download - Deutsches Jugendinstitut e.V.

Three factors have a particularly positive effect on this continuing historical-intercultural
integration process:
1. A city centre with an urban character and a lively business community provides a
forum, a “grand stage” for informal encounters among a multilateral population
structure. Additionally, the individual ethnic, social and cultural groups will find
their more or less accepted specific “islands of retreat” in urban districts. These
areas (ethnic cultural associations, traditional clubs and associations, fire brigade,
restaurants, internet cafés, etc.) frequently represent the compromise on the part of
the inhabitants between the culture of their homeland and the mainstream aspects
of the dominating culture within the urban district and therefore offer the
experience of successive integration steps.
2. Nursery schools, schools and social leisure activities (children’s and youth centre,
neighbourhood centre, etc.) also offer methodical-didactic intercultural activities
which encourage, intensify and partially “ritualise” the aforementioned informal
associations.
3. The network structure between diverse connected systems continues to be upheld
by the urban district working party, the association of local clubs and the “Social
Integrative City” programme as an intercultural intermediary and self-regulatory
instrument.
The only existing negative feature is the departure or “exodus” of younger “German”
families according to demographic data. This could produce a medium-and long-term
imbalance in the socially balanced heterogeneity of the population structure which could
threaten to communicate the image of a “foreigners’ quarter” both internally and externally
(cf. Kilb 2003).
Generally, the following favourable socio-environmental aspects for successful
integration processes can be identified in reference to the two studies:
• non-stigmatised but structurally enhanced urban areas
• urban forums for communication and common activities
• similar employment and residential experiences and activities in the
backgrounds of “Germans“ and “immigrants“
• similar social status of (both) groups
• social and material mixed structures in the relevant “communities“
• fewer culturally heterogenic socio-environmental structures
• common socio-environmental history on a local scale
• multicultural socio-environmental economic structure in the local provision of
services
The following five socio-environmental criteria appear to trigger off favourable
integrational effects, particularly among children and young persons:
1. The variety of a graded system of cultural and background-based locations of
“retreat” and multi-cultural locations/forums for self-portrayal and encounter
2. common locations for cultural acquirements: locations with people and “histories”
which can be experienced
94