What kind of anti-discrimination law do we want?

• The General Equal Treatment Act (AGG), which came into force in 2006, provides fundamental protection against discrimination in Germany.
• The starting point of the research project was the observed discrepancy between widely articulated calls for reform and the lack of actual amendments to the AGG. The project investigated the reasons behind political stagnation in anti-discrimination law.
• To this end, the actor structures in the field were examined, analyzing the positions, interests, and political convictions of different actors regarding anti-discrimination law, the networks that exist, and how the various actors act strategically to advance their demands. Analyzing these aspects helps explain why some interests are successfully mediated and implemented, while others are less so. The policy analysis was guided by the theoretical model of the Advocacy Coalition Framework.

The research project provided, for the first time, a political science overview of the relevant actors, their interests, and positions regarding anti-discrimination law in Germany. While numerous scattered contributions from law, social sciences, politics, associations, and civil society have appeared since the AGG came into force, a systematic, comprehensive analysis that also considered network relationships and strategies for advancing interests was lacking.

Explaining the stagnation in anti-discrimination law.

Three types of data were collected and analyzed, a document analysis, a written online survey, and qualitative interviews:

1. The document analysis identified which reform proposals for the further development of anti-discrimination law exist, which actors formulated them, and which actors hold opposing positions.
2. A written online survey of relevant actors across Germany examined their current positions and interests regarding anti-discrimination law, how they act strategically to advance their interests, and with whom they collaborate to ensure their interests are heard.
3. Qualitative interviews with actors from politics, civil society, business, public authorities, and trade unions provided a deeper understanding of positions, interests, strategies, and relevant collaborations for the further development of anti-discrimination law.

• The results of the research project show that civil society actors and public authorities working on anti-discrimination issues largely agree on key reform proposals. These include expanding the law’s scope to cover state actions, limiting exemptions, strengthening the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, and improving legal enforcement, for example through association-based litigation, longer deadlines, and simplified rules on the burden of proof. These proposals address points that were already discussed during the AGG’s development but were not adopted at the time.
• In contrast, business actors generally consider the existing regulations and legal protection against discrimination in various areas of life to be sufficient. However, some are partially open to extending the AGG to state institutions and expanding anti-discrimination advisory services.
• Overall, the political convictions of civil society and business actors have remained stable, although opposition from business actors is no longer as strong as during the AGG’s creation. Nevertheless, they often perceive discrimination as isolated cases rather than a structural problem requiring legal solutions, and they fear that a stronger AGG would primarily lead to bureaucracy and overregulation.
  A relevant factor explaining why reforms have not been implemented is the party-political constellation at the federal level. From 2005 to 2021, the CDU/CSU continuously led the federal government and consistently refused to expand the AGG beyond the minimum required by EU law. Additional obstacles include the lack of resources for political lobbying and the fragmentation of anti-discrimination work. Another barrier is the absence of clear political responsibility for raising demands at the federal level—anti-discrimination policy is negotiated across multiple domains, such as equality, integration, disability, and queer policy, which makes coordination and consolidation of common demands difficult.
• The project also examined how actors act strategically and the network structures in the field. Civil society actors and public anti-discrimination bodies focus more on discourse formation (public opinion, knowledge generation, professional exchange) than on direct political influence. However, when opportunities arise, they target concrete political decisions more than expected. Business actors, in contrast, clearly focus on political decisions, with discourse formation being largely irrelevant for them.

The results confirm the well-known asymmetry in interest representation and the resource constraints of civil society actors. To create a more balanced democratic decision-making process, interest groups with limited resources should be strengthened, for example through clearly regulated participation in consultations.