The research analyses the function of “Communal landscapes of education” for the mediation between post-Fordist capitalism into the social construction of childhood

Topic: Since approximately five years, “Communal Landscapes of Education” (further: CLoE) has become a widely used concept in German local politics. Aiming for the systematic improvement of the regional or local education landscape, local states network with childhood-related stakeholders like schools, child and youth services, culture, sports, local economy, and civil society seek to develop a “coherent overall system of education, rearing and care” (compare e.g. Deutscher Verein 2007).

Context: The results of studies like PISA, which make comparisons on international and national scales, have increased the importance of education as standort-factor. In a knowledge-based society, the economic sustainability as well as social systems are said to be dependent on well-functioning educational systems. Hence, education is crucial for competitiveness (Eichert 2007; Deutscher Städtetag 2009).

Objective: In public and academic discourses, CLoEs are mainly seen as win-win-concept for all stakeholders, including children and youth as addresses (compare Reutlinger 2010, 21) and especially those who are “at risk”. But as the concept is a means to improve the local states position in inter-urban competition, the grasp on childhood that goes along with the concept is driven by economic reasons. From a perspective that combines critical geography and geographies of childhood, the research will analyze if in CLoEs, childhood gets shaped by the local states standort-political needs evoked by the logic of post-Fordist capitalism, rather than by the needs of children.

Theoretical Framework: On the one hand, it is based on the regulation schools findings that in the post-Fordist stage of capitalism, under conditions of economic pressure, local states have to compete for investors and privileged families (Harvey 1989, Heeg & Brenner 1999). Education is considered to be a standort-factor that attracts these target groups. Furthermore, the relation to local state’s specific stand-political interest is specifiable, for local or regional scales differ concerning how education can be put to use, and hence, how the landscapes are finally shaped. So, the framework is complemented by the theoretical debate on political-economy of scale (Jessop 2007, Belina 2008, Brenner 2008).

On the other hand,the local states’ economic-driven grasp on childhood confirms  Cindy Katz’ (2008) assumption that, as problems provoked by current capitalism are projected on and channeled into childhood, childhood becomes increasingly reconfigured by the logic of capital - which materializes in geographies of childhood (that then, shape the everyday experience of being a child).

Research questions: To clarify the role of CLoEs as mediators between standort-politics and the social construction of childhood, my analyze consists of:

-        Which actors are part of the network? How is the influence distributed within the network? What kind of education is promoted by the "Communal Landscape of education"?

-        How are the landscapes shaped spatially? Where do the contacts between children/youth and networkpartners take place? Which places are included and how can they be characterized?

-         In how far do networks and included spaces correspond to the local state’s particular standort-political demands?

Belina, Bernd (2008): Skalare Praxis. In: Wissen, Markus; Röttger, Bernd; Heeg, Susanne (Hg.): Politics of scale. Räume der Globalisierung und Perspektiven emanzipatorischer Politik. 1. Aufl. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot (Raumproduktionen, 3), S. 106–123. Brenner, Neil (2008): Tausend Blätter. Bemerkungen zu den Geographien ungleicher räumlicher Entwicklung. In: Wissen, Markus; Röttger, Bernd; Heeg, Susanne (Hg.): Politics of scale. Räume der Globalisierung und Perspektiven emanzipatorischer Politik. 1. Aufl. Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot (Raumproduktionen, 3), S. 57–84. Deutscher Städtetag (2009):Bildungsoffensive – eine Antwort auf die Krise?! Diskussionsgrundlage zur 35. ordentlichen Hauptversammlung des Deutschen Städtetags. http://gew.de/Binaries/Binary48228/md_statement_dt_st%C3%A4dtetag_fin%20_1_.pdf Deutscher Verein für öffentliche und private Fürsorge e.V. (2007): Diskussionspapier des Deutschen Vereins zum Aufbau Kommunaler Bildungslandschaften. Online verfügbar unter http://www.deutscher-verein.de/05-empfehlungen/empfehlungen_archiv/empfehlungen2007/pdf/Diskussionspapier_des_Deutschen_Vereins_zum_Aufbau_Kommunaler_Bildungslandschaften.pdf, zuletzt geprüft am 12.07.2010. Eichert, Christof (2007): Bildung als Standortfaktor. In: Solzbacher, Claudia; Minderop, Dorothea (Hg.): Bildungsnetzwerke und regionale Bildungslandschaften. Ziele und Konzepte, Aufgaben und Prozess. München: LinkLuchterhand (Praxishilfen Schule), S. 14–22. Harvey (1989): From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: the transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. In: Geografiska Annaler, Series B (71) 3–17. Heeg, Susanne & Neil Brenner (1999): Lokale Politik und Stadtentwicklung nach dem Fordismus: Möglichkeiten und Beschränkungen. In: Kurswechsel (2) 103-120. Jessop, Bob (2007): Raum, Ort, Maßstäbe. Territorialisierungsstrategien in postfordistischen Gesellschaften. In: Kessl, Fabian; Otto, Hans-Uwe (Hg.): Territorialisierung des Sozialen. Regieren über soziale Nahräume. Opladen: Budrich, S. 25–56. Katz, Cindi (2008): Childhood as spectacle. Relays of anxiety and the reconfiguration of the child. In: Cultural Geographies, Jg. 15, H. 1, S. 5–17. Reutlinger, Christian (2010): Bildungsorte, Bildungsräume und Bildungslandschaften im Spiegel von Ungleichheit. Kritischer Blick auf das "Räumeln" im Bildungsdiskurs. In: Otto, Hans-Uwe (Hg.) (2010): Räume flexibler Bildung. Bildungslandschaft in der Diskussion. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften .