reaction to the introduction of the new ‘Excellence Initiative’ funding programme, where proposals from the humanities were not very successful. 8 Frühwald, Wolfgang , et al. (1991) Geisteswissenschaften heute: eine Denkschrift. Frankfurt/ Main. For this debate, see also Krebs, Rebecca, Siouti, Irini, Apitzsch, Ursula and Silke Wenk (2005).

18

growing feeling that ideas implying a ‘Ganzheit’ or ‘wholeness’ of the ‘nation’ or ‘society’ were problematic. Hence ‘culture’ came to replace ‘the spirit’ (Geist, as in the word for the humanities, Geisteswissenschaften). At the same time the reformulation as Kulturwissenschaften seemed again to suggest an attempt to integrate and the construction of a ‘unity’, just like the idea of Geisteswissenschaften (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 11). The report considered developments tending to reduce the Geisteswissenschaften to one integrated Kulturwissenschaft (in the singular and not plural) to be especially problematic. In spite of some critical remarks about the concept, the paper underlines the important consequences the debate has had for interdisciplinary co-operation.

According to the Wissenschaftsrat new questions, problem fields and methods have led to a growing diversification in all research fields, including the humanities and social sciences. Alongside the positive aspects of this specialisation and differentiation, though, both interdisciplinary and disciplinary communication have become more difficult (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 65).

The report comes back several times to the question of how interdisciplinary work relates to communication within the disciplines. A differentiation inside the disciplines and at the same time a diminished communication between these different fields might endanger the ‘continuity of a discipline’ (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 66). This can be regarded as problematic, especially concerning the situation of the next generation of researchers. A possible answer to the process of diversification was formulated with the concept of Kulturwissenschaften or cultural studies.

This debate on the reform of the German humanities has had a considerable effect on the development of the humanities in the last 15 years, especially interdisciplinary co-operation. Regarding the question of interdisciplinarity in the humanities, the report identifies some clear successes in establishing interdisciplinary co-operation. Structures for interdisciplinary co-operation have been set up to address such themes as memory, knowledge, institutions, the media, and symbolic communication (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 67). This research has often been carried out in Collaborative Research Centres funded by the DFG. Therefore, the Wissenschaftsrat considers the debate about Kulturwissenchaften to have been fruitful for interdisciplinary work in the humanities.

The visibility of the humanities has been strengthened by these interdisciplinary activities, as the cooperative research programmes resulted for example in many more public conferences as big research entities are more ‘visible’. The conferences have mostly been documented in series of publications or edited volumes which, as the Wissenschaftsrat criticises, do not receive much attention in the respective disciplinary communities. Consequently, they fear that instead of integrating the fragmented disciplines, which was one intention of the concept of Kulturwissenschaften, it might fragment the humanities even more.

2.5.2 The importance of the humanities: different political views on their function

Of course, both the press release of the (former) government coalition and that of the (former) opposition underline the importance of the disciplinary fields of the social sciences and humanities. But while the SPD and Bündnis 90/Die Grünen stress the

19

importance of these disciplines in resolving current social problems, the CDU/CSU refers to the national tradition of the humanities and their relevance for an international German cultural policy. Thus we can note a striking difference: the press release of the SPD states that the social sciences and humanities can make a significant contribution to meeting the social challenges posed by globalisation. They underline especially the need to strengthen research on women and gender, on peace and conflict, on migration and integration, and on higher education. Bündnis 90/Die Grünen consider these disciplinary fields important, defining the role of the humanities and social sciences as a ‘seismograph’ of social developments as they are an instrument for the self-understanding of society. Like the SPD, they see the social sciences and humanities as necessary to cope with questions concerning the future of society.

The argument of the opposition differs noticeably from the rather similar positions of SPD and Greens. Their press release underlines the notion of national tradition, seeing Germany as the ‚’classical’ country of the humanities and stressing the importance of the humanities for ‘auswärtige Kulturpolitik’ or ‘international cultural policy’. (However, the press release of Bündnis 90/Die Grünen also points to the potential of Germany as a ‘Kultur- und Bildungsnation’ or ‘nation of culture and learning’.)The differences between the (former) government and the (former) opposition seem to suggest differing concepts of these disciplinary fields, which may influence future research policies.

The Wissenschaftsrat defines the task of the humanities in the future as follows: ‘The future of the humanities can be seen in research which works in a methodologically conscious way, arguing with historical precision, communicating this to society and at the same time helping to constitute society.’9 (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 12)

2.5.3 Proposed strategies to strengthen the social sciences and humanities: (inter)disciplinarity and recommended changes

In the hearing, all three parties underlined the need to work in an interdisciplinary way. The SPD press release called for more networking between the different disciplines, an enforcement of interdisciplinary co-operation with the natural sciences, and a stronger coordination of the small disciplines (SPD-BT-8 www.spdfraktion.de, 11 May 2005). The press release of Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (http.://www.gruene-fraktion.de/cms/presse/dok/68/68405-print.htm) reported that two major targets have been articulated for a research policy regarding the humanities and social sciences :

to maintain small disciplines and degree courses, and to establish Institutes of Advanced Study or ‘research colleges’

(Forschungskollegs).

The press release of the CDU/CSU differs only slightly from the positions of the SPDand Bündnis 90/Die Grünen. Like the SPD, the CDU/CSU underlines the need to

9’Die Zukunft der Geisteswissenschaften liegt im Bereich der Forschung in einer methodologisch bewussten, historisch präzise argumentierenden, gesellschaftlich kommunizierbaren und zugleich die Gesellschaft mitkonstitutierenden Forschung.’

20

work in an interdisciplinary way and to cooperate with different disciplines. Although the reform process initiated by the Bologna process means a challenge to the structures and traditions of these disciplinary fields, according to the CDU/CSU these processes could promote new co-operation between different disciplinary cultures and could prepare graduates better for their professional life.

Departing from the positions described above, the CDU/CSU underlined the need for the social sciences and humanities to increase the professionalisation of students and to intensify the relationship between universities and the economy, so that graduates will be better integrated into a profession after completing their degrees. They argue that the humanities and social sciences need to become more visible in their participation in a public ‘social discourse’. The CDU/CSU demands the following:

continued support for the Humanities Research Centres financed by the DFG after 2007,

a review of the usefulness of introducing Institutes of Advanced Studies or Wissenschaftskollegs (a proposal of the government coalition),

the further development of the Akademienprogramm.

In addition to these political positions, which suggest the introduction of a new form of research programme, the Wissenschaftsrat goes into more detail concerning the question of what sort of funding strategy would meet the specific needs of the humanities.

The Wissenschaftsrat formulates more concrete ideas about interdisciplinarity and relates this to its proposal for the future of the humanities. Related to the changes towards interdisciplinary co-operation (a result also of the debate about Kulturwissenschaften), the Wissenschaftsrat specifies its idea of useful interdisciplinary work as follows: ‘Interdisciplinary work in a narrow sense should have as a starting point a problem which can be fruitfully analysed by different disciplines, which all are able to identify it and work on it from their perspective.’10

(Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 68)Interdisciplinary themes should not be understood as a ‘roof’ under which disciplines interact in a ‘superficial’ way, the Wissenschaftsrat comments critically (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 67). Nor should interdisciplinary work be understood as an ‘orientation of different disciplinary discourses towards one general problem’ (ibid.: 68). Generally, the Wissenschaftsrat considers current communication between interdisciplinary and disciplinary discourses as problematic. Consequently it calls for improved communication within the disciplines to integrate interdisciplinary discussions. Referring to interdisciplinary fields directed towards a cultural studies discourse, it states that these tend to develop their own autonomous research fields which do not connect with the respective disciplinary fields.

Regarding the younger generation of students and future researchers, a further fragmentation of the humanities and an early focus on cultural studies ‘may push the imparting of disciplinary methods into the background’, whereas disciplinary methods

10Interdisziplinäres Arbeiten im engeren Sinne setzt vielmehr ein Problem voraus, das seine wissenschaftliche Fruchtbarkeit dadurch gewinnt, dass es aus der Perspektive unterschiedlicher Disziplinen als Forschungsgegenstand erkannt und bearbeitet werden kann.

21

are considered by the Wissenschaftsrat as the ‘fundament’, on which students ‘can base their further scientific or practical training’ (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 68).

Concluding its section on ‘Disciplinary differentiation and scientific communication’ (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 64-70), the Wissenschaftsrat concentrates on recommendations for communication in the disciplines. They demand of the disciplinary associations (Fachgesellschaften) that they should ‘agree on disciplinary standards’ (Verständigung über disziplinäre Standards) that is, common standards and key competences. Further, they recommend the intensification of self-reflection and communication on research findings in the disciplines through the establishment of journals which integrate the different parts and could connect interdisciplinary and disciplinary research findings.

