Autonomous Organization of the (International) Scientific Community Would Simplify Data Protection in the Social Sciences and Encourage Reanalysis

In den Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften besteht ohne die Moeglichkeit einer Re-Analyse von statistischen Ergebnissen (gleichermaßen amtlichen wie nicht-amtlichen) die Gefahr von nicht entdeckten Irrtuemern. Mit anderen Worten: Re- Analysen sind in der Wissenschaft die "Berufungsinstanz", ohne die es keine funktionierende Scientific Community geben kann. Der Schutz vor fehlerhaften wissenschaftlichen Ergebnissen mit Hilfe von Re-Analysen ist ein "oeffentliches Interesse", das in der Datenschutzdiskussion und insbesondere bei der Auslegung von Datenschutzregelungen bislang zu wenig beachtet wurde. Das Wissenschaftssystem und der Gesetzgeber sind gleichermaßen aufgefordert, Re-Analysen zu ermoeglichen ohne den Datenschutz zu verletzen. Als Instrumente werden Selbstbindungen im Wissenschaftssystem und die Schaffung eines gesetzlichen "Forschungsdaten-Geheimnisses" diskutiert. The re-analysis of statistical data is an effective means of protecting the public from undiscovered errors in social science research. Re-analysis is critical, as there is no difference between official data and non-official data. However, discussions concerning data protection legislation do not usually take this into consideration. Proper data protection rules must make it possible to conduct independent re-analysis of protected data. The paper discusses the possibilities of self-binding in the (international) scientific community and creating a new kind of law which would provide scientific data with a special legal status (Forschungsdaten- Geheimnis).

The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) in the Nineties: An Example of Incremental Innovations in an Ongoing Longitudinal Study

The main aim of the present paper is to historically reappraise the development of the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) in the 1990s after the first six waves had been collected. This development was closely connected to the opening of the Iron Curtain in Eastern Europe and the fall of the Wall separating the two German states. In addition to its relevance for the SOEP, this study is also of interest in relation to the contemporary history of science.SOEP, German unification, immigration studies, research governance, survey methods

The Political Economy of Natural Disaster Insurance: Lessons from the Failure of a Proposed Compulsory Insurance Scheme in Germany

This paper studies the politico-economic reasons for the refusal of a proposed compulsory flood insurance scheme in Germany. It provides the rationale for such scheme and outlines the basic features of a market-orientated design. The main reasons for the political down-turn of this proposal were the misperceived costs of a state guarantee, legal objections against a compulsory insurance, distributional conflicts between the federal government and the Ger-man states (Länder) on the implied administrative costs, and the well-known charity hazard of ad-hoc disaster relief. The focus on pure market solutions proved to be an ineffective strategy for policy advice in this field.

Reform of the Public Pension System in Germany

This paper studies the current crisis in the German pension system and discusses the various reform proposals.

Above-Average Rise in Immigrant Poverty: Poverty Often Concomitant with Other Types of Deprivation

The years 1998 to 2003 were marked by a deterioration in the economic situation of the German population with an immigrant background as the share of immigrants living below the poverty line increased at an above average rate. The older and younger age groups in this segment of the population are particularly prone to poverty. The Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) survey, which is carried out by the DIW Berlin in collaboration with the Infratest Social Research Institute, shows that 28% of children and young people aged under 20 with an immigrant background were living in precarious circumstances in 2003. The share of native Germans of the same age living in such circumstances was substantially lower, albeit still disturbingly high at 20%. Citizens of Turkish origin, in particular, are frequently found living below the poverty line. Immigrants from Western countries, by contrast, live comparatively rarely in poverty. Naturalised Germans are better off on average than foreign nationals, although this is not true for ethnic Germans. The fact that poverty is not a transitory phenomenon but an enduring condition for many immigrants is particularly alarming. Only improved education and training will solve this problem in the long term. The recruitment of foreign labour, the admission of refugees and the return of ethnic German settlers from former Eastern Bloc countries have culminated in large waves of immigration to Germany over the last 50 years. On official figures, over seven million foreign nationals and over four million ethnic Germans are living in Germany today. Germany still has a net migration surplus, although it has diminished significantly in recent years.

How Fair Is Income Taxation in the View of the German Public?

It is not possible to provide a scientific answer to questions regarding the 'fairness' of taxation. Nonetheless, empirical economics and social science research can still yield helpful information for legislators charged with deciding on the level and structure of the tax system. Such research also includes the public's assessment of the fairness of the tax system. At the beginning of 2005, DIW Berlin incorporated questions concerning the fairness of income taxation in its 'Socio-Economic Panel' longitudinal study. Preliminary findings of this research are now available. The tax burden on unskilled workers was considered excessively high by almost two-thirds of respondents. By contrast, the burden on the board members of large enterprises was considered too low by three-quarters of those surveyed, and this view was actually shared by two-thirds of the executive staff in the sample. However, it is not possible to draw any direct conclusions for economic and fiscal policy from these findings. The evaluation of such data is a wholly political act lying in the exclusive domain of the parliament. However, these results at least demonstrate unambiguously that when it comes to the issue of income and fiscal equity, people belonging to all sections of the population think in a more egalitarian manner than is assumed by large segments of public opinion and politics.