Conclusions and a possible research agenda
Participation is present throughout the Contract in surprising frequency. Whilst never explicitly clarified as a term, the analysis performed in this paper shows that the focus lies mostly on the institutional framework. Participation as rights and participation in the public sphere are mostly underlying principles, which, however, permeate the whole document and are repeated regularly. Participation as practice remains weak, as there is no mention of how the Senate will deal with non-institutional or even anti-institutional forms of participation, such as social movements. In the Contract participation takes place in different public spheres – housing, cultural policy, urban planning and privatization policy – and at different scales – the housing estate, the neighbourhood, the borough and the state. But it even considers Berlin’s responsibility beyond its borders, in Europe and internationally. This is a geographical responsibility that, as stated in the Contract, stems both from Berlin’s (and Germany’s) past and from its current hegemonic position in a globalized world.
Social justice, equality, anti-discrimination and social cohesion as values behind the Contract are meant to allow all citizens to participate equally in the public sphere. Underprivileged groups are explicitly mentioned several times: the poor, women, LGBQT, Roma, migrants and refugees. Austerity as an exclusionary ideology is clearly rejected. The document refers to several power fault lines – class, gender, sexuality and ethnic origin. Whereas participation is not directly present as a right in itself, suffrage rights as well as the rights to housing, education and work are explicitly or implicitly addressed. The Contract considers the extension of voting rights to European citizens and non-European migrants at different polity scales. It also addresses the relationship between direct and representative democracy.
