1 Bringing the Case Studies Together
Our methodological innovation, ethnography of Europeanization, offers a multi-dimensional and intersectional approach to how people construct Europe and their notion of belonging to it at different social and cultural locations. We explore this in data sets from three EU cultural initiatives – the European Capital of Culture (ECOC), the European Citizen Campus (ECC), and the European Heritage Label (EHL). In our three case studies, various social locations and demographic aspects, such as age, gender, education, nationality, country of residence, and level of active engagement in cultural participation, had a major impact on our research participants’ answers dealing with Europe and the ‘European’. These socio-demographic factors affected both people’s agency and their imaginations of Europe, and intersected with other social and cultural phenomena that participants addressed, such as mobility, cultural diversity, and ideas of participation. People’s social location plays a role in deepening and/or creating opportunities for engaging in such phenomena and contributing to processes of belonging.
In this chapter, we bring together the core findings from our three case studies and cross-analyze them in relation to spatial and temporal contexts, including the specific contexts in which the EU cultural initiatives occurred. While we address the overlap in our data, we have no intention to conduct a comparative study. Our qualitative analysis takes into account only the answers of EU citizens and of citizens of Russia, Ukraine, and Switzerland, which includes all respondents and participants in the ECOC and ECC data sets and 230 interviewed visitors to EHL sites.
In order to interpret and understand our data and its meanings more extensively, we have quantified certain answers from our interviews and survey. These findings are valid and representative only for the respective case study in which the responses were collected. Bearing in mind the small numbers of informants, particularly in the ECC and EHL cases, we do not claim that our results are as representative as larger surveys like Eurobarometer. However, grouping the answers enabled us to discuss belonging to Europe from different perspectives and in various contexts, and to consider the factors affecting the answers that referred to the respondents’ relationship to Europe and views on the ‘European’. Grouping answers also helped us to identify important topics
2 The Impact of Social Locations and the Research Setting on Notions of Europe
2.1 Gender
In all our three case studies (Chapters 4–6), more women than men participated in the questionnaire surveys or qualitative interviews. Although we are aware of more than binary gender conceptions, we did not perceive any potential conflict based on the traditional gender division during our data collection and we will therefore continue to refer to men and women only. In the ECOC data, eight respondents did not (for several possible reasons) reveal their gender. Based on our data, we noticed that female participants and interviewees tended to hold neutral to positive views on the ‘European’ and Europe more often than men did, particularly participants in the ECOC and EHL case studies (see tables 7.1 and 7.2). The ECC case is slightly different as all interviewees had volunteered to participate in a European project with thematic workshops dealing with European issues, and we therefore assume that the participants had positive associations with Europe and the EU. While male interviewees and respondents also had a high approval of Europe and the EU, in particular on economic and political issues, they more often voiced criticism towards the EU and its current state of affairs and politics in their answers.
Notions of European identity and feeling European in relation to gender among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine (123 women and 107 men)
| Women | Men | |
|---|---|---|
| Strongly feels European | 62% | 66% |
| Feels both European and membership of a specific nation, region, or city | 22% | 21% |
| Does not feel European | 13% | 10% |
| Positive associations with the concept of European identity | 19% | 19% |
| Neutral associations with the concept of European identity | 64% | 50% |
| Negative associations with the concept of European identity | 6% | 9% |
| Other associations with European identity (e.g. views that it is a project, still needs elaboration, or may emerge only in the future) | 11% | 22% |
| Is able to describe what European identity is | 65% | 51% |
| Does not think that European identity exists | 7% | 17% |
Views on Europeanness among the respondents from Pécs, Tallinn, and Turku based on gender (968 women and 451 men)
| Women | Men | |
|---|---|---|
| Identifies a lot with Europeanness | 44% | 38% |
| Positive or very positive impressions on Europeanness | 76% | 70% |
| Sees that ECOC events represent a lot or very much Europeanness | 63% | 55% |
| Sees that ECOC events should represent a lot or very much Europeanness | 74% | 67% |
Drawing on our EHL interview data, more women than men expressed the view that something like a European identity might exist and it seemed to be easier for women to describe what this was (see Table 7.1). They often connected it to notions and ideas that highlighted family and roots on the one hand, and the importance of peace and strengthening rights and equality, on
In the following, we refer to our detailed analysis of the ECOC case as an example that supports the findings on the interrelation between gender and views of Europe from our EHL case. The questionnaire survey used in the ECOC study allowed us to cross-reference gender with respondents’ views on Europeanness. Our analysis of the ECOC case indicated that women identified with Europeanness more often than men (see Table 7.2). When calculating how much the respondents considered Europeanness as an important element for their identity, women had a higher score in all case ECOCs (mean score of a scale of 1–3 [not at all / to some extent / a lot]: for respondents in Pécs,
The respondents’ views on how the ECOC events represented Europeanness, or how they should represent it, followed similar gender bias. We calculated how much the respondents perceived that the ECOC events represented Europeanness using the mean score on a scale of 1–5 (not at all / a little / to some extent / a lot / very much), and found that women scored higher than men (Pécs women 3.82 and men 3.68; Tallinn women 4.01 and men 3.64; Turku women 3.68 and men 3.58). Here, the difference was biggest again in Tallinn and smallest in Turku. Moreover, women saw more often than men that the events should represent Europeanness (in Pécs women 4.15 and men 3.96; Tallinn women 4.22 and men 4.01; Turku women 3.78 and men 3.69). Again, the biggest difference was in Tallinn and the smallest in Turku.
