Das Arbeitserziehungslager Breitenau (1940-1945). Ein Beitrag zum nationalsozialistischen Lagersystem

Die Dissertation befasst sich mit der Geschichte des Arbeitserziehungslagers (AEL) Breitenau, das 1940 von der Gestapostelle Kassel auf dem Gelände der Landesarbeitsanstalt Breitenau in Guxhagen gegründet wurde und bis zum Kriegsende bestand. Darüber hinaus wird auch der Frage nachgegangen, wie nach der NS-Zeit mit der Geschichte des Lagers, den Opfern und den Tätern umgegangen wurde. Die Dissertation ist in drei Teile gegliedert. Der erste Teil gibt einen Überblick über die Geschichte der Geheimen Staatspolizeistelle Kassel, der das Lager unterstand und die als zentrale Verfolgungsbehörde für den Regierungsbezirk Kassel zuständig war. Dabei wird vor allem aufgezeigt, wie die Gestapostelle Kassel entstanden ist, wie sie aufgebaut war und wer die Leiter und Mitarbeiter während des Zweiten Weltkrieges waren, die die Verfolgungsmaßnahmen organisierten und durchführten. Der zweite Teil der Dissertation befasst sich mit der eigentlichen Lagergeschichte. Breitenau war eines der ersten Arbeitserziehungslager überhaupt. Die Hauptfunktion bestand darin, ausländische Zwangsarbeiter und Zwangsarbeiterinnen, die sich dem Arbeitseinsatz widersetzt hatten, durch harte Bestrafung gefügig zu machen. Gleichzeitig wurden in das AEL aber auch deutsche und ausländische Gefangene eingewiesen, die aus politischen, rassischen, religiösen oder weltanschaulichen Gründen verhaftet worden waren. Das Lager unterstand zwar der Geheimen Staatspolizei Kassel, wurde aber von den Bediensteten der Landesarbeitsanstalt mit geleitet. Im Verlaufe des Zweiten Weltkrieges waren im AEL Breitenau etwa 8.300 überwiegend ausländische Schutzhaftgefangene inhaftiert, unter denen sich ca. 1.900 Frauen und 6.400 Männer befanden. Bei den Einweisungen wirkten neben der Gestapostelle Kassel und der Gestapostelle Weimar zahlreiche Orts- und Kreispolizeibehörden mit, wodurch ein flächendeckender Verfolgungsapparat entstand. Insgesamt lassen sich über 1.000 letzte Wohnorte von Gefangenen ermitteln. Die Haft- und Lebensbedingungen im Lager waren vor allem für die ausländischen Gefangenen besonders unmenschlich, und es gab mehrere Todesfälle. Nachweislich wurden mehr als 750 Gefangene in Konzentrationslager deportiert, was für viele den Tod bedeutete. Außerdem wurden mindestens 18 polnische Gefangene von Angehörigen der Gestapo Kassel erhängt und noch unmittelbar vor Kriegsende ein Massenmord an 28 Gefangenen verübt. Erst mit dem Einmarsch der amerikanischen Soldaten am Ostersamstag 1945 wurde das Arbeitserziehungslager Breitenau endgültig aufgelöst. Im dritten Teil der Dissertation wird der Frage des Umgangs mit dem damaligen Geschehen nachgegangen. Dabei lässt sich feststellen, dass die Täter und Mittäter von deutschen Spruchkammern und Gerichten gar nicht oder kaum bestraft wurden. Gleichzeitig wurden ihnen verschiedene Möglichkeiten geboten, sich in die Gesellschaft zu integrieren. Die ehemaligen Gefangenen hatten dagegen keinen Anspruch auf Entschädigung, und auch eine gesellschaftliche Würdigung wurde ihnen versagt. Erst seit den 90er Jahren trat hier eine Veränderung ein, die allerdings für viele Verfolgte zu spät kam. Die Geschichte des Arbeitserziehungslagers Breitenau war viele Jahre verdrängt worden. Das Gelände diente bis 1949 als Landesarbeitsanstalt, dann als geschlossenes Erziehungsheim, und seit 1974 besteht dort eine psychiatrische Einrichtung. Erst 1979 wurde durch ein Forschungsprojekt an der Gesamthochschule Kassel die NS-Geschichte „wiederentdeckt“ und 1984 die Gedenkstätte Breitenau eingerichtet, die als Gedenk- und Bildungsort an das damalige Geschehen erinnert.

