Home| About| People| Projects| Events| Visitors| Publications| Contact

Citizens Talking About Europe. French, British and Belgian Citizens in Political Discussion

Navigation

Project Introduction

This project explores ‘European citizenship’ understood as European citizens’ understanding and evaluation as well as their capacities and strategies for engaging in political discussion on this subject with their fellows. The research will contribute to understanding of the complexity of citizens’ engagement with a developing European public. It will also contribute to understanding the dynamic relationship between conflict, deliberation, and disengagement in public settings.

The data was collected in focus group sessions (click here for extracts from the group discussions):

  • Participants met for an extended period (three hours including refreshment and socialisation).
  • They discussed a range of questions regarding Europe (click here for the discussion schedule)
    • their experience of ‘being European’,
    • the power structure of Europe,
    • the question of Turkey’s possible entry into the EU, and
    • the attitudes of the major political parties of their country to Turkish entry.
  • Participants had to be citizens of the relevant country, but covered a wide range of ages. Groups were deliberately constituted to include participants who were
    • socially homogeneous (that is to say, with similar kinds of education and occupation), but
    • politically heterogeneous (that is to say, with different partisan allegiances and measured attitudes to European union).

So in each country we convened (click here for the lists giving characteristics of group participants)

  • At least two groups of participants with occupations such as cleaners, drivers, shop assistants and kitchen workers, known for project purposes as ‘working class/ouvriers’,
  • Two with occupations such as office workers, salespersons, health support worker (white collar/employés), and
  • Two groups with university or higher education and jobs such as consultant engineer, office manager, or journalist (professional-manager/cadres).
  • In addition we convened, in each country, two groups of ‘activists/militants’ – individuals active in parties, running for office, or employed in ‘political’ posts in parties or other relevant organisations.

The idea is that we expected our ‘activists/militants’ to be familiar with facts about and understand the controversies about the European Union and European politics, to have relatively well formed and stable attitudes to these controversies, and to be used to engaging in political debate and argument.

The research design will enable three kinds of comparison.

  • First, between countries;
  • Second, both within and across the countries, between social groups;
  • Third, between politically involved people (party militants) and ordinary citizens.

Analysis will focus on two interrelated levels

  • First, comparative (by country, by social group) analysis of participants’ attitudes to and understandings of European citizenship
    • Initial results suggest ostensible country differences:
      • The Belgian groups speak from a taken for granted position within the EU, and focus on familiar dilemmas of a multi-level institutional system in which political authority is complex and shared;
      • The French groups also take the EU for granted but do not make any clear distinction between it and the country; they focus above all on social policy, and threats to the European social model from neo-liberalism;
      • The British groups speak very clearly from outside the EU, and focus above all on the questions of sovereignty and national identity.
    • However, these ostensible differences are, of course, complicated by the multi-vocality of the groups. Within groups there are divisions over:
      • ‘protectionism v liberalism’ in economics,
      • ‘openness v closure’ with regard to national and EU borders and migration, and
      • ‘multiculturalism v cultural homogeneity’ with regard to the presence of workers and citizens from diverse cultures in the EU countries.
    • Both the magnitude and detail of the differences is likely to vary by social class. In some respects the differences between the working class/ouvriers groups are magnified as compared to those between the activists/militants, and managers/cadres; in other respects they are less.
  • Second, comparative analysis of participants’ readiness to engage in debate and conflict. We ask what resources (knowledge, discursive skills, emotional literacy, political commitment etc) are brought to bear in the discussion and how they are deployed in conflict.
    • There are moments in the course of discussion (‘politicisation moments’) when lines of disagreement become conflictual. At these points participants can either proceed to the articulation of political difference or even hostility, or can seek to depoliticise the moment, for instance by withdrawal, or making a joke, or by changing the subject.
    • The course taken at such moments is connected both to participants’ political commitments (political differences connected to social difference, partisan allegiance or both) and to their commitment to deliberation and cooperative styles of discussion.