The Wissenschaftsrat now considers that the disciplinary structures in universities are not necessarily a hindrance for such interdisciplinary research. This represents a change from the views stated in 1994. With regard to favourable research policies, the Wissenschaftsrat recommends funding programmes which promote individual and cooperative forms of research and ideally combine the two (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 88), as both working methods have their special advantages for research in the humanities. The paper points out the specificities of the humanities in this regard (Wissenschaftsrat 2006: 86). The paper suggests as a new programme format Forschungskollegs, similar to Anglo-Saxon ‘Institutes of Advanced Research’, which could combine the advantages of individual and cooperative research.

Concerning the funding of research programmes in the humanities, the Wissenschaftsrat makes three recommendations (2006: 94-96): Research in the humanities should not be primarily measured in terms of its direct social relevance. Even if the humanities are able to and should participate in the discussion of socially relevant questions, this also requires ‘basic research’, which has its ‘own value’ (as in the natural sciences). If research programmes formulate thematic focal points, these should be developed in a dialogue with academe. The most important criteria for selection should remain quality and relevance and not be ‘pressed’ into the form of an abstract research programme. One important task for the humanities is research on and the documentation of the cultural heritage. This could be a field where European co-operation would be very useful. Generally, the paper calls for the opening of the European research programmes to research in the humanities.

Summarising, we can note that the Wissenschaftsrat paid particular attention to the relationship between disciplinarity and interdisciplinarity. Secondly, the advisory board underlined the specific needs and value of the humanities in relation to funding policy for research programmes.

22

3. The Volkswagen Foundation

The Volkswagen Foundation (a nonprofit foundation formed under German private law) plays an important role in the support of the humanities and social sciences in the private research support sector in Germany. In 2004 alone, it provided 21 million euro towards research projects in the areas of the humanities and social sciences. The VW Foundation not only supports the humanities and social sciences, but is a major player in all fields of study. In 2004, it provided a total of 91 million euro for research activities (VW Annual Report 2004).

It is the goal of the VW Foundation to improve the structural requirements and the general framework of the German academic world and to sponsor future academics in Germany and abroad (VW Annual Report 2004). In contrast to the DFG, which still shows a high level of disciplinary organisation, the VW Foundation places considerable emphasis on the overcoming of disciplinary boundaries and the promotion of fringe areas. The principal goal of the VW Foundation is:

to stimulate new interdisciplinary developments, to assist in creating highly-qualified research capacity and to establish new, path-breaking fields of research. The aim is both to identify new and significant areas of investigation, as well as to make contributions toward resolving existing issues. There is a common focus on topics and issues which may otherwise be receiving too little attention from the government or other research funding institutions. It is a further core interest of the VW Foundation not only to concentrate solely on the scientific community and its inner scientific needs and development, but to generate socio-political learning processes combined with application-oriented research and to explore new forms of learning by linking together academia, politics and the public sphere (VW Annual Report 2004: 26-28).

Essentially, the VW Foundation supports basic research. As the mission statement of the Foundation makes clear, interdisciplinarity, internationalism, and practical applications of science are its core distinguishing features. The fact that the VW Foundation, in comparison to the DFG, pays special attention to bringing academic research and practice together is explained primarily by the history of the Foundation. The Foundation was formed in 1961 by the Federal Republic of Germany and the federal state of Lower Saxony under the name Stiftung Volkswagenwerk, with the purpose of establishing an institution to support science and technology in research and higher education and to generate the economic development of the Federal Republic of Germany after World War II. Its financial means are generated by its own capital of 2.3 billion euro (as of December 2004).

3.1 Organisational structure and research initiativesThe Foundation is administered by a managing board which is formed by a board of trustees consisting of fourteen honorary members. Furthermore, a chief executive officer (Generalsekretär) is responsible for the management of the Foundation.

23

The board of trustees is currently chaired by the Minister of Science and Culture of Lower Saxony. Deputy Chairperson is a MP and former Minister of the Federal Government for Education and Research. The fourteen members of the managing board are appointed by the Federal Government and the government of Lower Saxony. The honorary board includes, besides the two ministers, three representatives from the business world and eight professors from German universities: three members from the humanities, and two from the social sciences, one of whom explicitly represents migration research. The membership of the board of trustees is indicative of the focus of the research programmes at the VW Foundation: the Foundation expressly supports the humanities and social sciences. The Foundation follows the principle of focusing on funding initiatives (VW Annual Report 2004: 7). For the development of funding initiatives and programmes, the processing of applications, advising applicants, as well as accompanying projects from start to finish, three divisions are responsible. The Social Sciences and Humanities are both in division II. The research programmes are usually initiated and agreed by the combined interdisciplinary board of trustees of the VW Foundation. In 2006, the funding activities of the Foundation are grouped in the following areas: (1) support of persons and new structures; (2) international focus; (3) thematic impetus; (4) social and cultural challenges. Furthermore, there is a special heading (5) off the beaten track; for extraordinary projects.

3.2 Peer reviewThe VW Foundation is committed to the principles of peer review. In 2004 729 external experts, including 215 from abroad, assisted the Foundation (VW Annual Report 2004: 12). In interdisciplinary programmes, the external experts are usually from different disciplines. The VW Foundation insists on impartiality, and thus excludes as external experts any persons who may be colleagues of applicants working in the same research group or university; nor does it permit the participation of scholars who have themselves submitted applications to the Foundation which are still being processed or have recently been turned down.

3.3 Support for the humanities and social sciences Especially within the bounds of initiatives 1, 2 and 4, programmes are initiated for the support of projects in the fields of the humanities and social sciences; among these, the programmes ‘Knowledge for Tomorrow – Cooperative Research Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa’, ‘Unity amidst Variety? Intellectual Foundations and Requirements for an Enlarged Europe’, ‘Between Europe and the Orient – A Focus on Research and Higher Education in/on Central Asia and the Caucasus’, ‘Key Issues in the Humanities’, ‘Documentation of Endangered Languages’, and in the areas of support for persons and structures, the programmes ‘Focus on the Humanities’, ‘Lichtenberg Professorships’, ‘Research Professorships’, and ‘University of the Future’ (among others). These programmes are coordinated by the research department of the humanities and social sciences (see Appendix 4).

As previously mentioned, it is an important goal of the VW Foundation to support the humanities. This has been done since 1998 through the already-existing programme ’Key Issues in the Humanities’ as well as the programme ‘Focus on Humanities’, which has been launched jointly with the Fritz Thyssen Foundation in 2005. The

24

programme ‘Focus on Humanities’ aims to provide personnel and structural support in the field of the humanities. It offers post-doctoral scholarships to highly qualified young researchers in the humanities (Dilthey Foundation) and finances professorial sabbaticals for up to two years for outstanding researchers who are writing a major academic work (opus magnum). Furthermore, it provides financial assistance for larger conferences, workshops and seminars (humanities and public life) (VW Annual Report 2004: 26-28).

The programme ‘Key Issues in the Humanities’ focuses primarily on disciplines in the fields of the humanities and cultural studies. It targets the interdisciplinarity between the humanities and cultural studies and, on the other hand, the natural sciences. The programme is thematically open and applicants identify project themes. Between 1998 and 2004, 25 applications were accepted and received a total support of 10 million euro.

3.4 Migration studiesSince 2003 the VW Foundation has been dealing with the funding initiative ‘Future Issues of our Societies’ which forms part of the support area ‘Social and Cultural Challenges’, and within this framework explicitly with migration processes as a phenomenon of social change. In one research programme the Foundation is presently sponsoring projects in the second phase in the fields of migration and integration (see Section 4).

Furthermore, the migration theme may sometimes also be included in other research projects which are supported in other programmes - for example, the current initiatives ‘Knowledge for Tomorrow – Cooperative Research Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa’ and ‘European Foreign and Security Policy Studies’. The research and training programme ‘European Foreign and Security Policy Studies’ was launched in 2005 by the Volkswagen Foundation in co-operation with the Compagnia di San Paolo, Turin (Italy) and the Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, Stockholm (Sweden). The aim of this programme is to analyse and debate the preconditions and prospects of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) of the European Union and the European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). The three foundations want to use the programme to strengthen the European dimension in the next generation of intellectual leaders and security experts (Mb 78c/2005: 1).

The programme ‘Knowledge for Tomorrow – Cooperative Research Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa’ started in 2003. It provides a contribution to the development and sustainable reinforcement of research in Sub-Saharan Africa. In the programme, projects are sponsored which are carried out by African scholars and scientists in co-operation with German researchers, providing junior researchers in Africa with an opportunity to enhance their skills and academic qualifications. A special focus of the programme is the development, reinforcement, and extension of academic networks inside Africa, also extending beyond existing language barriers. Currently, there is one workshop in Senegal in preparation on ‘Negotiating Culture in the Context of Globalization’. In this context, internal migration processes in Africa will be a topic (Mb8/ 2005: 1).

25

In the past, the migration theme has been included in the programme ‘How Do We Perceive or Shape Foreign and Native Cultural Identities? Research on Processes of Intercultural Dissociation, Mediation and Identity-Shaping’, which ended in 2002.

26

4. Case study at the programme level“Interdisciplinarity in whatever form is our trademark”.

The focus of this case study is an interdisciplinary research programme in the field of migration, conducted under the auspices of the Volkswagen Foundation. First, a summary of the background to the programme is provided, along with its thematic focus and main features. An overview of the projects financed under the programme is also given. We then proceed to summarise different aspects of the programme which we have used as possible indicators for certain ‘dimensions of interdisciplinarity’ in the research programme.

4.1 History, theme, and aim of the programmeThe ‘Migration and Integration’ research programme developed out of the research initiative ‘Future issues of our society – analysis, advice and communication between academia and practice’. This initiative was launched in 2002 and aimed at examining various aspects of a fundamental change taking place in Europe as experienced by Germany, as well as other countries, at the beginning of the 21st century. In doing so the VW Foundation intended ‘in conjunction with application-oriented pure research, to promote socio-political research processes incorporating science, politics and the general public, and to explore new ways of carrying out such research’ (Mb78b/2003: 1).

In this context, the Migration and Integration programme developed out of the criticism that both society and academia had been very slow to react to the fact that the Federal Republic of Germany is a land of immigrants. The VW Foundation believes this to be reflected in the fact that it was only from the end of the 1990s that there was a gradual acceptance by political elites that ‘international migration and immigration are normal and permanent features of modern society’ (MB78b/2003: 1).

The main idea behind the programme is for migration researchers to conduct their work in interdisciplinary international projects11 in a dialogue with representatives from relevant fields of practice, in order to change public discourse on migration. The network of scientists and practitioners is thus intended to contribute to overcoming the frequently encountered rigid division in migration research between academic research and practice.

The programme was initiated by a trustee of the board of directors of the VW Foundation. He is a professor of modern history in the field of historical migration research. He himself has an interdisciplinary academic background and, in addition to history and politics, also studied social sciences. He participated in the founding of an Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies in the 1990s. In 2001 the VW Foundation funded an endowed professorship for this institute, specifically for the sociology and methodology of intercultural and interdisciplinary migration research. The trustee was involved in developing a draft proposal for the Migration and Integration research programme in conjunction with the institute. A longstanding colleague of his, who is also an expert adviser to the VW Foundation, was also closely

11 The VW Foundation uses the term ‘study groups’ for projects.

27

involved in developing the programme. This colleague is the current director of the interdisciplinary migration research institute and the holder of the VW Foundation’s endowed professorship. In addition to sociology, he also studied philosophy and linguistics.

According to the programme director, the Foundation’s Board of Directors approved the draft programme without difficulty after it had been presented and discussed at an international workshop with participants from various disciplines and fields of experience which had been organized together with the Foundation´s staff. As aresult of the workshop a slightly revised draft was presented to the committee of trustees, which then highlighted certain aspects of the programme before a public call was announced through the press division. This procedure was in keeping with normal practice in the establishment of a research programme by the Foundation, which has a top-down structure.

It is clear that this programme would not have come into being without the personal involvement of those who initiated it. The fact that the programme was developed by a team of migration researchers, who occupy a particular position within the German-speaking migration research community in terms of theories around migration, is obviously also reflected in the call for proposals. Consequently, the form and method of the research is shaped by these theoretical positions just as migration is identified as a central theme by the VW Foundation. A theoretical perspective with a particular emphasis on issues related to integration has been adopted, while more recent theoretical positions seems to be not explicitly catered for in the call for proposals. This fact and the (possible) resulting exclusion of certain research approaches – and research teams – are obvious and they are acknowledged by the programme management. They appear to be acceptable, since other aspects (such as transnationalisation approaches) have been dealt with under the terms of former funding initiatives (e.g. Global Structures and Governance, closed in 2002).

4.2 Programme coordinationThe programme is coordinated by a programme director from the Humanities and Social Sciences Section. The programme director has an interdisciplinary academic background in the social sciences. He received a doctorate in the field of economic theory from a German university. He then worked at that university before moving to the VW Foundation as programme director. He has been promoting research there for several years.

4.3 Previous callsUp to now there have been two calls for proposals under this programme. The first call was in July 2003 and the second in December 2005. The aim of both calls is to initiate projects aimed at investigating the various options open to migrants to take part in the differentiated social structures of society. According to the first call, the most important objective was the investigation of ‘the various options open to migrants for participation in differentiated social structures of society, the impact of migration on the social structures and the processes involving the social integration of migrants’ (Mb78b/2003: 2). Thus migration and integration are understood as processes of social mobility and considered in relation to social transformation. The

28

focus areas put forward in the first call for proposals were: economics, organisation, multilingualism, education, structures of socialisation, and ethnicity (Mv78b/2003: 3). For the second call from December 2005, which is still current, the focus areas in terms of the structural options for integrating migrants are ‘Migration and Organisation’ and ‘Structure and Change of Language’. The focus on language in the second call was a result of the fact that very few interdisciplinary proposals were submitted in response to the first call in this area, so that the Foundation specifically wished to encourage the academic community to initiate interdisciplinary initiatives between social scientists and linguists. In the opinion of the programme director, the lack of co-operation between linguists and social scientists results from the fact that in practice, despite extensive communication, the institutional or disciplinary structures are difficult to break through. The next round of calls for proposals is scheduled for 2008. Then the principle will be that further themes will be identified on the basis of the incoming applications and proposals, and these will be carried over to the next round.

4.4 Funded projectsDuring the first phase of proposals 8 projects were funded in the focus areas of education, the economy, and participation. Most of the projects started in the third quarter of 2005, and some are now in the data collection phase while others are still in the initial phase. All the projects have a particular focus on the ‘receiving society’, and seek to identify the determinants which influence and support the successful integration of migrants and people with a background of migrations. Some of the projects concentrate more on the migration subjects, others more on the institutions, but both elements are present in all the projects. On an institutional level three projects focus on the economy, the labour market, the educational system, the health system, and the police. An overall analysis of the participating projects (see Appendix 5) has shown that social science disciplines are chiefly involved, particularly economics, sociology, psychology, education, and political science. The disciplinary composition of the projects varies considerably. In some projects neighbouring disciplines work together, while in others different disciplines, such as economics, anthropology, and cultural studies are involved. Two projects are monodisciplinary. The methods and methodologies of each of the projects are very different. The projects are mostly either qualitative or quantitative, while in rare cases an attempt is made to combine both qualitative and quantitative methods. Many of the projects have a similar structure, working across different regions, cities, and various migrant groups.

4.5 Financial aid granted7.5 million euros have been made available for research projects in the field of migration research as part of the Migration and Integration programme. In 2004 the sum of five million euros was approved for a total of 8 approved research projects (press release dated 1 December 2004). In the second, current, round of proposals 2-3 projects will be funded for periods of three years, receiving 800,000 euros each.

29

4.6 The main criteria for approving proposalsThe formal criteria for approving applications are those of interdisciplinarity, practice, and internationality. These criteria are, however, sometimes weighted differently by the different members of the expert group. Should one of these three dimensions be distinctly under-represented, then this is dealt with by the group. There are no fixed criteria for the assessment of interdisciplinary co-operation to which the experts involved are required to adhere in terms of the Migration and Integration programme. It is left up to the individual expert which criteria to use for the evaluation ofinterdisciplinarity, or ‘interdisciplinary co-operation’, as it is termed in the call for proposals, in order to approve a particular proposal. For the first call in the Migration and Integration programme the experts agreed that a positive evaluation in the last phase of the application required the nucleus of the study group first to be very clearly identified within one discipline, and then for neighbouring disciplines to be included in answering the research question.

4.7 Composition of the expert groupThe expert group that examines the projects is interdisciplinary and international in its composition for all programmes. In the Migration and Integration programme the expert group consists of a total of 13 individuals from both academia and practice, recruited from Germany as well as from Switzerland, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom. All the experts work within the field of migration research. Most of them have an interdisciplinary background themselves, some between the social sciences and the arts, but mostly in disciplines adjacent to these two areas. The disciplines of sociology, economics, political science, linguistics, medicine, social anthropology, ethnology, and education, as well as social and organisational psychology, are represented. The Foundation tries to ensure some continuity in the group’s composition. If the range of subjects of the disciplines shifts, then the expert group is reconstituted. Thus, it is likely that in the process of the second call in the area of organisation and language, the linguistic component of the expert group will be stronger. In addition, the experts must be changed if one of them decides to submit a proposal. When recruiting expert advisers, the VW Foundation stresses the importance of a broad range of experience, so that both their academic background and their previous field of work are taken into account.

4.8 InterdisciplinarityEven though interdisciplinarity is an essential feature of the Foundation’s research programming, the question of how the VW Foundation defines this term is not answered clearly either in the Foundation’s annual reports or on its homepage. The programme director understands it to be a ‘communication process’ in which ‘theoretical and methodological approaches should be mutually stimulating’. The aspect of interdisciplinarity is taken into consideration when approving a proposal and is also practically implemented, in that workshops are organised regularly in which all the projects funded under the programme must participate. By this means the Foundation seeks specifically to support interdisciplinary co-operation and mutual exchanges between representatives of both practice and academia.

30

However, such ‘interdisciplinary communication’ proved to be extremely difficult during the first workshop held in October 2005. It was not so much the disciplinary backgrounds of the participants that were problematic, but rather their methodological orientation and procedures. The event turned into a competition between ‘qualitative and quantitative migration researchers’, which in the view of those in charge signified the necessity for successful migration research structured on an interdisciplinary basis to combine different methodological approaches. Other workshops are planned for the future on various topics which were identified in the discussion at the first workshop, including interdisciplinary research methods, the use of terminology in interdisciplinary research, assets and liabilities of international comparative research, and theoretical themes and concepts such as, for example, ‘the interplay of cultural and structural aspects of the integration process; diversity and integration’ (Enzinger 2005: 5).

The programme management envisages that the workshops will provide an important opportunity to support interdisciplinary co-operation in the projects. It seems that up to now (as acknowledged critically by management) there have been an increasing number of projects in the programmes whose internal procedures indicate that they are multidisciplinary, or additive, rather than interdisciplinary. The Foundation would like to avoid this, but in the end it is the responsibility of the individual project partners and research teams to make the research interdisciplinary in nature.

4.9 ConclusionThe VW Foundation sees itself as fundamentally interdisciplinary in nature. Interdisciplinarity is required in the project proposals and represents one of the three central criteria for assessment. The Migration and Integration programme may present itself as ‘interdisciplinary’, but a theoretical reflection on what interdisciplinarity is and should be (that is, what exactly is meant by the term) is not apparent.

Nevertheless, an attempt has begun to establish ‘interdisciplinary’ practice within the programmes, both conceptually and methodologically. The initiators of the programme, as well as the director, have an interdisciplinary background and a personal interest in the application of interdisciplinary research practice. The criterion of interdisciplinarity plays a central role both in the composition of the expert groups and in the evaluation of proposals. However, it is legitimate to ask whether ‘interdisciplinarity’ does not in practice mean something closer to ‘multidisciplinarity’. Whether or not this is the case, at least conditions have been created at an institutional level for multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary forms of co-operation in the form of research projects. This represents an attempt to break through traditional disciplinary research structures in Germany by means of the multi/interdisciplinary research programme on migration and integration, and to construct and permanently establish new structures in the field of migration research.

31

5. Case study at the project levelIn order to understand how interdisciplinarity is conceived and practised in research projects, we decided to choose for a case study the project ‘Cultural Capital during Migration: On the relevance of educational qualifications and residence permits for the status passage into the labour market’, which is one of the eight research groups currently being funded under the Volkswagen Foundation's programme ‘Migration and Integration’ (see Section 4).

After an initial analysis of all funded projects (see Section 4.4) we identified this project for our case study because we had good reasons for the hypothesis that the project is in practice interdisciplinary, both in its subject and research design and its research team construction.

In the following presentation we will start with a brief description of the project. We will first look at certain aspects which seem important in order to understand actual interdisciplinarity in research, and then discuss those aspects' influence on the dimensions of interdisciplinarity which we discovered and discuss in the next section (see Section 6). Our analysis is primarily based on the analysis of the interviews we conducted with the project coordinators and researchers (see Appendix 3: Overview of the interviews). Furthermore, we have analysed other source material like the project proposal and official documents and web sites (see Section 1 on the methods applied in the analysis of the material).

5.1 Constitution process of the project The constitution process of the research group started in the autumn semester 2003, after the Volkswagen Foundation's call for applications was published on the internet and in a German newspaper called Die Zeit. The work on the project grew out of the interest of an existing group of young academics in Germany who had previously worked together at the universities of Berlin. These young academics were a professor of sociology, and two assistant professors in sociology and educational sciences. They had the first ideas for a research project on the integration of highly qualified migrants into the labour market, and contributed with their individual theoretical and empirical research interests and their areas of specialisation. They also asked a professor of political science in Canada to collaborate with them in preparing an application to the Volkswagen Foundation.They also involved two other co-operation partners, a lecturer in psychology from a university in the UK and a sociologist from a research institute in Turkey. They had all worked in close collaboration in different research contexts before starting this new co-operation in a study group. The project partners pointed out in the interviews that the co-operation has been very successful from the beginning. One reason for this successful co-operation was that they had all worked together before in different research and working groups at the Free University of Berlin, and they also integrated their own research interests without encroaching upon the others' areas of specialisation. However, the two-stage application procedure of the Volkswagen Foundation itself was very difficult. The participating persons worked in different institutions in different countries. Therefore, they communicated primarily by e-mail and telephone conferences. In the first part of the application procedure, the research

32

team produced a outline of an application report for funding and submitted it in December 2003 to the Foundation. After a waiting period of six months, the Foundation informed the research group that they had passed the first selection round successfully. The research team therefore continued with their work and prepared a detailed application, which they presented in the next selection round. The presentation and the full application were evaluated by an international interdisciplinary review committee. This review used criteria which included the academic potential and originality of the project as well as the qualifications of the applicants, the aspect of interdisciplinarity, and international co-operation. The relevance of the project for policymaking and the relevant contacts with practitioners were also assessed. In relation to the evaluation in the Foundation, it became clear from the interviews that interdisciplinarity was not an immediate focus at the hearing during the second phase of applications. Nevertheless, in the view of the project partners an interdisciplinary alignment was clear, because the expert advisers had different disciplinary backgrounds and answered the questions posed to them in very different ways. Some time after the hearing the Volkswagen Foundation announced that they would support the research group with a grant of 650,000 euros over three years. Thus the research project come into being officially in the spring of 2005, and is currently in its first stage.

5.2 Subject of the projectThe aim of the project is to study the integration of highly qualified migrants into the labour market and examine how migrants make use of their cultural capital during their entry into the labour market. The research questions will be answered by a empirical study. The project is structured in such a way that the research operates on three levels. On the micro level, narrative interviews and group discussions are solicited to reconstruct the experiences of the migrants. On the intermediary level, forms of symbolic exclusion in social contexts (e.g. discrimination, racism etc.) are examined. Finally, the macro-structural level involves an investigation of the systems and legal conditions in place in the relevant national contexts in order to recruit migrants and to help them in the process of integration. To join these three levels on a practical level the research is conducted on an interdisciplinary basis. The main subject of the project remains the transversal hybrid discipline of Migration Studies (Apitzsch 2005), but it also extends into the traditional disciplines of sociology, political science, educational science, and psychology.

5.3 Theoretical conceptualisationThe theoretical conceptualisation of the subject of the project is based on concepts from praxeology and cultural sociology, especially the works of Pierre Bourdieu and Karl Mannheim. The integration of migrants into the labour market is theoretically conceptualised in the project as a multi-dimensional status passage: (1) as an entry into the labour force, i.e. as a change in status of the educational and professional accomplishments, with its imminent social risks and need for re-orientation; (2) as aprocess of migration, i.e. as a change in status because of a transition between nation states with their specific education systems and labour markets (proposal 2005: 2, 10). The study takes up ideas from German and international education and life history research, in which status passages are a central topic. This research tradition dealing with status passages has hitherto been primarily quantitatively oriented, and has paid

33

very little attention to the question of migration. The study group extends this tradition by investigating the entry of migrants into the labour market and by adopting a qualitative research perspective. It also examines the structural and contextual conditions required for a status transition and the orientations and coping strategies of the immigrants (proposal 2005: 10).

5.4 Empirical studyThe research design of the empirical study is characterised by a methodological strategy which combines a variety of approaches to qualitative research, in order to investigate individual and collective status passages as micro and meso phenomena as well as their macro-social contexts. In general, the project is following a qualitative-empirical research tradition which pays particular attention to respond to the standards of quantitative methods.

5.4.1 Status groups

In order to avoid a sampling which focuses on specific national and ethnic groups, a sampling strategy is applied which focuses on different status groups with respect to the level of their educational qualifications and their residence status. As mentioned above, the project focuses on highly qualified migrants who have a legal residence status that makes them formally equal to the indigenous population in the labour market. The project distinguishes between the following groups and subgroups, which will be taken into account in the empirical study (proposal 2005: 4):

Bildungsinländer, i.e the group of indigenously trained persons whose last educational qualification was acquired after migration:Bildungsausländer, i.e the group of foreign-trained persons whose last educational qualification was acquired before migrating.

Furthermore, as contrastive status groups, the following groups who differ with respect to their educational qualifications are examined:

Mittelqualifizierte BildungsinländerInnen, i.e moderately qualified Bildungsinländer Hochqualifizierte Bildungsausländerin mit nachrangigen Aufenthaltstiteln, i.e highly qualified Bildungsausländer with a lower status in terms of the residence permit regulating their access to the labour market (proposal 2005: 4).

5.4.2 Country comparison

‘In order to shed light on the mutual effects of educational and legal titles in the status passages of migrants in Germany and to sketch out alternatives to the current situation’, a country comparison between Germany, Canada, Great Britain and Turkey is included in the research design (proposal 2005: 5). For purposes of comparison with the German case the research group decided to take Canada as a contrastive case, because ‘Canada actively seeks to attract highly qualified migrants and can thus be seen as an appropriate comparative case study for the group of highly qualified Bildungsinländer and Bildungsausländer, who have access to the labour market’ (proposal 2005: 5). In addition to Canada, another contrastive case for the country comparison is Turkey. In Turkey the government migration policy is a relatively new phenomenon. Thus, there exists a lower degree of control for highly qualified

34

migrants with a subordinate legal status and a transition into the labour market that is more informal (Nohl et al. 2005: 18). In this respect, the case of Turkey as an EU candidate country is interesting as a contrast case to Germany for the status group of highly qualified migrants with a subordinate legal status. Furthermore, the UK is interesting as another comparative case within the EU because it has adopted a less exclusionary naturalisation policy and developed distinct anti-discrimination policies with regard to the large group of moderately qualified migrants. The country comparison is designed to shed light on the multiplicity of meso and macro social, national and also urban contexts regarding their effects on the status passage into the labour market. Furthermore, the country comparison may provide inputs for practical suggestions, at the level of labour market policies, for the associated project council which accompanies the research group. In this council are actors from the area of labour market policies, representatives of non-governmental organisations active in the field of labour market integration, representatives of interest groups, migrant organisations, and politicians at the national and European levels (proposal 2005: 5)

5.4.3 The sampling strategy

The process of data collection and comparison in the research group follows the strategy of ´Theoretical Sampling` developed by Glaser and Straus (1967) in their concept of Grounded Theory (see Table 7). The research project focuses on highly qualified migrants and compares four status groups following the principle of 'contrast in commonality' (Kontrast in der Gemeinsamkeit) (Bohnsack 2003: 143). The status groups will be selected with regard to the level of the educational qualifications and time and place of the acquisition of the entitlement to residence.

5.4.4 Data collection methods

As with any research, the choice about what method to use for collecting and analysing data was influenced by the theoretical and conceptual issues. In order to investigate the individual and collective action practices and coping strategies of migrants during their integration into the labour market, the research group uses narrative interviews (following the concept of Fritz Schütze 1977, 1983) and group discussions (following the concept of Ralf Bohnsack 2001, 2003) as methods for collecting data. In addition, narrative interviews and semi-structured expert interviews are in use at the meso level. The qualitative data material is supplemented by additional statistics and literature for the macro-social contexts analysis.

35

Table 7: Overview of the data collection in the empirical study 12

Dimensions of individual and collective status passages

Empirical data

value of the educational qualifications

access to the labour market

where the qualific-ation was obtained

highly qualified

equal Bildungsin-länder

20 narrative interviews (NI) and 4 group discussions (GD) in Germany15 NIs and 3 GDs in Canada

middlequalified

equal Bildungsin-länder

20 NIs and 4 GDs in Germany15 NIs and 3 GDs in UK

highglyqualified

equal Bildungs-ausländer

20 NIs and 4 GDs in Germany15 NIs and 3 GDs in Canada

highlyqualified

of lower status

Bildungs-ausländer

20 NIs and 4 GDs in Germany15 NIs and 3 GDs in der Turkey

meso and macro social contexts of status passages

20 expert interviews (EIs) in Germany, 15 EIs in Canada, 10 EIs in UK, 8 EIs in TurkeySecondary assessment of the NIs and GDsDocuments of the labour market, migration policy, institutional regulations etc.statistics and studies

5.4.5 Data analysis strategies

The empirical data will be analysed in a way that will allow the identification of the significance of educational qualifications and the right of residence, in terms of generalisable and typified features across the different national cases and in terms of the gender-specific characteristics of status passages (proposal 2005: 5). Thus, the research group is following different interpretation strategies. For the interpretation of the expert interviews an interpretation strategy developed by Meuser and Nagel (1991) is used, which focuses on the detailed analysis of the content of the expert knowledge. For the interpretation of the narrative interviews and the group discussions, the research group is following the ‘documentary method’ strategy13

(Bohnsack 2000, 2003, Nohl 2005), which is the dominant approach in the research project. The documentary method is a methodologically controlled interpretation procedure which follows the tradition of Karl Mannheim's sociology of knowledge, but it has also been influenced in some respects by ethnomethodology and the Chicago School. It aims to reconstruct the explicit and implicit knowledge of the actors in the fields which frame and structure their action (Bohnsack 2001, 2003). The interpretation procedure of the documentary method proceeds via the analysis of individual cases and case comparisons. Thus, through case comparisons the method

12 Adapted from proposal 2005: 21.13 For how to proceed in detail in analysing the narrative interviews and group discussions using the documentary method, see Bohnsack et al. 2001, Bohnsack 2003, Nohl 2005.

36

makes it possible to reconstruct cross-case dimensions in the status passages, which will be integrated to establish a typology.14

It should be mentioned at this point that the documentary method is one of several schools and types of qualitative research, and has established itself as a methodologically well-founded research approach in the German social science community in recent years.15 It was developed by the sociologist Ralf Bohnsack, who made an important contribution to the elaboration of qualitative-reconstructive methodology. The method is used not only in sociological research but also in different disciplines for the interpretation of group discussions, interviews, different sorts of conversations, videographics, pictures and photos (Bohnsack 2003).

5.5 Organisation of the research group and communication processThe research group is coordinated by a directorate of four coordinators. The four leading coordinators have their own subprojects and research teams. The leading team is working together with two co-operation research partner teams in Turkey and the UK. In sub-projects the co-operation teams will investigate every status group in one country of comparison, i.e. Canada, the UK, and Turkey. To ensure close co-operation in the research group, two coordinators are working together as the interdisciplinary team responsible for certain research topics. The research groups started their (sub)projects in spring 2005. Currently (December 2005) there are approximately 20 researchers and research assistants involved, working in part-time positions. In addition, the coordinators are planning to give (post)doctoral students the possibility to participate as associated members in the research projects. The communication and interaction situation in the first stage of the project is marked by the fact that the research groups have to organize their collaboration across different localities. The communication between the coordinators and sub-teams mostly relies on e-mail and telephone conferences. The opportunities for face-to-face communication are restricted to meetings, workshops and conferences. Discussions during (team) meetings, and also in everyday communication via e-mail, play an important role for the research activities and the interpretation of the data because the research design requires permanent comparative analysis of the data. The research teams communicate regularly, sometimes every day, usually in German. Inevitably, as in every project, there are sometimes differences of opinion about working arrangements and substantive issues. However, in general the coordinators consider that the communication process functions very well.

5.6 Academic and (inter) disciplinary backgrounds of the coordinatorsAll the coordinators of the research project and most of the researchers are social scientists. Of the three coordinators in Germany, the two female coordinators position themselves as a sociologist and an educational scientist. The coordinator in Canada positions himself in the area where political sociology and political science overlap. It

14

According the methodological position of the documentary method, the typology formation process, thus proceeds in principle by comparing different cases.15

For those who are interested in the different types of qualitative research procedures in the German context, we recommend as an introduction Apitzsch 2004, Apitzsch and Inowlocki 2000, Kraimer 2000.

37

is obvious, as we mentioned above, that the dominant disciplines in the research group are social science disciplines. However, the humanities are also represented, even if only in the career backgrounds of the coordinators and researchers. The coordinators have interdisciplinary career backgrounds and working experience in different interdisciplinary research contexts at universities as well as in research institutes. Furthermore, all of them had coordinated their own research projects before being involved in this research group.

5.6.1 Portraits of the coordinators

Coordinator 1 is a professor of sociology at a Western German University with a focus on empirical research, hermeneutics, and statistics. Her areas of research include sociology of youth, qualitative research on human development, migration studies, and gender studies. In addition to the Volkswagen Foundation research group, she is coordinating an interdisciplinary research network on biographical research on human development. After graduating in sociology from the Free University of Berlin in 1987, she worked as a researcher at a federal institute for vocational education and training She received her PhD in cultural sociology and anthropology from the Free University of Berlin in 1994, and then coordinated a research group at a social pedagogical institute. Furthermore, she participated in two European research projects on youth research and human development research. From 1998 to 2002 she coordinated a research project about the labour market integration of young female migrants at the Free University of Berlin, which was funded by the German Research Community (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG). In this research context, she presented her Habilitation (postdoctoral) thesis (2002) at the Humboldt University of Berlin.

Coordinator 2 is currently working as a lecturer and researcher at the Institute for Sociology at a Southern German University. She also identifies herself as a sociologist. Her areas of research include sociology of social inequality, transnationalisation, migration, and ethnicity. However, she is originally a psychologist, who continued her studies in theoretical sociology and qualitative methods and holds degrees in both disciplines. She received her first degree in psychology from the University of Munich in 1992. After graduating in psychology, she continued her postgraduate studies in qualitative methods at the Free University of Berlin and worked in an interdisciplinary research institute for political science in the area of peace studies. She completed her empirical PhD in sociology in 2001 at the Humboldt University of Berlin, and then worked as researcher in an interdisciplinary research centre on Reflexive Modernisation at the University of the Federal Armed Forces Munich. From 2002 to 2005 she coordinated a DFG-funded research project on highly qualified migrants, which is her Habilitation project.

