TP7 – Institutional Regimes

The Influence of Institutional Regimes on the Perception of Security Measures A populace’s willingness to accept security measures not only depends on the arrangement of these measures, but also on social customs and institutional designs. European comparisons show immense differences. Sub-project 7 examines possible causes for the acceptance of security-oriented regulations from a comparative perspective. This makes it an area of shared concern  for the wider SIRA-project, especially bridging subprojects 1 (theoretical framework), 2 (sociology), 5 (law) and 6 (cultural anthropology). This sub-project tests the hypothesis that the populace’s attitude towards security measures is strongly influenced by the institutional regime and its guiding principles. The analysis of institutional regimes aims to clarify reasons for acceptance of security measures. This analysis will hopefully improve understanding of the causes and reasons for the (mis-)perception of security measures, and should also enlighten political actors as to how they might implement security measures in public spaces in consensus with a democratic public, The researchuses two methodological approaches: The policy analysis will focus on the policy field of internal security with particular emphasis on ‘data retention’. This measure was discussed and implemented simultaneously in the European Union. The two countries of comparison, – the UK and Germany – perform decidedly different as political and institutional regimes. In this respect, institutions integrated into the decision making process play a central role. Impact analysis of institutions has a long tradition in political sciences. In particular, the establishment of different streams of neoinstitutionalism in comparative politics has highlighted institutions as a crucial research subject in comparative political research. This project is especially shaped by actor-centred neoinstitutionalism. Further to this, the influence of national institutional regimes upon the population’s attitudes towards security measures shall also be observed. This is done by polling residents in the UK and Germany. The questionnaire covers five areas: trust in political and security institutions, attitudes towards security in public space, the internet and air travel, as well as voting behavior.


  • Bug, Mathias/Münch, Ursula (2012): Politik verändert Internet (und Medien) –Innere Sicherheit, Vorratsdatenspeicherung und die Wahrnehmung durch die Bevölkerung . In: Schröder, Michael (Hg.): Die Web-Revolution. Das Internet verändert Politik und Medien. Olzog. München, S. 147-174.
  • Bug, Mathias/Röllgen, Jasmin/Münch, Ursula (2012): Föderalismus als Problem — Föderalismus als Lösungsansatz: Eine erste Aufarbeitung im Kontext des Skandals um die rechtsextremen Gewalttaten von Mitgliederndes Nationalsozialistischen Untergrunds (NSU). In: Europäisches Zentrum für Föderalismus-Forschung Tübingen (Hrsg.): Jahrbuch des Föderalismus 2012, Nomos, Baden-Baden, 138-152.
  • Bug, Mathias/Enskat, Sebastian/Fischer, Susanne/ Klüfers, Philipp/ Röllgen, Jasmin/ Wagner, Katrin (2011): Strategien gegen die Unsicherheit. Europäische Sicherheitsmaßnahmen nach 9/11, in: Die Friedens-Warte, 86:3-4, S. 53-83.
  • Bug, Mathias/Röllgen, Jasmin (2011): Internal Security Institutions Meeting Internet Governance – A Comparative View on the UK and Germany. In: JeDEM 3(2): 59-74, 2011. Download unter:


Conference contribution

  • Bug, Mathias: Users’ Perception of Security Measures and Security Threats in the Internet. Workshop of ECREA’s Communication Law and Policy Section: “Communication and Media Policy in the Era of the Internet and Digitization”. Panel: “Norms, Goals and Principles for Communication Policy”. 15.-17.3.2012, München
  • Bug, Mathias/Röllgen, Jasmin: Internal Security Institutions Meeting Internet Governance – A comparative view on the UK and Germany. ECPR General Conference 2011; Section: “Open Section”; Panel: “Information Governance: Transformations and its Drivers?”, 24.-27.8.2011, Reykjavik
  • Bug, Mathias/Röllgen, Jasmin: Internal Security in the UK and Germany – Similar Approaches, Different Outcomes; 37th IASGP Annual Conference, 16./17.5.2011, London




Conference visits

  • 14th European Police Congress, 15./16.2.2011, Berlin

  • Forschungsforum Öffentliche Sicherheit, Workshop III: Kriminalität – alte und neue Herausforderungen, 15./16.3.2011, Berlin

  • Meilensteinkonferenz KoSiPol, 13./14.7.2011, Münster

  • Gesprächskreis (Un-)Sicherheit, 4.11.2011, München

  • Netzpolitischer Kongress – Gesellschaft digital gestalten. 12./13.11.2010, Berlin, Bündnis ’90/Die Grünen Bundestagsfraktion


Overview and papers of the 2. SIRA-Conference Series 26.5.-27.5.2011 -

to the papers Contact:

Dipl. Sozialwirt Mathias Bug
Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung (DIW Berlin) Mohrenstraße 58 10117 Berlin Tel.: 030 89789 348 Fax: 030 89789 108 E-Mail:
Projekt management:
Prof. Dr.  Ursula Münch
Institut für Politikwissenschaft
Professur für Innenpolitik und Vergleichende Regierungslehre
Universität der Bundeswehr München
Werner Heisenberg-Weg 39
85577 Neubiberg
Tel.: +49 89 6004 3002
Fax: +49 89 6004 4409 (Sekretariat)

Comments are closed.