Team Members

Coordinator: Dr Sophie Duchesne (CEVIPOF, CNRS and Sciences Po)

Dr Florence Haegel, CEVIPOF (Sciences Po, Paris),

Dr Elizabeth Frazer (Department of Politics and International Relations and New College, University of Oxford)

Prof André-Paul Frognier (Unité de sciences socials et politique, Universit é Catholique de Louvain)

Dr Guillaume Garcia (centre d’Etudes Européennes, Sciences Po, Paris)

Virginie Van Ingelgom (Aspirante FNRS, Université Catholique de Louvain)

Research Assistant: Paul Honey (Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford)

Funders

ANR (Agence Nationale pour la Recherche, France), Centre d’Etudes Européennes (Sciences Po, Paris), Leverhulme Trust (UK), Nuffield College (Oxford), Fonds National de la Recherche Scientifique (Belgique)

Publications

S.Duchesne, E. Frazer, A.-P. Frognier, G. Garcia, F. Haegel, L. Pialek et V. Van Ingelgom, « Comment les Français, les Britanniques et les Belges parlent de l’Europe ? », CEVIPOF political sociology seminar series, 4 octobre 2006. More information... pdf file pdf

S. Duchesne & F. Haegel. ‘La politisation des discussions à l’épreuve de la comparaison : premiers enseignements d’une enquête en France, en Belgique francophone et en Angleterre sur le thème de l’Europe’, paper presented at the workshop nbr 2, French Political Association Congress (Regards croisés sur la politisation des individus : ici et là-bas, hier et aujourd’hui) Toulouse, Septembre 2007, http://www.congres-afsp.fr/ (paper to be found on line on the workshop programme)

S. Duchesne & V. Van Ingelgom (UCL, Louvain la Neuve), « A propos de la construction d’une communauté politique européenne. Comment les Belges (francophones) et les Français parlent des Européens (de l’Ouest) : sont-ils déjà des ‘nous’ ou encore des ‘autres’ ? », paper presented at the second conference of the European Studies Group of the French Political Science Association, Grenoble, December 6/7 2007. More information... pdf file pdf

S. Duchesne & V. Van Ingelgom, ‘Comment les discussions deviennent politiques lorsque des Francais, des Anglais ou des Belges francophone parlent de l’Europe?’ Politique européenne N°24, winter 2008, p.145-149. More information... pdf file pdf

S.Duchesne, ‘Waiting for European identity…: Preliminary thoughts about the identification process with Europe’, to be published in Perspectives on European Society and Politics, special issue on "European Identity", edited by Claire Wallace and Kristin Stromsnes, vol. 9, n°4, December 2008, p.397-410. More information... pdf file pdf

G.Garcia, V.Van Ingelgom, S.Duchesne, E.Frazer, A.-P. Frognier & F.Haegel, “Comparing Conflict on European Issues. A possible Way to assess the salience of Europe for French, British and French speaking Belgians”, paper presented at the conference “European Citizenship Revisited”, University of Oxford, 23rd of June 2008. More information pdf file pdf

F.Haegel, S.Duchesne, E.Frazer, A.-P. Frognier, G.Garcia, & V.Van Ingelgom, “National “Framing revisited. French, British and French speaking Belgian citizens arguing about Europe”, paper presented at the conference “European Citizenship Revisited ”, University of Oxford, 23rd of June 2008. More information pdf file pdf

S.Duchesne, E.Frazer, A.-P. Frognier, G.Garcia, F.Haegel, & V.Van Ingelgom, “Attention to Europe: where social groups really differ. Comparative Analysis of French, British and (French speaking) Belgian focus groups”, paper presented at the conference “European Citizenship Revisited”, University of Oxford, 23rd of June 2008. More information pdf file pdf

E. Frazer, V. Van Ingelgom, S. Duchesne, F. Haegel, A.P. Frognier, G. Garcia, ‘Citizens talking about Europe: discussion becoming political’
at UACES (University Association for Contemporary European Studies) ‘Rethinking the European Union’ panel Values and Ethos in an Enlarging Europe, Edinburgh, UK. September 2008. More information... pdf file pdf

S. Duchesne & V. Van Ingelgom, « L’indifférence des Français et des Belges (francophones) pour leurs voisins européens : une pièce de plus au dossier de l’absence de communauté politique européenne ? », forthcoming, Politique Européenne, n°26, December 2008. More information pdf file pdf

Paper prepared for the EPOP Conference, Manchester, September 2008 (Panel: Political Discussion and Political Deliberation in a Comparative Perspective) More information pdf file pdf

Events

Thursday October 4 2006:

CEVIPOF Political Sociology Seminar Series: Presentation of general hypotheses.

Monday May 5 2008:

European Studies Centre, Sciences Po/Paris: First presentation of results.

Monday June 23 2008:

Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford: 'European Citizenship Revisited'. More information...


Restricted Materials

© Department of Politics and International Relations.