Relationale Räume mit Grenzen. Grundbegriffe der Analyse alltagsweltlicher Raumphänomene.

In their article, Löw and Weidenhaus conceptualise borders in the context of a relation-oriented sociological theory of space. The aim is to take into account the empirical meaning of borders and containing spaces without ignoring the lessons of the spatial turn which characterise the relation-oriented theory of space. To begin with, they distinguish metaphors on space from space itself (p. 207ff). Spatial metaphors can be used to describe a large number of social phenomena such as a family structure or a cyberchat. The physical location, i.e. the notion of “where in the world” (p. 209) is not important for spatial metaphors because it does not change the described order in any way. On the other hand, space always refers to physical relations pertaining to the position coordinates of a location and therefore features an important material component, given spaces are transformed as soon as position coordinates change (p. 210). The authors refer to space as a “relational arrangement of social assets and living beings in given locations” (p. 212). The spatial perception depends on the provision of a “combination” through which objects are interconnected as well as the provision of “spacing” through which objects are arranged in space (p. 212). The subject constructs space through the provision of combination and spacing while taking into account the location; it forms a part of the objects/subjects in space from a relational and physical perspective, and is created and led by institutionalised and prestructured social conventions pertaining to spatial production (p. 213). As it is possible to empirically observe that there are also spaces such as national States which need borders given the exclusive nature of certain aspects, such as the law for instance, it is a requirement to theoretically integrate borders to the relation-oriented concept of space (p. 214). Löw and Weidenhaus envision borders as relations between spaces. Borders connect at least two spaces with each other, which requires the performance of combination as well as distinction services. When the combination is performed initially, spaces often appear in the form of networks, whereas distinction services focus on border construction, which leads to the creation of territorial spaces such as national States. Border constructions tend to increase proportionally with boundaries, i.e. the relation with other spaces (p. 215). The example of border constructions in Europe during the migration movements along the Balkan route in 2015 ultimately allows for the representation, using a hermeneutic media analysis, of the way borders can be analysed empirically in relational spaces. The authors note that national State borders have the specific ability to territorialise rights and control mobility (p. 219). Regarding the borders which were closed to refugees along the Balkan route, the authors show that closing such borders territorialises rights on the one hand by blocking any access to them (and to the State territory). On the other hand, morality is also territorialised, as evidenced by proposals for dignified treatment within borders, or by the denunciation of unscrupulous smugglers operating outside borders (p. 221f).  The discourse on transit zones furthermore shows how borders themselves can become spaces where no national law is enforced, despite the control States exert over such borders (p. 223f).