Coordinator 3 is a junior professor of intercultural education at the Faculty of Educational Sciences at one of the Universities of Berlin. His areas of research include intercultural education, migration and youth studies, and the methodology and practice of qualitative-reconstructive research. He studied educational science, psychology, and Islamic science in Germany and Turkey. After his graduation in 1995, he continued his PhD studies at an interdisciplinary DFG graduate school at the Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg. After that, he was a researcher and

38

lecturer at the working group on Qualitative Research on Human Development at the Free University of Berlin, where he received his PhD in 2000, with a PhD project on migration and experiences of difference. From 2001 to 2004 he was assistant professor at the Institute of Educational Science at the Otto von Guericke University, Magdeburg, where he received his Habilitation qualification with an empirical study on Bildung and Spontaneity in different life phases.

Coordinator 4 is an associate professor in the departments of political science and history at a university in Canada. His research interests include: political sociology, comparative politics, EU politics. He studied sociology, political science, economics, and philosophy. He received his first degree in political science from the University of Marburg in 1991 and his PhD from the European University Institute in Florence (Italy) in 1995. He then coordinated a research project on Symbolic Exclusion at the Humboldt University in Berlin, where he was an assistant professor until 1998. He then went as a DAAD German and European Studies lecturer to the University of Victoria in Canada, where he is currently acting director of an interdisciplinary programme focusing on the study of European integration and is responsible for several research projects in the areas of Migration Studies, European Integration, and Politics. In addition to this research project on the integration of migrants into the labour market, he is coordinator of another project on the topic of multicultural policies in the field of health care, which is financed by the same programme of the Volkswagen Foundation.

5.6.2 Co-operation partners

The co-operation partner in the United Kingdom is a lecturer in communication psychology and cognitive behaviour therapist. She holds a BSc in psychology, an MSc in clinical psychology from the Department of Psychology at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece, and a PhD in psychology from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. She has worked in several research projects. Her areas of research are mental health, social care, and cross-national research. The co-operation partner in Turkey is a sociologist. She studied sociology, Arab studies, turcology, philosophy, and ethnology and is currently working at a research institute in Istanbul.

5.7 InterdisciplinarityInterdisciplinarity is required both in the academic backgrounds of the research team and in the structure of the project, where interdisciplinarity is set out in the research design. Relying on the statements from the interviews available to us, it appears that in the ongoing project interdisciplinarity is characterised and understood as a communication process, where each discipline brings its advantages and strengths to the project, in order to specify the subject under investigation and to develop, on the basis of individual disciplinary specialisations, new research strategies and common findings. The coordinators follow this definition in their communication process in the project. They are following a research logic where the separate results from the different disciplines are not put together for the first time during the final phase; rather, there is an ongoing and intense process of analysis and co-operation during the period of the investigation. The intense discussions in the study groups did not only happen after the project officially started, but were already part of the proposal phase

39

from 2003-2005 when the research problems were discussed from various perspectives. This proposal phase was regarded as transdisciplinary by one of the participating partners in the project. All the partners mentioned that the research group meetings are a significant and influential forum for communication between disciplines, but everyday communication by e-mail and telephone is also important.

All participants in the project stressed that the interdisciplinary co-operation in the research group was extremely productive and turned out to be very successful, given the difficult conditions of interdisciplinary research, in contrast to previous experiences in other contexts of similar research. In terms of the evaluation of successful interdisciplinary co-operation, all participants provided similar statements. It was stressed that the successful co-operation between the different disciplines was a result, in particular, of a generally comprehensive theoretical and methodological approach, since the project is strongly tied to socio-cultural and praxis-related theoretical concepts (in particular those of Pierre Bourdieu and Karl Mannheim) and has a primarily qualitative structure, even though quantitative data are also used. These areas of common interest are defined as areas where a common transversal methodological approach is used rather than a common disciplinary approach.

The fact that all the coordinators involved in the project had known each other for a long time and had already worked together in different networks was perceived as an equally important factor, and one which had a positive influence on the success of the co-operation and the interdisciplinary setting. Other conditions were also mentioned as being significant. These include, besides the interdisciplinary backgrounds of the participants and their wide experience in relation to interdisciplinary research, a generally shared understanding of both research and academia. An equally important aspect is the dimension of taking the necessary time, which is essential for sustained and intense co-operation and a mutual understanding of the different approaches.

The researchers' understandings and experiences of interdisciplinarity emerged from the work on the ongoing project, and also from previous experiences in interdisciplinary research collaboration. They all have working experience in other interdisciplinary settings in research and teaching, and their academic backgrounds are interdisciplinary. In general, the coordinators viewed their individual experiences in interdisciplinary co-operation as a challenge and estimated them as fruitful for their own work. The interdisciplinary experiences inspired them to enrich their own disciplinary viewpoints and to establish a critical self-reflexivity about the borders of the own discipline. There was also considerable agreement among the coordinators that the interdisciplinary approach in general is difficult, because it is a more complex approach than research and teaching in a mono-disciplinary setting. It is institutionally difficult to realise, both because of the traditional disciplinary structure of universities and because it challenges supposed authorities in a disciplinary field. Consequently, disadvantages can arise from interdisciplinary career backgrounds and positioning in qualitative interdisciplinary working groups. The female sociologists involved in the project considered that for young researchers at the beginning of their academic career an interdisciplinary background can trigger exclusion mechanisms in the traditional disciplinary subject-specific cultures, especially in the field of sociological migration research where the mainstream works quantitatively in a traditional disciplinary manner.

40

5.8 Conclusion

In the project, different disciplinary perspectives were communicated, reflected, and integrated in the research design. One reason for the successful co-operation between the disciplines was the comprehensive theoretical and methodological approach. The theoretical concepts, as well as the methods employed, are not disciplinary in themselves and can be used in different (inter)disciplinary fields. The research design integrates different qualitative-methodological research approaches, which is a response to the challenges arising from the integrative interdisciplinary approach.

In the research project, one can identify a communication process which crosses disciplinary boundaries and can be described as successful interdisciplinary co-operation between individual researchers. In the context of this ongoing research, the conduct of interdisciplinary research seems to be easier than in other interdisciplinary programmes (e.g. collaborative research centres) because of the relatively small size of the group and the individual motivation of the researchers. The fact that the researchers involved have worked together in different networks in recent years and know each other very well influences the research process in a positive manner. It is obvious that productive interdisciplinary research co-operation in the team is possible because all team members take the time and make the effort to discuss and reach a consensus on their ideas regarding scientific standards, methods, and results. At the same time the coordinators have their own areas of specialisation in their disciplinary fields, without encroaching on the others’ authority in their areas of expertise.

Another important factor which influences interdisciplinary co-operation as a whole is the fact that all the coordinators have interdisciplinary academic career backgrounds and a good deal of experience with interdisciplinary research co-operation. They have worked in different interdisciplinary research projects at different universities and research institutes throughout their academic careers and studied different disciplines. Interdisciplinary work is for the coordinators not a ‘one-off temporary exception in the current project’, but a ‘normal condition’ of their academic biographies.

41

6. Conclusion: Interdisciplinarity, research policies and practices

1. Third-party research funding income in the social sciences and humanities has, in general, increased in recent years. At the same time, funding for coordinated interdisciplinary programmes has increased in both the national and the private funding sectors. Grants for coordinated interdisciplinary and/or cross-disciplinary programmes doubled between 1990 and 2003. Thus, interdisciplinarity is obviously formally required and present as a trend in the research funding landscape. However, this has happened more for pragmatic than for programmatic reasons. The small disciplines in particular are often involved in coordinated programmes for capacity reasons in order to increase the chances that the project will be funded and because they are under increasing economic pressure. Even if interdisciplinarity is formally present in the programmes, this does not necessarily mean that it is always realised in research practice.

2. A new tendency which can be observed in research policy is an articulation of the specific problems of the humanities. They have been supported through explicit measures and thematically open (not necessarily interdisciplinary-orientated) programmes funded by both the national research foundation and the private foundations. At the same time the demand for praxis-oriented research or applicability is increasingly being addressed to the social sciences, especially by the private funding sector.

3. In general, there is a tendency at the policy level to strengthen interdisciplinarity, especially in the form of co-operation between the social sciences and the humanities on the one hand and the natural sciences on the other, but not between the social sciences and the humanities. Interdisciplinarity between the social sciences and the humanities is not explicitly required at the policy level.

4. The structural conditions needed to support interdisciplinary research in the field of migration studies have been established primarily in the private research sector.

5. It seems that there is an obvious emphasis at the policy level on support for praxis-oriented interdisciplinary co-operation between social science disciplines, but not on forms which emphasise interdisciplinary co-operation between the humanities and social sciences in the interdisciplinary field of migration.

6. An interdisciplinary orientation at the programme-policy level can affect interdisciplinary research practice in migration studies in different ways, but it seems that it has no significant impact on the way interdisciplinarity is put into practice at the project level.

