Towards An Ever Closer Union among the Peoples of Europe? A Longitudinal Network Analysis of the European Social Space
1Freie Universität Berlin; 2Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg; 3Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences
Following relational sociology (Emirbayer 1997) and transactionalist theory (Deutsch 1953), we sug-gest to conceptualize the European social space as a multiplex network of people’s transnational mo-bility and communication. To enhance our understanding of how this social space has evolved over time, we comparatively analyse the development of five types of cross-border interaction (migration, student exchange, tourist flows, phone calls, online friendships) over periods of up to five decades (1960–2010). In specific, we examine: (1) how the density of interaction has changed over time, (2) how the degree of closure towards the outside world has changed over time, (3) whether the networks have become more centralized or more equally distributed over time, and (4) what the mechanisms behind these trends are, e.g., whether historically and culturally bound regional clusters are dissolving and political and economic ties are becoming more relevant. Social network analyses of process-generated dyadic data from a variety of sources (UN, World Bank, World Tourism Organiza-tion, International Telecommunication Union, Facebook) reveal, inter alia, that (a) the density of in-teraction has consistently increased in Europe and (b) trends in closure are type-dependent, with in-creasing closure in migration and student exchange and decreasing closure in tourism and phone calls. Thus, our findings provide new insights into the changing structure of Europe as a social space and highlight the necessity to take the multiplex nature of human interaction into account when examin-ing processes of transnational integration.
Assessing transnational behavior of Europe’s second generation through linking research on migrant transnationalism and intra-European mobility
Centre Marc Bloch, Germany
In Europe, the study of second generation transnationalism is still in its infancy. While there are important studies on second generation’s transnational ways of being and belonging (e.g. Fokkema et al. 2012; Wessendorf 2013), these studies usually focus solely on transnational practices that connect the Country of Residence to the ancestral home country. The conclusion is usually that the second generation exhibits less transnational behavior than their parents – first generation immigrants. This limitation is inadequate as the second generation is likely to show other forms of mobility with different destination countries, just as other mobile Europeans. To fully capture second generation’s transnational ways of being and belonging, we therefore need to connect the migrant transnationalism literature to the literature on intra-EU mobility and European identification. So far, these two research traditions have existed rather next to each other, even though they address similar theoretical questions. In this theoretical paper, I will demonstrate how linking the two research traditions advance our understanding of second generation transnationalism. It enables us to focus on the link between ways of being and belonging, which has been a central question in studies on intra-EU mobility and European identification. Understanding the link between behavior and identification, in turn, is crucial for figuring out the ways that transnationalism and integration interact for the second generation. In addition to theoretical advances, linking the two research traditions also leads us to think about new methodological ways of researching transnationalism and mobilities.
European Identity and Mobility" Is it the taking part that counts? Youth transnational political participation in the EU
1Colegio Nacional de Ciencias Políticas y Sociología, Spain; 2Universidad Carlos III; 3Universidad Complutense de Madrid
The study of transnational migration has been developed in Europe in a prolific way during the last two decades (Pries 2002; Vertovec, 2003; Bauböck, 2003; Faist, 2013) and the main concept of transnationality extended through the work of multiple scholars. Nevertheless while transnational economic, social, or cultural activities are performed through political boundaries without directly questioning them, political transnationalism defy exclusive loyalties of citizens towards a single state and acts as if the political community had been de facto extended beyond the territory of the State (Bauböck, 2007).
Existing literature focuses mainly on receiving countries and how the political opportunity structure (POS) determines transnational political participation (Morales, Pilati, 2014). In relation to the “sending-country gap" (De Haas, 2011) we question whether the high rate (57%) of young people who feel excluded from economic and social life because of the economic crisis (Eurobarometer, 2016), and the substantial variance of citizens willingness to migrate on countries more affected (Spain, Portugal, Greece), do echo on participation positively or negatively.
Using data extracted from two surveys (n5750, n3200) conducted within the H2020-MOVE project (GA.No 643263) that examines youth mobility in the EU, we introduce a new variable (mobility/non-mobility) in the study of youth political participation and civic engagement building on previous works on online political activities (Anduiza, 2007), migrant political participation (Morales, Pilati, 2014) and directionality of this participation (Ostergaard-Nielsen, 2009) and address the issue of participation from countries more affected by the economic crisis (Spain, Romania) versus less affected (Germany, Norway).
This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 649263.
Modern Space of Experience: a global history of intellectuals in displacement
Universitat de Barcelona, Spain
Contemporary global history has greatly improved our understanding of what could be understood as the relation between ‘the modern’ and ‘the global’ - a connection that is not obvious at it appears in some contemporary approaches. Opening new historical archives and revising previous ones, historians and social scientists have demonstrated the role of European and non-Western-Europeans intellectuals in the creation of a global modern order and in doing so have challenged by different means the idea of universal history, of the possibility of a cosmopolitan order, and an of the modern development. Current post-colonial and 'Southern' critiques have been a source of these revisions, and at the same time the findings from the new global history have been used to rethink the formation of the modern world. This paper draws on some empirical sources that the ‘global turn’ has brought about, but strongly rejects and criticises proposals that are based on crystallised geographical images that aim to explain ‘how places think’ – as these appear for instance in the work of Michael Burawoy, Walter Mignolo, Raewyn Connell and Boaventura Sousa Santos. And by doing so it creates an image of Europe as historical unproblematic rational actor. The paper will analyse intellectuals in displacement. It will be shown that the global dimension of modernity is based on the experience of displacement and the knowledge generated through this movement. By this it is meant that to experience a different way of seeing the unknown, or to approach what is already known through different eyes, is a way for human beings to situate themselves in a world that has become transformed because of their own action.