Is there a „Europe“ in European Integration?

Euro­pean Inte­gra­tion has been a top­ic of social sci­ence research for more than twen­ty years now but has, for a long time, been dom­i­nat­ed by the analy­sis of polit­i­cal and admin­is­tra­tive process­es of build­ing Euro­pean Union insti­tu­tions and chang­ing nation­al pol­i­cy. Only the last years have seen an increas­ing inter­est in process­es of Euro­peaniza­tion from a more gen­er­al, soci­o­log­i­cal, per­spec­tive that less empha­sizes legal aspects and transna­tion­al bar­gain­ing process­es but put its focus on the impact Europe – in one of the mul­ti­tude of shapes it takes – has on people’s lives and every­day activ­i­ties.

This new­ly emerg­ing research ques­tion intro­duces not only a new type of research object into Euro­pean Stud­ies but also focus­es our atten­tion on what is actu­al­ly is that we call Europe and whether this goes beyond legal insti­tu­tions. While polit­i­cal sci­ence can eas­i­ly rep­re­sent Europe by the Euro­pean Union or the Coun­cil of Europe, soci­ol­o­gy needs to ask the ques­tion whether changes it observes are a sign of Euro­peaniza­tion or an expres­sion of more gen­er­al process­es like de-nation­al­iza­tion, glob­al­iza­tion or transna­tion­al­iza­tion ((Delan­ty, G., & Rum­ford, C. (2005). Rethink­ing Europe. Social The­o­ry and the Impli­ca­tions of Euro­peaniza­tion. Lon­don, New York: Rout­ledge.)) – and devel­op gen­er­al cri­te­ria for each cat­e­go­ry. Observ­ing, for exam­ple, an increase in cross-bor­der com­mut­ing, air trav­el ((Mau, S. (2007). Transna­tionale Verge­sellschaf­tung. Die Ent­gren­zung sozialer Lebenswel­ten. Frank­furt / Main: Cam­pus.)) or lan­guage pro­fi­cien­cy ((Ger­hards, Jür­gen, From Babel to Brus­sels: Euro­pean Inte­gra­tion and the Impor­tance of Transna­tion­al Lin­guis­tic Cap­i­tal (Sep­tem­ber 1, 2012). Berlin Stud­ies on the Soci­ol­o­gy of Europe (BSSE) Work­ing Paper No. 28. Avail­able at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2156812 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2156812)), might be an indi­ca­tor for Euro­peaniza­tion but it remains unclear, in how far there is a dis­tinct­ly Euro­pean dimen­sion to those activ­i­ties. Even more, we don’t even know yet how we could iden­ti­fy such a dimen­sion.

Thus, instead of look­ing at the grand scale of Euro­peaniza­tion, span­ning an area from Fin­land to Spain and from Ire­land to Roma­nia and dis­cussing the emer­gence of a pan-Euro­pean com­mon soci­ety, soci­ol­o­gy must devel­op a much nar­row­er focus and, first of all, ask the ques­tion of how people’s activ­i­ties and think­ing are relat­ed to their region, their home state and/or Europe as a social scale. In oth­er words, while polit­i­cal sci­ence does well by tak­ing the Euro­pean Union as a start­ing point of its research and con­sid­er­ing its emer­gence as well as its influ­ence on domes­tic or even region­al poli­cies, soci­ol­o­gy needs to acquire a more bot­tom-up per­spec­tive that asks in which ways peo­ple change their every­day lives in respect to its ter­ri­to­r­i­al basis and the for­mer­ly dom­i­nant order of the nation state, what these changes might be attrib­uted to and how this might relate to the emer­gence of some kind of soci­etal enti­ty we could call Europe.

It is tempt­ing to sim­ply attribute all types of transna­tion­al­iza­tion that do occur with­in the Euro­pean con­ti­nent to Euro­peaniza­tion, as it cur­rent­ly so often done, but this blurs the fact that there are sev­er­al dif­fer­ent process­es with­in the mod­ern wold that might trig­ger this change in activ­i­ty and thought pat­terns. So we first have to devel­op the con­cep­tu­al frame­work and the cor­re­spond­ing ana­lyt­i­cal toolk­it to be able to sys­tem­atize those devel­op­ments and then start con­sid­er­ing whether one might inter­pret them as an expres­sion of Euro­peaniza­tion.

Not sur­pris­ing­ly, first research fol­low­ing along those lines does actu­al­ly find that people’s think­ing and act­ing does more and more tran­scend their coun­try of ori­gin but not nec­es­sar­i­ly obtain a ter­ri­to­r­i­al scale that could be called Euro­pean. While research on Dan­ish youths shows how transna­tion­al think­ing and life plan­ning, if transna­tion­al­ly ori­ent­ed at all, most­ly refers to cul­tur­al and eco­nom­ic cen­ters like Lon­don or the Unit­ed States’ east coast ((Yndi­gegn, C. (2003). Life Plan­ning in the Periph­ery: Life Chances and Life Per­spec­tives for Young Peo­ple in the Dan­ish-Ger­man Bor­der Region. Young, 11(3), 235–251. doi:10.1177/11033088030113003)) , my own research on Ger­man bor­der regions shows on a small­er scale, how peo­ple actu­al­ly do expand their hori­zon of activ­i­ties across bor­ders and how they even, to a lim­it­ed extend, adopt cul­tur­al pat­terns from their neigh­bor­ing coun­try. It also points out how geo­graph­i­cal­ly lim­it­ed these activ­i­ties remain, being more or less restrict­ed to the imme­di­ate vicin­i­ty on the oth­er side of the bor­der and how they cre­ate only lit­tle inter­est in the neigh­bor­ing coun­try as a whole, and even much less in Europe ((Müller, N. (2014). Die alltägliche Repro­duk­tion nationaler Gren­zen. Kon­stanz: UVK.))

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert