Prof. Dr. Steffen Mau

Prof. Mau erforscht gegenwärtig die Dynamiken gesellschaftlicher Polarisierung und Konflikte in Deutschland und Europa — insbesondere wie soziale Ungleichheit, Lebensführung und politische Orientierungen zusammenhängen. Sein aktueller Fokus liegt auf der Analyse von Trigger Points in politischen Debatten, also jenen Momenten, in denen Diskussionen emotional aufgeladen und moralisiert werden, sowie auf der Kartierung von Klimakonflikten als Ungleichheitskonflikte. Für Unternehmen und öffentliche Institutionen bietet diese Forschung Erkenntnisse darüber, wie gesellschaftliche Spannungen entstehen, welche sozialen Gruppen in Konflikten aufeinanderprallen und wie politische Polarisierung mit konkreten Lebensweisen verwoben ist — relevant für Kommunikation, Stakeholder-Management und die Antizipation von Akzeptanzproblemen bei Transformationsprozessen (Energiewende, Migration, Digitalisierung). Seine Arbeiten verbinden qualitative Fokusgruppen-Analysen mit quantitativen Paneldaten und untersuchen dabei auch Langzeiteffekte historischer Erfahrungen (DDR-Sozialisation) auf gegenwärtige politische Einstellungen.

🔒 Das System hat 985 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden

• Welfare State Futures: Das Europa unserer Kinder – Norface

  Quelle ↗

  Förderer: DFG Sachbeihilfe Zeitraum: 04/2015 - 10/2018 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Steffen Mau

• FG 1539/1: Europa-Professionalismus: Eine wissenssoziologische S

  Quelle ↗
  409-02 · Softwaretechnik und Programmiersprachen

  Förderer: DFG Forschungsgruppe Zeitraum: 05/2015 - 09/2015 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Steffen Mau

• FOR 1539/2: Europa Professionalismus: Eine wissenssoziologische Studie zur Professionalisierung von Europa-Expertise (TP 05)

  Quelle ↗
  409-02 · Softwaretechnik und Programmiersprachen

  Förderer: DFG Forschungsgruppe Zeitraum: 10/2015 - 09/2019 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Steffen Mau

• Migration and welfare state solidarity in Western Europe

  2009

  Journal of European Social Policy · DOI

  In recent decades Western Europe has had to face increasing migration levels resulting in a more diverse population. As a direct consequence, the question of adequate inclusion of immigrants into the welfare state has arisen. At the same time it has been asked whether the inclusion of non-nationals or migrants into the welfare state may undermine the solidaristic basis and legitimacy of welfare state redistribution. Citizens who are in general positive about the welfare state may adopt a critical view if migrants are granted equal access. Using data from the European Social Survey (2002/2003) for European OECD Countries we examine the relationship between ethnic diversity and public social expenditure, welfare state support and attitudes towards immigrants among European citizens. The results indicate only weak negative correlations between ethnic diversity and public social expenditure levels. Multilevel regression models with support for the welfare state and attitudes towards the legal inclusion of immigrants as dependent variables in fact reveal a negative influence of ethnic diversity. However, when controlling for migration in combination with other contextual factors, especially GDP, the unemployment rate and welfare regime seem to have a mediating influence.

• The Global Mobility Divide: How Visa Policies Have Evolved over Time

  2015

  Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies · DOI

  While visa policies are the major instrument for regulating and controlling the global flow of people, little is known about how they have changed over time. Accordingly, scholars have expressed the need for large-N datasets which cover more than one point in time. This article takes up this challenge and presents a for the first time a global overview of the changes in visa waiver policies based on a newly created database containing the visa waiver policies of over 150 countries for 1969 and 2010. We find that, on average, visa-free mobility has in-creased over the past 40 years. However, not everybody has benefited from these develop-ments. In fact, visa waivers are increasingly unequally divided: While citizens of OECD countries and rich countries have gained mobility rights, mobility rights for other regions have stagnated or even diminished, in particular for citizens from African countries. Overall, we find a clear bifurcation in mobility rights, leading to a ‘global mobility divide’.