This project is funded under Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities

Media Policy Makers Researchers Civil Society Organizations
LogOn  Register
Lost Password

Promoting the Dialogue between Research and Politics
06 novembre 2009





The workshop was recorded on video and can be accessed here.

Additionally, four interviews with political decision makers was recorded :

> Interview to Wolfgang Michalek


1. Did the policy makers appreciate the research results presented?

Policy makers said they gained from the presentation because the focus was put back on essential issues and because facts are important for any political discussion. In their political work, they can draw on the presented research findings and scientific literature. Up to now, research on migration has been conducted from a very male perspective. Therefore, concentrating more intensely on women is justified. Generally, the problem is not a lack of research but the question of ‘receiving’ its results: Due to their enormous amount, it is impossible to process all research findings.

2. Which needs have been expressed by the policy makers?

On this workshop the processing of existing research findings for policy makers and the competences within political institutions were discussed in great detail. Research should not concentrate exclusively on topical extremes and dichotomies (e.g. the female migrant as heroine or victim) or on specific groups of migrants; it should also concern itself with the whole of society and offer some syntheses. Policy makers demanded better, more comprehensible and more compact overviews of existing research findings. On the other hand, there is need for advanced training on the contractor-side in order to develop their competence as contractors.

3. Which is the more effective ways  indicated  from the discussant to bridge research and policies?

The following points were suggested:

→ Implementation of an open communication platform for knowledge sharing and management.

 → Facilitation of inter-institutional discussions.

 → Creation of a neutral mediator for processing research findings and conveying criticism.

→ A platform for policy makers where they can ask questions.

→ Discussion of the different ‘languages’ in the fields of science and politics.

→ Demand for obligatory disclosure of contract studies.

4. Which recommendations or key messages emerged from the debate?

→ Demand for research is especially high in the following fields:

♦ Career choice of migrants, atypical jobs, youth unemployment, equal opportunities and discrimination on the labour market

♦ Socialization and role models

♦ Participation of migrants on all levels

♦ Education and facilitating an increase in higher degrees

♦ Homosexuality and multiple discrimination

♦ Right-wing tendencies of immigrant youths

♦ Research approaches focusing not only on the victims of discrimination but also on the perpetrators

♦ Research beyond extreme topics and specific groups of migrants

→ On the one hand, a mediator/mediation level and a communication platform should be established in order to transfer research findings more effectively. On the other hand, policy makers should be more prepared to concern themselves with a variety of topics. In short, a culture of transfer should be developed. This point was stressed several times.

→ Research should provide orientation for political actors, and its results should be spread with the help of disseminators.

→ A better understanding of contractor systems and subsystems is called for.

→ Political actors as contractors need to increase their understanding of a research project’s conceptual phase, which is necessary despite all time pressure, and of its special requirements (contractor competence).





[Minutes of Workshop (EN)]

[Minutes of workshop (DE)]