42

7. Our analysis shows that under the conditions of the interdisciplinary ‘Migration and Integration’ programme, cross-disciplinary research at the project level is conceptualised and practised in different ways: as mono-disciplinary research as well as multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary work.

8. At the programme level, different forms of cross-disciplinary research processes (multidisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity) are covered by the label ‘interdisciplinary approach’. The ‘interdisciplinary approach’ can be seen as moving between the constitution of ‘transversal’ (cross-cutting) subdisciplines and the creation of a new ‘hybrid’ discipline of migration studies.

9. Interdisciplinarity is a permanent communication and transformation process,and is indispensable for effective praxis-oriented migration research.

10. Successful interdisciplinary co-operation at the project level depends on a generally comprehensive theoretical and methodological approach, but is also affected by different ‘social’ factors which influence the cross-disciplinary communication process in a positive manner.

11. Researchers must have learned how to work in an interdisciplinary way inorder to be able to meet the interdisciplinary challenges that arise in research projects, and to do genuinely interdisciplinary migration research.

43

Appendix 1 Questionnaire I (Questions to Programme Directors)

1. Schwerpunkt: Forschungsförderung der SW und GW in der Volkswagenstiftung

Wie sehen Sie momentan die Forschungssituation in den Geistes- und Sozialwissenschaften in der BRD? /- Muss in der Forschungspolitik auf den Aspekt der Interdisziplinarität zwischen den Geistes und Sozialwissenschaften eingegangen werden? Wie wird dies momentan in der Volkswagenstiftung diskutiert?

2. Schwerpunkt: Migrationsforschung und Interdisziplinarität Können Sie bitte die „Entstehungsgeschichte“ der Forschungsinitiative

„Zukunftsfragen der Gesellschaft- Analyse, Beratung und Kommunikation zwischen Wissenschaft und Praxis“ erzählen? Wie ist es dazu gekommen, dass die VW Stiftung in diesem Zusammenhang das Programm „Migration und Integration“ initiiert hat?

Gibt es neben dieser Forschungsinitiative auch andere Initiativen, die sich mit dem Themenbereich „Migration“ beschäftigen?

Im Rahmen der Initiative „Zukunftsfragen der Gesellschaft“ werden unter dem call „Migration und Integration“ Studiengruppen gefördert. Wie wichtig ist für die Bewilligung der Studiengruppen (anträge) der Aspekt der Interdisziplinarität?

Wie schätzen Sie die Möglichkeiten der Realisierung von interdisziplinärer Kooperationen/ Programmen ein, die (im Schwerpunkt Migration) sowohl die Geistes- als auch die Sozialwissenschaften integrieren?

Wie ist der Bewilligungsausschuss/ Gutachterkreis für die Förderung der Projekte im Rahmen der Forschungsinitiative „Zukunftsfragen der Gesellschaft-...“zusammengesetzt (insb. für die Ausschreibung Studiengruppen „Migration und Integration“)?

Welche verschiedenen Disziplinen sind vertreten? Welche Rolle spielen externe GutachterInnen? Wie sind die Entscheidungskompetenzen gelagert?

Wie entscheidend ist der Aspekt der Interdisziplinarität bei der Antragsbewilligung?

Unterscheidet sich dessen Relevanz bei den verschiedenen Programmen? Welche Kriterien muss interdisziplinäre Forschung bei der Bewilligung bzw. Begutachtung erfüllen?

44

Appendix 2Questionnaire II (Questions to Project Coordinators)

1. Eingangsfrage: Entstehungsgeschichte und Zusammensetzung des Forschungsteams

Können Sie mir bitte die Entstehungsgeschichte des Projekts erzählen?

Weitere externe Nachfragen: Wie haben Sie das Forschungskonzept entwickelt und wie kam die

Zusammensetzung des (Leitungs-)Teams zustande? Welche Disziplinen sind in ihrer Forschungsgruppe vertreten und welche

Disziplin repräsentieren Sie? Wie würden Sie sich selbst disziplinär verorten? Welche Studiengänge haben Sie studiert und an welchen Fakultäten haben Sie

ihre Abschlüsse erlangt?

2. Interdisziplinarität Wie würden Sie Interdisziplinarität definieren? Was macht das Interdisziplinäre in ihrer Studiengruppe aus? Gibt es

interdisziplinäre Diskussionszusammenhänge? Gibt es gemeinsame Bezugspunkte? (theoretische und methodische Ansätze?)

Haben Sie bisher außer in der Studiengruppe auch in anderen interdisziplinären Zusammenhängen gearbeitet? Welche Vorteile und welche Schwierigkeiten sehen Sie beim interdisziplinären Arbeiten? Wie würden Sie ihre bisherigen Erfahrungen in der Studiengruppe bewerten?

Im Zusammenhang mit der Antragsstellung/Anhörung bei der Volkswagenstiftung: Hatten Sie den Eindruck, dass der Aspekt der Interdisziplinarität bei der Bewilligung des Antrages besonders wichtig war?

3. Methoden Welche Methoden kommen in ihrem Projekt zum Einsatz? Wie würden Sie

sich (und ihre Kollegen) methodisch verorten?

45

Appendix 3Overview data collection

Policy level 2 expert interviews

Programme level 1 interview with the programme director2 interviews with administration-staff1 interview with a Professor of Sociology with focus on Migration Studies who applied in the Migration and Integration Programme

Project level 5 interviews with the coordinators 1 interview with a researcher 1 group discussion at the Faculty of Social Sciences, at the J.W. GoetheUniversity of Frankfurt am Main in the presence of a project coordinator

Appendix 4

Overview research initiatives at the Volkswagen foundation16

1. ‘Support of persons and new structures’

Lichtenberg professorships* Focus on the Humanities University of the future* Symposia and summer schools

2. ‘International focus’

Knowledge of Tomorrow: Cooperative Research Projects in Sub-Saharan Africa*

Between Europe and the Oorient – A Focus on Research and Higher Education in/on Central Asia and the Caucascus*

Unity admist Variety? Intellectual Foundations and Requirement for an Enlarged Europe*

Documentation of Endangered Languages*

3. ‘Thematic impetus’

16 Source: <http://www.volkswagenstiftung.de>

46

Innovative Methods for Manufacturing of Multifunctional Surfaces New Conceptual Approaches to Modelling and Simulating of Complex

Systems(Complex Networks as a Phenomenon across Disciplines) Interplay between Molecular Formations and Biological Function Evolutionary Biology

4. ‘Social and cultural challenges’

Future Issues of our Society- Analysis, Advice and Communication between Academia and Practice*

Innovation Processes in the Economy and Society* Key Issues on the Humanities (Programme for the promotion of

interdisciplinary and international co-operation)*

5. ‘Off the beaten track - extraordinary projects’

Research projects which do not fit in the ongoing thematic initiatives currently supported by the Volkswagen foundation (exceptional cases)

*= initiatives and programmes which are coordinated in the division of Humanities and Social Sciences.

47

Appendix 5Overview funded projects17

Project 1 TitleIndividual efforts for integration and social integration preconditions of foreign adolescents in Germany

Research Team 4 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. Department of Pedagogy and Psychology at one of the universities of Berlin2. Institute of Psychology at a university in Switzerland3. Department of Educational Planning and Evaluation/ Education Directorate of a canton in Switzerland4. Department of Psychology at a university in Switzerland

Disciplines Psychology

Methods Quantitative Methods

17 Source: http://www. volkswagen-stiftung.de/presse-news/presse04/01122004.pdf, http://www.idw-online.de/pages/de/news92722, <http:www.migration-integration.de/groups_e.php>24.1.2006.

48

Project 2 The integration of the European second generation (TIES). Best practice in eight cities in five countries

Research Team 12 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsResearch Institutes

1. Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies in the Netherlands2. Interdisciplinary Demo-graphic Institute in the Netherlands3. Institute for Migration Research and Intercultural Studies in Germany4. X Forum for Population Studies, at a university in Switzerland5. Academy of Sciences for European Integration in Austria6. Faculty of Social and BehaviouralSciences at a university in the Netherlands7. Department of Sociology at a Catholic university in Belgium8. A national demographic institute in France9. A university institute of Migration Studies in Spain10. Centre for Research in Internal Migration and Ethnic Relations in Sweden11. Department of Planning and Regional Development in Greece12. Centre for Urban Research at a university in New York City, USA

Disciplines Migration Studies

Methods Quantitative Methods

49

Project 3 TitleHome start before school start-Requirements for a successful transition of Turkish-based children to kindergarten and elementary school

Research Team 2 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. Faculty of Psychology at a German university2. Faculty of Psychology at a university in Turkey

Disciplines Only Psychology

Methods Quantitative Methods

Project 4 TitleCultural Capital during Migration. Towards the relevance of education titles and residence permits for the status passages into the labour market

Research Team 6 research teams 4 coordinators and 2 co-operation teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. Faculty of Sociology at a university in Germany2. Faculty of Sociology at a university in Germany3. Department of Pedagogy and Psychology at a university in Germany4. Departments of Political Science and History at a university in Canada

Disciplines SociologyEducational SciencesPolitical Sciences

Methods Qualitative Methods

50

Project 5 TitleThe economics and persistence of migrant ethnicity

Research Team 7 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. An institute for the study of labour in Germany2. Department of Economics at a university in Chicago, USA.3. Centre for Comparative Immigration Studies at a university in California, USA.4. Department of Sociology at a university in Germany.5. A Faculty of Economics at a university in Australia6. An institute for Political Sciences at a university in Germany7. Department of Economics at one of the elite universities in the USA

Disciplines EconomicsPolitical SciencesSociology

Methods Quantitative Methods

51

Project 6 TitleDiversity, integration and the economy

Research Team 5 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. An institute of international economicsin Germany2. An institute for employment research in Germany3. An institute for economics at a technical university in Germany4. A centre on migration, policy and society in the UK5. A research institute in Italy

Disciplines EconomicsMigration Studies

Methods Quantitative Methods

52

Project 7 TitleGiving new subjects a voice. Cultural diversity in the health-care system

Research Team 6 research teams

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. Faculty of Social Sciences at a German university2. Departments of Political Science and History, and Anthropology at a university in Canada 3. A centre of European Law and Politics at a German university4. A Department for Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology5. A Department of Sociology and Social Research in Italy6. A Faculty of Social Sciences at a German university

Disciplines SociologyPolitical SciencesPsychologyAnthropologyMedicine

Methods Qualitative Methods

Project 8 TitleMigrants in organisations of law and order

Research Team 1 interdisciplinary research group (7 coordinators)

Faculties/DepartmentsInstitutesResearch Institutes

1. An interdisciplinary research group at an institute for security and prevention research in Germany

Disciplines Sociology (Sociology of law, Sociology of Organization, Sociology of Criminology)CriminologyHistory

Methods Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

53

Bibliography

Apitzsch, Ursula and Lena Inowlocki (2000) ‘Biographical Analysis: a German school?’ in: Chamberlaine Prue, Bornat Joanna, and Tom Wendegraf (eds.) The Turn to Biographical Methods in Social Science: Comparative Issues and Examples, London, New York, 53-71.

Apitzsch, Ursula (2003) ‘Biographieforschung’. In: Orth, B., Schwietring, T., J, Weiß (eds.) Soziologische Forschung: Stand und Perspektiven. Opladen: Leske + Budrich, 95-110.

Bogner, Alexander, Littig, Beate and Wolfgang Menz (eds.) (2002) Das Experteninterview. Theorie, Methode, Anwendung. 2. Auflage. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

Bohnsack, Ralf, Nentwig-Gesemann, Iris and Arnd-Michael Nohl (eds.) (2001) Die dokumentarische Methode und ihre Forschungspraxis. Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

Bohnsack, Ralf (2003) Rekonstruktive Sozialforschung. Einführung in qualitative Methoden. 5. Auflage, Opladen: Leske + Budrich.

BMBF (2005) Antwort der Bundesregierung auf die Große Anfrage der Abgeordneten Katherina Reiche, Thomas Rachel, Dr. Maria Böhmer, weiterer Abgeordneter und der Fraktion der CDU/CSU. Lage der Forschung in Deutschland. Drucksache 15/4793. 31 January 2005 . <http.://www.bmbf.de/pub/GA-lage_forschungsfoederung.pdf> 17 May 2005.

Bund-Länder Kommission (2005) Information on the Bund-Länder-Commission for Educational Planning and Research Promotion. <http:www.blk-bonn.de>.

Bührmann, Andrea (2004) ‘Rezension zu: Alexander Bogner, Beate Littig & Wolfgang Menz (Hrsg.) (2002): Das Experteninterview. Theorie, Methode, Anwendung` [19 Absätze]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/ Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 5(3), Art 1.http://qualitative-research-net/fqs-texte/3-04/04-3-1-d.htm, [Mai 2005].

Deutscher Bundestag würdigt die Geisteswissenschaften (2005) Pressemitteilung Nr. 385 der Bundestagsfraktion Bündnis 90/Die Grünen 12 May. 19. May 2005. <http.://www.gruene-fraktion.de/cms/presse/dok/68/68405-print.htm>

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (2004) Jahresbericht 2003.

Entzinger, Han (2005) The Overall Picture: Towards More Synergy in the Migration and Integration Programme. Paper presented at the conference of the Research Programme at Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin on October 7th, 2005.

Fritz Thyssen Foundation (2004) Annual Report 2003/ 2004.

54

Gillham, Bill (2000) Case Study Research Methods. New York: Continuum.

Gollnick, Ines (2005) ‘Die Unaufdringliche: Ursula Sowa’ Das Parlament Nr. 12, 21 March 19 May 2005 <http.://www.bundestag.de/cgibin/druck.pl?N=parlament>

Glaser, Barney and Anselm Strauss (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine.

--- (1971) Status Passage. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Griffin, Gabriele (2005) ‘Definitions of Multi-, Inter-, and Transdisciplinarity’. Unpublished ms.

Griffin, Gabriele, Medhurst, Pam and Trish Green (2005) Disciplinary Boundaries between the Social Sciences and Humanities: National Report on the UK.<http://www.hull.ac.uk/researchintegration/reports.htm>

Holm, Ulla and Mia Liinason (2005) Disciplinary Boundaries between the Social Sciences and Humanities. Comparative Report on Interdisciplinarity<http://www.hull.ac.uk/researchintegration/reports.htm>

Kraimer, Klaus (ed.) (2000) Die Fallrekonstruktion. Sinnverstehen in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Forschung, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp Verlag.

Krebs, Rebecca, Siouti, Irini Apitzsch, Ursula and Silke Wenk (2005) Disciplinary Boundaries between the Social Sciences and Humanities: National Report on Germany. <http://www.hull.ac.uk/researchintegration/reports.htm> .

Krebs, Rebecca and Silke Wenk (2005) Scene Setting of Research Funding in Germany. Unpublished ms.

Meuser, M and Nagel Ulrike (1991) ‘Experteninterviews: Vielfach erprobt, wenig bedacht: Ein Beitrag zur qualitativen Methodendiskussion.’ In: Garz, D and Klaus Kraimer (eds.) (1991) Qualitativ-empirische Sozialforschung, Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 441-468.

Nohl, Arnd Michael (2005) ‘Dokumentarische Interpretation narrativerInterviews’. In: bildungsforschung, Jahrgang 2,Ausgabe 2, http://www.bildungsforschung.org/Archiv/2005-02/interview/.

Proposal for the Volkswagen Foundation (2005) Kulturelles Kapital in der Migration. Zur Bedeutung von Bildungs- und Aufenthaltstiteln während der Statuspassage in den Arbeitsmarkt. Antrag an die Volkswagenstiftung. Unpublished ms.

Rosenthal, Gabriele (1995) ‘Prinzipien einer rekonstruktiven Fallanalyse’, in: Rosenthal, Gabriele (1995) Erlebte und erzählte Lebensgeschichte. Gestalt und Struktur biographischer Selbstpräsentation.’ Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag. 208-227.

Strauss, Anselm L. (1994) Grundlagen qualitativer Sozialforschung. München.

55

Schittenhelm, Karin (2005) Soziale Lagen im Übergang. Junge Migrantinnen und Einheimische zwischen Schule und Berufsausbildung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

--- (2005) ‘Statuspassagen in Bildungsbiogarphien junger Erwachsener mit Migrationshintergrund’, Vortrag am IPC Gesellschaftswissenschaften, Faculty of Social Sciences, J.W. Goethe University of Frankfurt. 15.12.2005.

Schütze, Fritz (1977) Die Technik des narrativen Interviews in Interaktionsfeldstudien in einem Projekt zur Erforschung von kommunalen Machtstrukturen, Arbeitsberichte und Forschungsmaterialien Nr.1 der Universität Bielefeld, Fakultät für Soziologie.

---(1983) ‘Biographieforschung und narratives Interview’, in: Neue Praxis, Heft 3, S.283-293.

Süßmann, Johannes (2005) ‘Fallstudien: Theorie-Geschichte-Methode’. Conf. on Fallstudien: Theorie-Geschichte- Methode. Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität Frankfurt am Main. 15.9.2005.

Volkswagenstiftung (2004) Wir stiften Wissen. Jahresbericht 2004. Hannover:Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht.

Volkswagenstiftung (2005) Merkblätter 65- 78a-c.

Winnacker, Ernst-Ludwig (2005) DFG Neujahrsansprache. 11.1.2005, Berlin.

Winnacker, Ernst-Ludwig (2006) Statement des DFG Präsidenten. Gemeinsame Pressekonferenz von DFG und Wissenschaftsrat zur Excellenzinitiative am 20. 1.2006.

Wissenschaftsrat (2006) Empfehlungen zur Entwicklung und Förderung der Geisteswissenschaften in Deutschland. Berlin, 27.1.2006. http://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/texte/7068-06.pdf.