Advertisement

Cross-scale Dynamics in the Relational Field of Citizenship

  • Manlio CinalliEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Politics of Identity and Citizenship Series book series ( CAL)

Abstract

Having already dealt with the horizontal and vertical dimensions of citizenship, and with the civic and political dimensions of integration, I can now move on to consider the relational dynamics that shape the area of the field that lies between the macro-level (which is the focus of the third chapter) and the micro-level of individual MFCs (which is the focus of the fourth chapter). In terms of meso-level relational dynamics, I am especially interested in the interactions between organised Muslim movements, associations and organisations of different kinds on the one hand (henceforth, Muslims actors) and actors and institutions in the policy domain as well as civil society actors in the public domain on the other; I am also interested in the way these Muslim actors rely on their discourse, networks, and contentious politics to achieve their aims. This relational field of discourse, networks and contentious politics allows us to examine the connections between citizenship and integration. More specifically, what this focus enables us to do is to hone in on the most important dynamics informing ontological citizenship, which constitute an essential meso-level that fills the cross-scale gap between the macro-level structures of horizontal and vertical citizenship, and the micro-level dynamics of civic and political integration.

References

  1. Baldassarri, D., & Diani, M. (2007). The integrative power of civic networks. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 735–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blommaert, J., & Verschueren, J. (1998). Debating diversity. Analysing the Discourse of Tolerance. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Burt, S. (1992). Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cinalli, M. (2003). Socio-politically polarized contexts and urban mobilization: A study of two campaigns of protest in Northern Ireland. The International Journal for Urban and Regional Research, 27(1), 158–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cinalli, M. (2004). Horizontal networks vs. vertical networks in multi-organisational alliances: A comparative study of the unemployment and asylum issue-fields in Britain. EurPolCom, 8(4).Google Scholar
  6. Cinalli, M. (2007). Between horizontal bridging and vertical governance: Pro-beneficiary movements in new labour Britain. In D. Purdue (Ed.), Civil societies and social movements: Potentials and problems (pp. 88–108). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  7. Cinalli, M., & Giugni, M. (2013a). Political opportunities, citizenship models, and the political claims making over Islam. Ethnicities, 13(2), 147–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cinalli, M., & Giugni, M. (2013b). Public discourses about Muslims and Islam in Europe. Ethnicities, 13(2), 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cinalli, M., & O’Flynn, I. (2014). Public deliberation, network analysis and the political integration of Muslims in Britain. British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 16(3), 428–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cinalli, M., & Giugni, M. (2016b). Collective responses to the economic crisis in the public domain: Myth or reality? Politics and Policy, 44(3), 427–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diani, M., & McAdam, D. (2003). Social movements and networks. Relational approaches to collective actions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diani, M., & Bison, I. (2004). Organizations, coalitions, and movements. Theory and Society, 33, 281–309.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2006a). Eurobarometer 66. Public Opinion in the European Union. TNS Opinion & Social. Available on http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/eb/eb66/eb66_en.pdf.
  14. European Commission. 2006b. Special Eurobarometer: Discrimination in The European Union. TNS Sofres. Available on http://ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/publicopinion/archives/ebs/ebs_263_en.pdf.
  15. Fishkin, J., He, B., Luskin, R., & Siu, A. (2010). Deliberative democracy in an unlikely place: Deliberative polling in China. British Journal of Political Science, 40(2), 435–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frank, O. (2011). Survey sampling in networks. In J. Scott & P. Carrington (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Social Network Analysis. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Granovetter, M. (1983). The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited. Sociological Theory, 1, 201–233.Google Scholar
  18. Kitschelt, H. (1986). Political opportunity structures and political protest: Anti-nuclear movements in four democracies. British Journal of Political Science, 16, 57–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koehly, L. M., & Pattison, P. (2005). Random graph models for social networks: Multiple relationsor multiple raters. In P. Carrington, J. Scott, & S. Wasserman (Eds.), Models and methods in social network analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Koomen, M., Tillie, J., van Heelsum, A., & van Stiphout, S. (2013). Discursive framing and the reproduction of integration in the public sphere: A comparative analysis of France, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Germany. Ethnicities, 13(2), 191–208.Google Scholar
  21. Koopmans, R., & Statham, R. (1999). Challenging the liberal nation-state? Postnationalism, and the collective claims making of migrants and ethnic minorities in Britain and Germany. American Journal of Sociology, 105, 652–696.Google Scholar
  22. Kriesi, H., Koopmans, R., Duyvendak, J. W., & Giugni, M. (1995). New Social Movements in Western Europe: A Comparative Analysis. London: UCL Press.Google Scholar
  23. Laumann, E., Galaskiewicz, J., & Marsden, P. (1978). Community structure as interorganizational linkages. Annual Review of Sociology, 4, 455–484.Google Scholar
  24. Lin, N., Ensel, W. M., & Vaughn, J. C. (1981). Social resources and strength of ties: structural facors in occupational status attainment. American Sociological Review, 46(4), 393–405.Google Scholar
  25. McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., & Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Melucci, Alberto. (1989). Nomads of the present. London: Hutchinson Radius.Google Scholar
  27. Phalet, K., & Swyngedouw, M. (2002). National identities and representations of citizenship: A comparison of Turks, Moroccans and working-class Belgians in Brussels. Ethnicities, 2, 5–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Sanders, L. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25, 347–376.Google Scholar
  29. Sunstein, C. R. (2002). The law of group polarisation. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 10(2), 175–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tilly, C. (1978). From mobilization to revolution. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  31. Van Dijk, T. (1993). Elite Discourse and Racism. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  32. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social Network Analysis: Method and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Young, I. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CEVIPOFSciences PoParisFrance

Personalised recommendations