These geographical differences in our findings on gender and Europeanness are difficult to explain but may connect to the influence of broader social and cultural phenomena, such as the experience, attributed significance, and implementation of gender equality. We found that in Pécs and Tallinn, both the ECOC programmes and the ECOC audiences often emphasized and dealt with the aim and interest of ‘becoming’ and being taken more seriously as
The findings from the ECOC data suggest a connection between Europeanization and the political and socio-cultural traditions in the respective countries. Compared to Estonia and Hungary, Finland has a longer tradition of gender equality dating from the introduction of women’s right to vote and stand for election in 1906. With other Nordic countries, Finland is commonly perceived to score high on gender equality politics (Lähdesmäki and Saresma 2014). Unlike the former Eastern bloc countries – Estonia and Hungary – Finland was more strongly influenced by EU politics, even before becoming member state. The European Community and then Union has emphasized equality between men and women as a fundamental value and sought to advance gender equality from its beginnings (Jacquot 2015; EC 2019; see also Lähdesmäki et al. 2020). While broad public discussion of women’s rights and gender equality began in Western countries in the late 1960s, this did not occur in the Soviet Union and its satellite states, even though the communist imagery and rhetoric characterized women as ‘equal to men’, emphasized the importance of women in the society, and offered greater opportunities and expectations for them to participate in the workforce. This different development may have shaped each society’s dominant perceptions on gender. In turn, it influences people’s relations and associations with Europe.
Thus, gender and the experience of gender politics may be more relevant for forming people’s views on Europe and their relationship with the EU in some societal contexts than in others. The extent and ways in which certain social phenomena are addressed in societies can reflect their citizens’ views on Europe as a whole. Social environments and the experience of everyday life
2.2 Age
Another factor that affected the interviewees’ and respondents’ views on Europe and ‘the European’ was their age. In the ECOC data, respondents to the questions on Europeanness born in the 1970s and 1960s were more reserved towards it than younger or older respondents (see Figure 7.1). The youngest respondents, born in the 1990s or later, and the oldest ones, born in the 1950s or earlier, had the most positive attitude towards the ‘European’.
Views on Europeanness among the ECOC respondents (N = 1,425) from Pécs, Tallinn, and Turku based on age
We noted similar findings in the EHL data, although this was collected seven years later – the ECOC data was collected in 2010 and 2011 and the EHL data in 2017 and 2018. However, the ECC data was less conclusive on age, as the interviewees were all younger (students) and had consciously decided to participate
Based on our analysis of the interviews from the EHL sites (see Chapter 6) we divided visitors into three age groups: young (aged 18–35), middle-aged (aged 36–65), and older (66+). In general, high numbers of people in all age groups felt European (in response to the question ‘Do you feel European?’, see Table 7.3). Among young interviewees, 60% strongly felt European, while 24% considered themselves both European and national citizens – and sometimes also felt belonging to a certain region or city. In the group of middle-aged interviewees, 64% strongly felt European and 22% both European and a national citizen, while in the oldest age group, 74% felt strongly European, 16% both European and national citizens, and only four interviewees did not feel European. The younger the age group, the more positive the associations with European identity (young: 24%, middle-aged: 20%, older: 8%), while older interviewees seemed to have more negative associations with the idea of a European identity. Older interviewees also more frequently highlighted European identity as a project. To a certain extent this resonates with the findings that the two younger age groups were both better able to describe what a European identity represented and more ready to accept that a shared European identity existed.
Notions on European identity and feeling European in relation to age among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine (N in age groups from the youngest to oldest: 87, 93, and 46)
| Age group | 18–35 | 36–65 | 66+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Strongly feels European | 60% | 64% | 74% |
| Feels both European and membership of a specific nation, region, or city | 24% | 22% | 16% |
| Does not feel European | 12% | 12% | 10% |
| Positive associations with the concept of European identity | 24% | 20% | 8% |
| Neutral associations with the concept of European identity | 60% | 57% | 56% |
| Negative associations with the concept of European identity | 7% | 5% | 12% |
| Other associations with European identity (e.g. views that it is a project, still needs elaboration, or may emerge only in the future) | 9% | 18% | 24% |
| Is able to describe what European identity is | 61% | 62% | 44% |
| Does not think that European identity exists | 9% | 13% | 14% |
This relationship between age and feeling European was slightly surprising to us. Similarly to the ECOC data, younger and older visitors to the EHL sites generally spoke in far more positive terms about European identity and the EU in the interviews. Middle-aged visitors generally voiced more frequent and often harsher criticism of the EU and the notion of a unified Europe. However, middle-aged interviewees were more likely than young people to give positive responses to the direct question on feeling European. This is one example of participants’ contradicting and contested notions in our case studies. One simplified explanation might be that young people are still in the process of finding their way, while middle-aged people are more critical and looking for immediate solutions to current problems, and members of the older generation are more relaxed and less tense about future projects. Another explanation is that there were unequal numbers of interviewees in each age group in the EHL case.
Our cross analysis showed that the EHL visitors in the youngest age group most frequently had positive associations with European identity (24%, see Table 7.3), while interviewees aged 66 and over seemed to have more negative associations with the idea of a European identity. Interviewees in the
Our results indicate that the older generation of Europeans should not be generally considered, or automatically dismissed, as conservative and
When analyzing the views to Europe in different age groups between countries, our data did not indicate clear differences between the ‘East’ and ‘West’ of Europe. This can be illustrated by the results from the ECOC case study. When calculating how much the respondents considered Europeanness as an important element for their identity, based on the mean of a scale from 1–3 (not at all / to some extent / a lot), the oldest age group, born in 1949 or earlier, scored highest (2.57) in Tallinn, but the figures were not much lower for Turku (2.40) and Pécs (2.38). The youngest respondents, born in the 1990s, also scored highest in Tallinn (2.49) and similarly in Turku and Pécs (both 2.37). The perception of the concept of Europeanness was not clearly different in ‘East’ and ‘West’ – at least in the youngest age group. The mean perception of a scale of 1–5 (very negative / negative / neutral / positive / very positive) for the youngest respondents was 4.31 in Tallinn, 4.14 in Turku, and 3.92 in Pécs. Among the oldest respondents, the scores were 4.11 in Turku, 3.93 in Pécs, and 3.90 in Tallinn. However, the number of respondents in this age group was relatively low, so it is not possible to draw meaningful conclusions for this question based on age.
2.3 Education
Another important socio-demographic factor affecting our research participants’ views on Europe, the EU, and belonging is their educational background. In general, interviewees who participated in the ECC project and an overwhelming majority of visitors to the EHL sites had a higher education. The interviewees from the ECC workshops were all university students, while almost three quarters of the interviewed EHL visitors either held a bachelor’s, master’s, or doctoral degree (or equivalent diploma) or were university students. In the ECOC data, almost half of the respondents had a university degree (see Annex 1).
As Risse (2004, 256) writes, based on earlier studies, education and income have a positive impact on levels of attachment to Europe (see also Citrin and Sides 2004). According to Risse, attachment to Europe is linked with support for the EU and willingness to cede authority and sovereignty to EU institutions in various policy domains. We acknowledge that our discussions of belonging to Europe are largely based on data gathered from people with a higher
The detailed questionnaire study in the ECOC data enabled more detailed cross-tabulation of the impact of education on the respondents’ views. Our analysis indicated that education was a relevant factor in the respondents’ identification with Europe and their notions of Europeanness. The respondents with lower levels of education appeared to have also lower interest in Europeanness, and less often connected Europeanness with the ECOC events. The data enabled us to conclude that the higher the educational background of the respondents, the higher their identification with Europe and the more positive their impression of Europe (see Table 7.4). Moreover, identification with Europeanness seemed to reflect ease to interpret the European dimension in the ECOC events (see Lähdesmäki 2013, 2014a).
Views on Europeanness among the respondents from Pécs, Tallinn and Turku based on educational level (A = comprehensive or elementary school, vocational course, or in-job training, N = 155; B = high school, polytechnic, or other higher vocational degree, N = 622; C = higher education [bachelor’s, master’s, or doctoral degree], N = 630)
| A | B | C | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identifies a lot with Europeanness | 39% | 40% | 44% |
| Positive or very positive impressions on Europeanness | 69% | 71% | 78% |
| Sees that ECOC events represent a lot or very much Europeanness | 54% | 64% | 60% |
| Sees that ECOC events should represent a lot or very much Europeanness | 64% | 74% | 72% |
Levels of education also affected how respondents answered the open questions on the representation of Europeanness in the ECOC events. This was explored using thematic codes, based on the themes listed in the Table 4.1. We calculated how many of these codes were included in each open response on Europeanness in the events. Many of the respondents found difficult to describe Europeanness and did not, thus, answer the open questions regarding it. We considered, however, these ‘empty answers’ as meaningful data and included them in our calculations with a number zero. The more educated the respondents were, the more often they answered the open questions and the
Means of the number of different ways of perceiving Europeanness in the ECOC events given by respondents in different educational groups in Pécs, Tallinn and Turku, including empty answers (A = comprehensive or elementary school, N = 45; B = vocational course or degree or in-job training, N = 110; C = high school, N = 462; D = polytechnic or other higher vocational education, N = 163; E = bachelor’s degree, N = 215; F = master’s degree, N = 340; G = doctoral degree, N = 36)
| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of different ways to perceive Europeanness in the ECOC events | 0.40 | 0.47 | 0.59 | 0.60 | 0.64 | 0.70 | 0.81 |
Similarly, the EHL data revealed that notions of feeling European or being able to describe ideas about what Europe and the ‘European’ represents was linked with the interviewees’ educational background (see Table 7.6). People who did not have a higher education struggled more frequently with describing notions of Europe, while interviewees with an academic background had greater linguistic and cognitive competence (and courage) to describe abstract concepts, and hence to explain what Europe and European identity might mean. Interviewees with a university education seemed to feel strongly European more often but, at the same time, they more frequently referred to both positive and negative associations with ‘European identity’. Interviewees with a higher education more often described Europe as being open-minded, borderless, culturally and linguistically diverse, tolerant, and guaranteeing human rights and freedoms. However, many of them found the term ‘identity’ problematic and negatively connoted with exclusion, as implied in our findings in relation to age groups. From their studies, they were familiar with the rejection of the concept as too exclusionary and limiting. However, this did not affect their general sense of belonging to Europe, feeling European, and belief that Europeans from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds had things in common. This rejection of the term identity did not reveal the interviewees’ relationship to the EU; in fact, most of them identified with the Union’s political and economic goals.
Notions on European identity and feeling European in relation to education level among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine (A = basic education, high school, or vocational training, N = 47; B = higher education, bachelor’s, master’s, or doctoral degree, N = 177)
| A | B | |
|---|---|---|
| Strongly feels European | 59% | 65% |
| Feels both European and membership of a specific nation, region, or city | 17% | 23% |
| Does not feel European | 24% | 8% |
| Positive associations with the concept of European identity | 16% | 20% |
| Neutral associations with the concept of European identity | 64% | 57% |
| Negative associations with the concept of European identity | 4% | 8% |
| Other associations with European identity (e.g. views that it is a project, still needs elaboration, or may emerge only in the future) | 16% | 15% |
| Is able to describe what European identity is | 49% | 61% |
| Does not think that European identity exists | 19% | 10% |
Our analysis of the EHL data suggests that visitors with a higher education tend to feel a higher level of belonging to Europe, but their appreciation of the EU is based on multiple and diverse factors, including personal experiences, such as mobility, international work environments, bicultural partnerships, or mixed family backgrounds. Many of the interviewees who held academic degrees had had more opportunities for mobility and had spent some time
2.4 National Background
In all three case studies, most of the interviewees were EU citizens. In the ECOC case study, the majority of the respondents originated from three host countries in Central, Eastern, and Northern Europe; Hungary, Estonia, and Finland. The ECC project involved university students from six Western European countries; Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, and Portugal. West European interviewees dominated the EHL data set, which was partly due to the higher mobility of visitors from some West European countries. For instance, at almost all EHL sites we interviewed Dutch, French, or German tourists. In total, we interviewed EHL visitors representing 34 nationalities (see Annex 1). The selection of the EHL sites for our fieldwork was based on the specific, predetermined criteria of our research project (see Lähdesmäki et al. 2020):
Frequency and percentage of nationalities among all EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine (N = 230)
| Nationality | Total number of visitors | Total percentage of visitors | Nationality | Total number of visitors | Total percentage of visitors |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Austria | 16 | 7% | Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Belgium | 33 | 14% | Slovakia | 1 | <1% |
| Czech Rep. | 1 | <1% | Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Denmark | 3 | 1% | Sweden | 2 | 1% |
| Finland | 3 | 1% | Switzerland | 2 | 1% |
| France | 35 | 15% | UK | 15 | 7% |
| Germany | 37 | 16% | Ukraine | 2 | 1% |
| Greece | 2 | 1% | Austrian-Polish | 1 | <1% |
| Ireland | 2 | 1% | Dutch-American | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 22 | 10% | French-German | 1 | <1% |
| Luxembourg | 1 | <1% | Russian-French | 1 | <1% |
| Netherlands | 35 | 15% | Swedish-Dutch | 1 | <1% |
| Poland | 9 | 4% | Hungarian-British-German | 1 | <1% |
| Portugal | 1 | <1% |
In all our data, Europe is often identified with ‘Western’ Europe and reflects a certain bias to reproduce ideas and notions of citizens from core Western EU member states. These narratives may significantly differ from those of citizens from Central and East European states. The wealth of backgrounds in the EHL data allowed us to observe considerable differences in the discourses about Europe and the ‘European’ from different parts of Europe. While for some Western European interviewees, East European countries served as examples of the ‘European Other’, the vast majority of all interviewees and respondents
The EHL visitors pinned specific social meanings on Europe, very similar to the official EU value discourse, and often interpreted the EU in terms of a social welfare model. Moreover, they often understood Europe as a social construction and closely associated it with the EU and its legal and political provisions. As a result, traditional and historical constructions of ingroups and outgroups, based on national and ethnic differences and enmities between European countries, were replaced by new categories of inclusion and exclusion. The new outgroups were usually situated or viewed as originating from outside Europe or the EU. Nevertheless, the visitors expressed historically and culturally embedded differences in how they understood the significance of national sovereignty and the citizens’ relationship to the EU, which influenced their ways of constructing (or not constructing) belonging to Europe. In this, our data reflects similar findings from earlier studies of political discourses and interpretations of European integration in European countries (see Marcusssen et al. 1999; Risse et al. 1999; Breakwell 2004).
Quantifying the qualitative responses in our EHL data enabled us to compare attitudes towards Europe and feeling European based on a four-point scales (feel strongly European / feel also European in addition to national or other scalar allegiance / do not feel European / cannot say or not answered) in relation to the seven biggest visitor groups: Germany, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Italy, Austria, and the UK (see Table 7.8). Italian interviewees (88%) and Austrians (81%) felt most strongly European, followed by Germans (75%) and French interviewees (73%). At the lower end of this group were Belgian (50%), British (50%), and Dutch (47%) visitors. Dutch visitors had the largest numbers who did not feel European (31%), followed by British visitors (17%) and Belgian and Austrian visitors (13% each). In contrast, relatively few French and German interviewees (8% and 3%, respectively) did not feel European and not a single Italian interviewee expressed not feeling European at all.
The seven biggest nationality groups in relation to their notion of feeling European among interviewed EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine (those who were asked/answered)
| Nationality | Strongly feels European | Feels also European | Does not feel European | Unable to say |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Austria | 81% | 6% | 13% | 0% |
| Belgium | 50% | 29% | 13% | 8% |
| France | 73% | 15% | 8% | 4% |
| Germany | 75% | 22% | 3% | 0% |
| Italy | 88% | 13% | 0% | 0% |
| Netherlands | 47% | 16% | 31% | 6% |
| UK | 50% | 33% | 17% | 0% |
When looking at the answers about feeling European among visitors from Ukraine, Switzerland and Russia, we noticed that they predominantly strongly felt European (60%) or also felt European (40%) in addition to feeling allegiance to their home countries. However, their total number was too small (see Table 7.7) to draw any valid conclusion or generalize our findings. While Poles constituted a comparatively small proportion of the interviewed visitors to the EHL sites, they were the biggest group among Central and East European nationals. Of the Polish interviewees, 17% expressed strongly feeling European
The quantification of the qualitative data from the EHL case study supported our reading of the interview data: that for most Europeans we interviewed, feeling European was an important issue. At the same time, the interviews revealed that feeling European is very complex. In some cases, Europe and belonging to Europe were interpreted as desirable but not necessarily linked with EU membership, whereas other visitors, particularly those who positioned themselves as feeling both European and citizens of an EU member state, often referred to the membership of their home country in the EU. Considering the small number of interviewees, we cannot draw strong conclusions but our data enables us to reflect on and interpret the responses in their wider (national, cultural, historical, societal) context.
Despite their rather skeptical attitude towards Europe, as exemplified in their comparatively low scores of feeling European (47%) and high scores of not feeling European (31%), Dutch interviewees displayed a curious example of in-betweenness. Depending on the EHL site at which they were interviewed, Dutch visitors differently integrated Europe and notions about the ‘European’ in their construction of belonging. At Camp Westerbork, we interviewed many local Dutch visitors and often noticed that they expressed Eurosceptic
The fact that Italian visitors strongly affirmed feeling European seemed surprising at first glance, given the rise of the populist party Lega Nord and the Cinque Stelle movement in Italy at the time of the EHL fieldwork. However, our results reflected the EHL site where most Italians were interviewed, which was a museum to one of the founding figures of the European Community and Union, Alcide de Gasperi. The majority of the visitors at this site were Italian students at university and in their final year at high school who participated in a project about Europe. The other Italian visitors were interviewed at EHL sites abroad, and we assume that the same effect of mobility, as observed among mobile Dutch visitors, applied to them as well.
Most Belgian visitors were interviewed at the EHL site in Belgium, which may have contributed to the aforementioned scores on strongly feeling European (50%) and not feeling European (13%). These answers may reflect a double-edged attitude to the European project in the Belgian public. Support for EU integration is not equally strong in all language communities across Belgium but reflects the divergent demands of different political forces, parties, and poles (see Sinardet 2013). Migration was addressed in many interviews we conducted in Belgium. However, increasing public opposition in Belgium to the EU’s social and economic agenda, in particular regarding further EU enlargement, coupled with concerns about social inequalities for Belgian nationals arising from inner-European mobility and migration to Europe from other countries, seem to reduce the willingness to support European integration and European solidarity (see Baute et al. 2019; Brack and Crespy 2019).
According to the qualitative analysis of our EHL data, UK visitors were more often skeptical about belonging to Europe and spoke more critically about ideas of solidarity and unity within the EU than visitors from other European states, which confirms the findings of earlier studies (e.g. Knopf 2002; Wyn Jones et al. 2013; Jeffery et al. 2014; Ormston 2015). Our interviewees from England tended to emphasize an antagonism between their sense of nationality (Englishness) and Europeanness, which was addressed in many interviews. The contrast between these two poles of belonging constructed their discourse
Europe and the EU resonated in a different way for the interviewed German visitors to EHL sites (both in Germany and abroad). They constructed a link between feeling German and being European, in which Europe and a concern for preserving European unity seemed to be strongly embedded in their understanding of belonging. The discourse of these interviewees strongly reflected the post-war, West German political discourse on overcoming the country’s nationalist and militarist history (see Risse 2004, 252) – in contrast to the discourse of many UK interviewees. This discourse favored European belonging over German identity. While most of the German interviewees were West Germans, the few East German interviewees seemed to share this discourse – but as it turned out, they either resided in West German federal states or had a critical attitude to the former German Democratic Republic.
The answers of the ECOC respondents in Pécs, Hungary and interviews with the Polish EHL visitors to the European Solidarity Centre in Gdańsk, Poland partly reflect the openly nationalistic turn in Polish and Hungarian politics in the past decade. The current attempts to rewrite Hungary’s ‘golden past’ conflicts with the experiences of the early 1990s, when Hungary strove to join ‘Europe’ and to ‘become European’. Similarly, the national populistic policy of the Law and Justice (PiS) party has recently led the government in Poland to openly and strongly collide with EU politics and values, resulting in a European Court of Justice ruling against Polish judicial reform. The Polish interviewees at the European Solidarity Centre partly referred to the critical legal and political situation in their country and, depending on their personal positions, this influenced their views on Europe and the ‘European’.
It is noteworthy that the few people who said they had dual citizenship or an ethnically mixed family background always felt strongly European, suggesting that multiple ethnic, national, and cultural allegiances and everyday transnational practices can facilitate a stronger allegiance to Europe (see Čeginskas 2016). Our findings confirm the importance of social experiences for making Europe to an important object of identification, as also proposed by the transactionalist theory, which suggests that patterns of transnational interaction and communication can lead to a growing sense of community among citizens, and hence increase support for further political integration
Far from wishing to essentialize our findings about notions of Europe and feeling European in relation to the nationality of the visitors, these examples reveal how nation-specific contexts and personal disposition based on culturally and historically embedded notions become relevant for understanding the responses in our data. Europeanization is not an isolated process: when addressing and examining Europeanization, it is important to pay attention to processes of regional, international, or supranational integration and to processes of globalization, as relations and interaction between states. A transnational approach must use different levels of analysis, namely, the local, the national, the European, and the global level, and, equally, the interplay between these levels must also be analyzed, as connecting points for transnational transactions can be found at each level (see Kuhn 2011; Faist 2014; Delhey et al. 2014). Similarly, the analysis of the ECOC data in relation to gender showed interesting regional differences, which appeared to intersect with various social aspects, such as gender and age. For historical reasons, the notion of Europe is understood differently in today’s states, which have developed as sovereign entities over centuries than in those, which were part of larger multi-ethnic empires in the years leading up to World War I. In addition, experiences with World War II and with the Socialist regime until 1989/1991 forged different mnemonic communities in West European and Central and East European countries. These historical experiences contributed to affect both their divergent understandings of the past and of their contemporary positions in the EU (see Mälksoo 2009, 2014). Hence, a notion of belonging to the EU – also in terms of a federal model of cohesion – can be interpreted against the fact that half of the twentieth-century these countries have been either occupied by the Soviet Union or situated in the Soviet bloc. This period of forced belonging affects their current notion of holding a liminal position
Similarly, the public debates on the current state of the EU highlight the many crises the Union is facing. People draw different conclusions from this: while some foresee disintegration of the EU, others assume that the Union’s future lies with even closer integration. However, the entanglement of national and European discourses in our participants’ answers makes it difficult for us to distinguish what they mean by Europe, as different interpretations of the concept are interrelated and mutually influence people’s perceptions. Therefore, the relation between the EU and its citizens needs to be examined in context – which may yield contradictory findings.
2.5 Location and Thematic Focus
The geographical locations and the thematic narrative of the researched EHL sites both matter for our pool of interviewees and their answers on Europe. Some EHL sites hold a different attraction to local or national visitors than to foreign tourists. For instance, the Great Guild Hall in Tallinn is more frequented by foreign visitors than by local Estonians who avoid the touristic old town where it is located. During our fieldwork, we did not manage to interview a single Estonian visitor to the Great Guild Hall. Other sites – such as Hambach Castle, Robert Schuman House, Alcide de Gasperi House Museum, or Carnuntum Archaeological Park – appeared to be of greater interest to local or national visitors than to foreigners. Furthermore, the specific themes of some EHL sites (e.g. Franz Liszt Academy of Music) did not necessarily attract a mainstream but rather a select audience.
The respondents interpreted our interview and survey questions in terms of the thematic narratives set by the respective exhibition at the heritage site, cultural event, or project, which consequently affected their views and answers. For instance, at EHL sites situated in border areas or near national borders – such as Hambach Castle, Lieu d’Europe, Robert Schuman House, Carnuntum Archaeological Park, or Alcide de Gasperi House Museum – visitors more often referred to borders and explained the impact of open borders on their lives. At Camp Westerbork, a former transit camp to Auschwitz and other extermination camps, visitors discussed mobility in critical terms, while at the Sagres Promontory they discussed nature and the environment, which they experienced there, and in Gdańsk most visitors referred to Eastern
Although the thematic narration of a site or cultural event provided an initial trigger for answering our questions, it did not necessarily constrain the interviewees’ narratives. This could be observed at some EHL sites, such as the Mundaneum in Belgium, where the exhibition on secret codes did not provide most visitors with any explicit relation to Europe or European cultural heritage. Interviewees moved freely in and out of the spatiotemporal and emotional frame suggested by the site’s narrative on secret codes. Equally, for some visitors, our questions stimulated long narratives, while others provided no more than a short reply. Chapters 4–6 discussed how the EU’s politics of belonging intertwines with individual and collective efforts and aspects that situate humans in time and space. Our case study participants revealed different processes of creating (non-)belonging and our analysis of the data showed that these processes are shifting, multiple, continuously constructed, and context-bound, enriched by personal narratives, positions, and experiences.
2.6 Personal Engagement in Cultural Activities
In our EHL fieldwork, we asked our interviewees about their notions of the importance of cultural heritage in general and European cultural heritage in particular (see Lähdesmäki et al. 2020). The responses enabled us to see a strong connection between personal views on the cultural heritage and imagination of Europe as a cultural space based on specific discourses. However, we did not ask the EHL interviewees in detail about their engagement with culture per se. In contrast, the questionnaire survey in the ECOC case study allowed us to specifically analyze respondents’ willingness to engage in cultural activities and their level of immersion, which revealed that this factor played a role in their views on the ‘European’. One question in this survey was: ‘How often do you participate in difference cultural events (such as festivals, concerts, exhibitions, theatre plays)?’ The analysis showed that culturally active respondents more often identified with Europeanness and had more positive impressions
Views on Europeanness among respondents from Pécs, Tallinn and Turku in relation to their activeness in cultural participation (A = hardly ever N = 18; B = once a year or less, N = 53; C = a couple of times a year, N = 321; D = every other month, N = 244; E = 1–3 times a month, N = 555; F = once a week or more, N = 209), including the mean number of ways in which they perceived Europeanness in the ECOC events
| A | B | C | D | E | F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identifies a lot with Europeanness | 29% | 40% | 38% | 36% | 44% | 54% |
| Positive or very positive impressions of Europeanness | 31% | 60% | 72% | 73% | 75% | 83% |
| Sees that ECOC events represent Europeanness a lot or very much | 37% | 67% | 56% | 62% | 61% | 67% |
| Sees that ECOC events should represent Europeanness a lot or very much | 50% | 77% | 67% | 70% | 72% | 79% |
| Number of different ways of perceiving Europeanness in the ECOC events | 0.00 | 0.34 | 0.43 | 0.64 | 0.69 | 0.77 |
The questionnaire data has been previously analyzed by creating a Cultural Competence Index based on the respondents’ level of education, immersion in cultural events in general, immersion in the ECOC events, immersion in the organization of the ECOC events, and source of livelihood in the arts and cultural sector (Lähdesmäki 2014b). This index aimed at enabling the analysis of the open responses guided by Bourdieu’s (1984, 1987) notion of cultural capital. The study indicated that the respondents with a high score in Cultural Competence Index related various contemporary phenomena and issues to the representation of Europeanness. In addition, they were more likely to interpret Europeanness in terms of international connections, which they recognized between the host city, its cultural scene, and Europe, and in relation to the
Based on the analysis of the ECOC case study in particular, we suggest that willingness to (actively) engage with cultural activities is another element of negotiating belonging that affects attitudes towards Europe. People who are willing to visit and immerse themselves in certain cultural events or sites marked as European might be more willing to construct belonging to Europe. For instance, we assumed that participants in the ECC project were interested in issues and themes related to Europe and the EU, which was behind the project. The interviewees’ answers were therefore more likely to confirm or possibly strengthen the interviewee’s existing set of attitudes and ideas. We were not able to analyze the connection between personal engagement in cultural activities and stronger sense of belonging to Europe in the EHL data, since the majority of the interviewed visitors were not aware that the Label had been awarded to the EHL site they were visiting (see Lähdesmäki et al. 2020; Čeginskas 2019). Based on this data, we suggest that personal engagement in European-themed cultural events and activities is more likely to be interconnected with various reasons and motivations.
2.7 Mobility
In the three case studies, our interviews and survey did not include specific questions on mobility, movement, and migration but mobility crystallized as an important theme and social phenomenon to which people referred in manifold ways during the qualitative interviews and in survey responses. We understand mobility experiences referring to experiences with cross-border mobility, which influence people’s individual transnational practices in terms of “individual ties, interactions, and mobility across borders” (Kuhn 2015, 31) that enable them to develop specific transnational skills or affect their choices in life (see Favell 2008; Kuhn 2011).
Mobility experiences equally affected visitors’ views on belonging to Europe, as we particularly noted in our EHL data set. While not all interviewees referred to personal experiences of transnational mobility, or mentioned explicitly their lack of them in the interviews, 29% of the EHL visitors (68 out of a total of 230) across all age groups integrated their personal experiences with various forms of mobility in their answers (see Table 7.10). These experiences included long-term migration experiences, periods studying or working abroad, extensive and frequent travels, or possessing summer cottages abroad,
Personal mobility experiences (explicit mentions of a stay abroad; Erasmus or equivalent; migration experience; extensive travel, N = 68) versus non-mobility experiences (explicit mentions of being non-mobile, N = 4) among EHL visitors from EU countries and from Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine in relation to age groups
| Age group | Mentions being mobile | Mentions being non-mobile |
|---|---|---|
| 18–35 | 92% | 8% |
| 36–65 | 92% | 8% |
| 66+ | 100% | 0% |
| Total | 94% | 6% |
The group of interviewees aged 66 and over addressed personal mobility experiences most (72% of this age group); they referred to extensive travels or long-term stays abroad for professional reasons, but also to memories of displacement during or right after World War II. The middle-aged interviewees made the least reference to their personal mobility experiences (or lack of them) in their answers (43%), while more than half of the interviewees under the age of 35 years referred to such experiences. There was an equally high number (92%) of interviewees in the young and middle-aged age groups who linked their answers to personal mobility experiences (see Table 7.10). Middle-aged persons often highlighted extensive travels or longer professional stays abroad. In contrast, younger people more frequently referred to exchanges (most notably Erasmus) or internships abroad, which testifies to the rise and attractivity of such programmes over the recent decades (Cairns 2017). They often explained their motivation for participating in exchanges with an increased interest in encountering people from different countries and learning more about their lifestyles in terms of ‘seeing and getting to know the world’.
We also noticed that a great number of the EHL interviewees with transnational mobility experiences judged mobility as a (even very) positive experience (see Table 7.11). Within this, we perceived age-related differences: young adults were the most likely to view mobility positively. While the oldest age group often had positive associations with mobility, they differentiated more carefully between voluntary (positive) and forced (negative) movement. Happy memories of meeting one’s future partner abroad or residing and working in different countries were contrasted in the same interviews with experiences of displacement and deportation during and shortly after World War II. Some interviewees also spoke critically about mobility in the current political climate in Europe and linked it with the humanitarian crisis of receiving refugees in Europe. Others, particularly middle-aged visitors, also referred to negative effects of inner-European migration and revealed concerns for safeguarding social standards and rights. In contrast, the younger generation often
Mobility associations in relation to age group among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland and Ukraine in four groups (positive N = 90, neutral N = 43, negative N = 2, both positive and negative associations N = 8)
| Age group | Positive associations with mobility | Neutral associations with mobility | Negative associations with mobility | Both positive and negative associations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 18–35 | 70% | 23% | 2% | 4% |
| 36–65 | 57% | 38% | 2% | 3% |
| 66+ | 60% | 27% | 0% | 13% |
| Total | 62% | 31% | 1% | 6% |
Moreover, our analysis revealed that those interviewees who expressed positive associations with mobility also often strongly felt European (72%, see Table 7.12), which confirms mobility as an important factor and social phenomenon in both European integration and feeling belonging to Europe (see e.g. Favell 2008; Recchi and Favell 2009). Interpersonal relationships, travel, and exchanges across European countries contribute to deepening awareness of cultural diversity in Europe, which interviewees commonly viewed as an important and descriptive feature of what represents Europe. At the same time, individual mobility enables cross-border encounters and transnational interaction that often have the psychological effect of mitigating national boundaries or political, cultural, and social differences within Europe (see also Kuhn 2011), and thereby help individuals feel that they share commonalities with citizens of other European countries.
Mobility associations in relation to feeling European (strong feelings N = 122; feeling several belongings N = 41; no feelings N = 22; unable to say N = 5) among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland and Ukraine
| Feeling European | Strongly feels European | Feels also European | Does not feel European | Unable to say |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive associations with mobility | 72% | 21% | 4% | 4% |
| Neutral associations with mobility | 50% | 28% | 19% | 3% |
| Negative associations with mobility | 0% | 50% | 50% | 0% |
| Both positive and negative associations with mobility | 71% | 29% | 0% | 0% |
| Total | 65% | 24% | 8% | 3% |
The ability to establish positive associations with (manifold forms of) mobility played a role across all age groups among those interviewees who strongly felt European, but it was a particularly important aspect among young interviewees as the interviews revealed (see Table 7.13). Younger interviewees often considered mobility as a right – and display of their personal freedom – that they took for granted, and which determined their space of movement and belonging. In this context, the European integration becomes a relevant factor for guaranteeing the continuation and extension of this right.
Positive associations with mobility according to age (N in age groups from the youngest to oldest: 22, 21, 15, and 58) and strongly feeling European among EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine
| Age group | 18–35 | 36–65 | 66+ | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strongly felt European and had positive associations with mobility | 85% | 64% | 68% | 72% |
Mobility associations and ability to describe European identity (able N = 106; unable N = 55; thinks it does not exist N = 21) in EHL visitors from EU countries, Russia, Switzerland, and Ukraine
| Is able to describe European identity | Unable to describe European identity but believes it exists | Thinks that European identity does not exist | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positive associations with mobility | 69% | 17% | 14% |
| Neutral associations with mobility | 47% | 40% | 13% |
| Negative associations with mobility | 50% | 50% | 0% |
| Both positive and negative associations with mobility | 57% | 43% | 0% |
| Total | 61% | 26% | 13% |
Mobility is an important social factor in the EU’s politics of belonging and connects to practices of EU citizenship, processes of integration, and social equality concerns, making the context of mobility experiences important for the individual, too. Increasing mobility is a central aim of the EU cultural policy (see Chapter 2). Our findings reveal that mobility is an important phenomenon in constructing belonging and intersects with the interviewees’ social locations. Diverse experiences of mobility, such as extensive travel, study exchanges, and migration for work or for love can make European citizens feel more European. Mobility often leads to meaningful relationships between people from different backgrounds. This enables learning about cultural and social practices that provide insight into Europe’s cultural diversity, without it becoming viewed as a source of friction and new conflict. Among young people in particular, positive experiences of mobility increase their sense of belonging to Europe and to the EU as a political, economic, and socio-cultural entity. The analysis of our case studies confirms that mobility has become increasingly significant in recent decades. It stands for globalization and collective networking in both positive and negative ways – maintaining and increasing personal freedoms but deepening social inequalities between people. Transnational mobility experiences seem to construct a cleavage between mobile and less mobile EU citizens, creating new forms of social inclusion and exclusion based on citizens’ unequal and stratified involvement in transnational interactions (Kuhn 2019, 1222; see also Faist 2014). Thus, it has an impact on the visitors’ answers, and conditions their relationship to and understanding of Europe and the ‘European’.
References
Baute, S., K. Abts, and B. Meuleman 2019. “Public Support for European Solidarity: Between Euroscepticism and EU Agenda Preferences?” Journal of Common Market Studies 57 (3): 533–550. DOI:
Billig, M. 1995. Banal Nationalism. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: Sage.
Bourdieu, P. 1984. Distinction. A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Routledge, London.
Bourdieu, P. 1987. “The Forms of Capital.” In Handbook of Theory and Research of the Sociology of Education, edited by J. G. Richardson, 241–258. New York: Greenwood Press.
Brack N., and A. Crespy 2019. “Belgium in Search of a Stance on Today’s EU Integration Dilemmas.” In The Future of Europe, edited by M. Kaeding, J. Pollak, and P. Schmidt, 5–8. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:
Breakwell, G. M. 2004. “Identity Change in the Context of the Growing Influence of European Union Institutions.” In Transnational Identities. Becoming European in the EU, edited by R. K. Hermann, T. Risse, and M. B. Brewer, 25–39. Oxford: Rowman & Battlefield.
Cairns, D. 2017. “The Erasmus Undergraduate Exchange Programme: A Highly Qualified Success Story?” Children’s Geographies 15 (6): 728–740. doi:
Citrin, J., and J. Sides 2004. “More than Nationals: How Identity Choice Matters in the New Europe.” In Transnational Identities. Becoming European in the EU, edited by R. K. Hermann, T. Risse, and M. B. Brewer, 161–185. Lanham, Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Čeginskas, V. L. A. 2016. “‘I am Europe’. Experiences of Multiple Belonging.” Ethnologia Fennica 43: 72–88. Accessed 23 April 2020. https://journal.fi/ethnolfenn/article/view/65636/26505
Čeginskas, V. L. A. 2019. “The Challenges in Creating Visibility of European Cultural Heritage: A Case Study of the European Heritage Label.” Ethnologia Fennica 46: 109–134.
Delhey, J., E. Deutschman, T. Graf, and K. Richter. 2014. “Measuring the Europeanization of Everyday Life: Three New Indices and an Empirical Application.” European Societies 16 (3): 355–377. doi:
Deutsch, K. W. 1957. Political Community and the North Atlantic Area: International Organization in the Light of Historical Experience. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Deutsch, K. W. 1966. International Political Communities. New York: Anchor Books edition Garden City.
Deutsch, K. W. 1969. Nationalism and Its Alternatives. New York: Alfred Knopf Inc.
EC (European Commission). 2019. 2019 Report on equality between women and men in the EU. Brussels: European Commission. doi:
Faist, T. 2014. “On the Transnational Social Question: How Social Inequalities are Reproduced in Europe.” Journal of European Social Policy 24 (3): 207–222. doi:
Favell, A. 2008. Eurostars and Eurocities. Free Movement and Mobility in an Integrating Europe. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
Jacquot, S. 2015. Transformation in EU Gender Equality. From Emergence to Dismantling. Gender and Politics Series. Houdsmills, and Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jeffery, C., R. Wyn Jones, A. Henderson, R. Scully, and G. Lodge 2014. Taking England Seriously: The New English Politics. ESRC Scottish Centre on Constitutional Change. Accessed 7 January 2020. https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/files/20030688/Taking_England_Seriously_The_New_English_Politics.pdf
Knopf, H.-J. 2002. “Britain and European Integration between 1950 and 1993: Towards a European Identity?” PhD diss. Department of Social and Political Sciences. Florence: European University Institute.
Kuhn, T. 2011. “Individual Transnationalism, Globalisation and Euroscepticism: An empirical test of Deutsch’s transactionalist theory.” European Journal of Political Research 50 (6): 811–837. doi:
Kuhn, T. 2015. Experiencing European Integration: Transnational Lives and European Identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, T. 2019. “Grand Theories of European Integration Revisited: Does Identity Politics Shape the Course of European Integration?” Journal of European Public Policy 26 (8): 1213–1230. doi:
Lähdesmäki, T. 2013. “Identity Politics of the European Capital of Culture Initiative and the Audience Reception of Cultural Events Compared.” The Nordic Journal of Cultural Policy 16 (2): 340–365.
Lähdesmäki, T. 2014a. “The Influence of Cultural Competence on the Interpretations of Territorial Identities in the European Capitals of Culture.” Baltic Journal of European Studies 4 (1): 69–96.
Lähdesmäki, T. 2014b. “European Capital of Culture Designation as an Initiator of Urban Transformation in the Post-socialist Countries.” European Planning Studies 22 (3): 481–497.
Lähdesmäki, T., V. L. A. Čeginskas, S. Kaasik-Krogerus, K. Mäkinen, and J. Turunen. 2020. Creating and Governing Cultural Heritage in the European Union: The European Heritage Label. London: Routledge.
Lähdesmäki, T., and T. Saresma. 2014. “Reframing Gender Equality in Finnish Online Discussion on Immigration: Populist Articulations of Religious Minorities and Marginalized Sexualities.” NORA—Nordic Journal of Feminist and Gender Research 22 (4): 299–313.
Lee, C., and R. Bideleux 2009. “‘Europe’: What Kind of Idea?” The European Legacy 14 (2): 163–176.
Mälksoo, M. 2009. “The Memory Politics of Becoming European: The East European Subaltern and the Collective Memory of Europe.” European Journal of International Relations 15(4), 653–680. doi:
Mälksoo, M. 2014. “Criminalizing Communism: Transnational Mnemopolitics in Europe.” International Political Sociology 8 (1): 82–99. doi:
Marcussen, M., T. Risse, D. Engelmann-Martin, H.-J. Knopf and K. Roscher 1999. “Constructing Europe: The Evolution of French, British and German Nation-State Identities.” Journal of European Public Policy 6 (4): 614–633.
Ormston, R. 2015. Disunited Kingdom: Attitudes to the EU across the UK. Accessed 7 January 2020. http://whatukthinks.org/eu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Analysis-paper-3-Disunited-kingdom.pdf
Recchi, E., and A. Favell, eds. 2009. Pioneers of European Integration. Citizenship and Mobility in the EU. Cheltenham: Edgar Elgar Publishing Inc.
Risse, T. 2004. “European Institutions and Identity Change: What Have We Learned?” In Transnational Identities. Becoming European in the EU, edited by R. K. Hermann, T. Risse, and M. B. Brewer, 247–271. Oxford: Rowman & Battlefield.
Risse, T., D. Engelmann-Martin, H.-J. Knopf, and K. Roscher 1999. “To Euro or Not to Euro. The EMU and Identity Politics in the European Union.” European Journal of International Relations 5 (2): 147–187.
Sinardet, D. 2013. “How Linguistically Divided Media Represent Linguistically Divisive Issues. Belgian TV-Debates on Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde.” Regional & Federal Studies 23 (3): 311–330. doi:
Wyn Jones, R., G. Lodge, C. Jeffery, G. Gottfried, R. Scully, A. Henderson, and D. Wincott. 2013. “England and Its Two Unions: The Anatomy of a Nation and Its Discontents.” Accessed 9 January 2020. http://www.ippr.org/publications/england-and-its-two-unions-the-anatomy-of-a-nation-and-its-discontents