挑战一体化叙事:改变对欧洲的看法

IF 2.8 2区 经济学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
V. Bachmann
{"title":"挑战一体化叙事:改变对欧洲的看法","authors":"V. Bachmann","doi":"10.1177/09697764231158307","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Union (EU) has long projected the vision of an integrating Europe, centred on successful regional integration, as a better geopolitical model in comparison to ‘others’, such as the Cold War superpowers, US neoconservativism or diverse autocratic regimes. The purported superiority of the ‘European model’ is thereby linked to credibly advancing the story of successful regional integration – internally as well as externally. This article suggests a narrative continuum between EU-optimism and EU-scepticism and argues that perceptions about the ‘success’ of the EU as a model for regional integration have changed between the first and the second decade of the new millennium. As part of this shift, EU-scepticism has gained in prominence over EU-optimism. This is related to a series of geopolitical ruptures since the late 2000s, in particular, the financial crisis, disputes on human mobility and border management, rising nationalism, Brexit and other right-wing populist movements across the continent. Focussing on the divisions within the EU as regards financial and migration policy, this article highlights three interrelated simultaneities. It argues (a) that process and discourse of (b) integration and disintegration have (c) internal and external dimensions. Empirically, it builds on interviews with African and European geopolitical elites that have been conducted as part of two research projects on external perceptions of the EU in East Africa between 2010 and 2018. It thus offers a snapshot on the shift of both ‘internal’ and ‘external’ perceptions of the EU against the context of wider geopolitical transformations over the course of this decisive decade.","PeriodicalId":47746,"journal":{"name":"European Urban and Regional Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contesting the integration narrative: Shifting perceptions of EUrope\",\"authors\":\"V. Bachmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09697764231158307\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The European Union (EU) has long projected the vision of an integrating Europe, centred on successful regional integration, as a better geopolitical model in comparison to ‘others’, such as the Cold War superpowers, US neoconservativism or diverse autocratic regimes. The purported superiority of the ‘European model’ is thereby linked to credibly advancing the story of successful regional integration – internally as well as externally. This article suggests a narrative continuum between EU-optimism and EU-scepticism and argues that perceptions about the ‘success’ of the EU as a model for regional integration have changed between the first and the second decade of the new millennium. As part of this shift, EU-scepticism has gained in prominence over EU-optimism. This is related to a series of geopolitical ruptures since the late 2000s, in particular, the financial crisis, disputes on human mobility and border management, rising nationalism, Brexit and other right-wing populist movements across the continent. Focussing on the divisions within the EU as regards financial and migration policy, this article highlights three interrelated simultaneities. It argues (a) that process and discourse of (b) integration and disintegration have (c) internal and external dimensions. Empirically, it builds on interviews with African and European geopolitical elites that have been conducted as part of two research projects on external perceptions of the EU in East Africa between 2010 and 2018. It thus offers a snapshot on the shift of both ‘internal’ and ‘external’ perceptions of the EU against the context of wider geopolitical transformations over the course of this decisive decade.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47746,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Urban and Regional Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Urban and Regional Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231158307\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Urban and Regional Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09697764231158307","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

长期以来,欧盟(EU)一直以成功的区域一体化为中心,将欧洲一体化作为比“其他国家”(如冷战超级大国、美国新保守主义或各种专制政权)更好的地缘政治模式。因此,所谓的“欧洲模式”的优越性与令人信服地推进成功的区域一体化的故事联系在一起——无论是对内还是对外。本文提出了欧盟乐观主义和欧盟怀疑主义之间的叙事连续性,并认为关于欧盟作为区域一体化典范的“成功”的看法在新千年的第一个十年和第二个十年之间发生了变化。作为这一转变的一部分,对欧盟的怀疑已经超过了对欧盟的乐观。这与2000年代末以来的一系列地缘政治破裂有关,特别是金融危机、关于人员流动和边境管理的争端、民族主义抬头、英国退欧和欧洲大陆其他右翼民粹主义运动。关注欧盟内部在金融和移民政策方面的分歧,本文强调了三个相互关联的同时性。它认为(a)整合和解体的过程和话语有(c)内部和外部维度。从经验上看,它建立在对非洲和欧洲地缘政治精英的采访基础上,这些访谈是2010年至2018年两个关于欧盟在东非的外部看法的研究项目的一部分。因此,在这个决定性的十年中,在更广泛的地缘政治变革的背景下,它提供了对欧盟“内部”和“外部”看法转变的快照。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Contesting the integration narrative: Shifting perceptions of EUrope
The European Union (EU) has long projected the vision of an integrating Europe, centred on successful regional integration, as a better geopolitical model in comparison to ‘others’, such as the Cold War superpowers, US neoconservativism or diverse autocratic regimes. The purported superiority of the ‘European model’ is thereby linked to credibly advancing the story of successful regional integration – internally as well as externally. This article suggests a narrative continuum between EU-optimism and EU-scepticism and argues that perceptions about the ‘success’ of the EU as a model for regional integration have changed between the first and the second decade of the new millennium. As part of this shift, EU-scepticism has gained in prominence over EU-optimism. This is related to a series of geopolitical ruptures since the late 2000s, in particular, the financial crisis, disputes on human mobility and border management, rising nationalism, Brexit and other right-wing populist movements across the continent. Focussing on the divisions within the EU as regards financial and migration policy, this article highlights three interrelated simultaneities. It argues (a) that process and discourse of (b) integration and disintegration have (c) internal and external dimensions. Empirically, it builds on interviews with African and European geopolitical elites that have been conducted as part of two research projects on external perceptions of the EU in East Africa between 2010 and 2018. It thus offers a snapshot on the shift of both ‘internal’ and ‘external’ perceptions of the EU against the context of wider geopolitical transformations over the course of this decisive decade.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
27
期刊介绍: European Urban and Regional Studies is a highly ranked, peer reviewed international journal. It provides an original contribution to academic and policy debate related to processes of urban and regional development in Europe. It offers a truly European coverage from the Atlantic to the Urals,and from the Arctic Circle to the Mediterranean. Its aims are to explore the ways in which space makes a difference to the social, economic, political and cultural map of Europe; highlight the connections between theoretical analysis and policy development; and place changes in global context.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信