Knowledge Building in Landscape Architecture

The objective of this study was to develop an internet-based seminar framework applicable for landscape architecture education. This process was accompanied by various aims. The basic expectation was to keep the main characteristics of landscape architecture education also in the online format. On top of that, four further objectives were anticipated: (1) training of competences for virtual team work, (2) fostering intercultural competence, (3) creation of equal opportunities for education through internet-based open access and (4) synergy effects and learning processes across institutional boundaries. This work started with the hypothesis that these four expected advantages would compensate for additional organisational efforts caused by the online delivery of the seminars and thus lead to a sustainable integration of this new learning mode into landscape architecture curricula. This rationale was followed by a presentation of four areas of knowledge to which the seminar development was directly related (1) landscape architecture as a subject and its pedagogy, (2) general learning theories, (3) developments in the ICT sector and (4) wider societal driving forces such as global citizenship and the increase of open educational resources. The research design took the shape of a pedagogical action research cycle. This approach was constructive: The author herself is teaching international landscape architecture students so that the model could directly be applied in practice. Seven online seminars were implemented in the period from 2008 to 2013 and this experience represents the core of this study. The seminars were conducted with varying themes while its pedagogy, organisation and the technological tools remained widely identical. The research design is further based on three levels of observation: (1) the seminar design on the basis of theory and methods from the learning sciences, in particular educational constructivism, (2) the seminar evaluation and (3) the evaluation of the seminars’ long term impact. The seminar model itself basically consists of four elements: (1) the taxonomy of learning objectives, (2) ICT tools and their application and pedagogy, (3) process models and (4) the case study framework. The seminar framework was followed by the presentation of the evaluation findings. The major findings of this study can be summed up as follows: Implementing online seminars across educational and national boundaries was possible both in term of organisation and technology. In particular, a high level of cultural diversity among the seminar participants has definitively been achieved. However, there were also obvious obstacles. These were primarily competing study commitments and incompatible schedules among the students attending from different academic programmes, partly even in different time zones. Both factors had negative impact on the individual and working group performances. With respect to the technical framework it can be concluded that the majority of the participants were able to use the tools either directly without any problem or after overcoming some smaller problems. Also the seminar wiki was intensively used for completing the seminar assignments. However, too less truly collaborative text production was observed which could be improved by changing the requirements for the collaborative task. Two different process models have been applied for guiding the collaboration of the small groups and both were in general successful. However, it needs to be said that even if the students were able to follow the collaborative task and to co-construct and compare case studies, most of them were not able to synthesize the knowledge they had compiled. This means that the area of consideration often remained on the level of the case and further reflections, generalisations and critique were largely missing. This shows that the seminar model needs to find better ways for triggering knowledge building and critical reflection. It was also suggested to have a more differentiated group building strategy in future seminars. A comparison of pre- and post seminar concept maps showed that an increase of factual and conceptual knowledge on the individual level was widely recognizable. Also the evaluation of the case studies (the major seminar output) revealed that the students have undergone developments of both the factual and the conceptual knowledge domain. Also their self-assessment with respect to individual learning development showed that the highest consensus was achieved in the field of subject-specific knowledge. The participants were much more doubtful with regard to the progress of generic competences such as analysis, communication and organisation. However, 50% of the participants confirmed that they perceived individual development on all competence areas the survey had asked for. Have the additional four targets been met? Concerning the competences for working in a virtual team it can be concluded that the vast majority was able to use the internet-based tools and to work with them in a target-oriented way. However, there were obvious differences regarding the intensity and activity of participation, both because of external and personal factors. A very positive aspect is the achievement of a high cultural diversity supporting the participants’ intercultural competence. Learning from group members was obviously a success factor for the working groups. Regarding the possibilities for better accessibility of educational opportunities it became clear that a significant number of participants were not able to go abroad during their studies because of financial or personal reasons. They confirmed that the online seminar was to some extent a compensation for not having been abroad for studying. Inter-institutional learning and synergy was achieved in so far that many teachers from different countries contributed with individual lectures. However, those teachers hardly ever followed more than one session. Therefore, the learning effect remained largely within the seminar learning group. Looking back at the research design it can be said that the pedagogical action research cycle was an appropriate and valuable approach allowing for strong interaction between theory and practice. However, some more external evaluation from peers in particular regarding the participants’ products would have been valuable.

Right to Food, Food Security and Food Aid Under International Law, or the Limits of a right-based approach

The right to food has become a pillar of international humanitarian and human rights law. The increasing number of food-related emergencies and the evolution of the international order brought the more precise notion of food security and made a potential right to receive food aid emerge. Despite this apparent centrality, recent statistics show that a life free from hunger is for many people all over the world still a utopian idea. The paper will explore nature and content of the right to food, food security and food aid under international law in order to understand the reasons behind the substantial failure of this right-centred approach, emphasising the lack of legal effects of many food-related provisions because of excessive moral connotations of the right to be free from hunger. Bearing in mind the three-dimensional nature of food security, the paper will also suggest that all attention has been focused on the availability of food, while real difficulties arise in terms of accessibility and adequacy. Emergency situations provide an excellent example of this unbalance, as the emerging right to receive food aid focus itself on the availability of food, without improving local production and adequacy. Looking at other evolving sectors of international law, such as the protection of the environment, and particularly the safeguard of biological diversity, alternative solutions will be envisaged in order to “feed” the right to food.