Christian Wille
Fonction
Research scientist
Organisation
Faculty of Language and Literature, Humanities, Arts and Education, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg
Vom processual shift zum complexity shift: Aktuelle analytische Trends in der Grenzforschung
Vom processual shift zum complexity shift: Aktuelle analytische Trends in der Grenzforschung
Language(s)
Allemand
Main Category
Introduction
The author sketches out, drawing on the theoretical and methodical developments of the last few decades in the area of border (area) research, how analytical concepts have been further developed, to systematically allow a more complex and more processual understanding of borders.
Summary
The author, drawing on the theoretical conceptual developments and changes in the field of border area research during the last decades, identifies and describes three analytical trends ("shifts"): the processual shift, the multiplicity shift and the complexity shift. These are not separate from each other, but refer to specific orientations in border research. Starting from the observation that in the wake of the so-called border turn there was an increase in awareness of borders, and against the background of the practice turn, which no longer sees culture as being characterised by representations, but by practices, through the three shifts new possibilities arise for examining borders, which focus more sharply on the processual and performative elements of the border.
Content
The author begins by calling border research one of the up-and-coming research fields that has emerged in social and cultural in the last few decades. Based among other things on intense emerging questions relating to globalisation and migration dynamics and the different associated perspectives and issues, more and more scientific disciplines are therefore taking an interest in the phenomenon of borders. In the wake of that, new impulses, concepts and analysis categories are developing fast, which the author systematically categorises in the article, singling out three analytical trends. These shifts, as the author calls them, designate "specific orientations in the scientific discussion of borders, are connected to general social analytical development and are practised in current border research alongside and with each other" (p. 107).
First of all the author describes the processual shift. He "overrides the idea of fixed and form border in favour of the view that borders are the results of social processes" (p. 107). This change of perspective originates, on the one hand, in a reaction to the increasing discourse on globalisation, and on the other hand, also in the spatial turn of the 1980s. This views space as a social production; these perspectives are therefore also increasingly being used with respect to borders. The theoretical framework that goes with this processuality comprises the basic assumptions that borders are made, continuously (re-)produced, changeable and (re-)produce regulations.
On that basis the view of borders expand as a result of the multiplicity shift. While the processuality of borders remains the most important starting point for this approach, border (de-)stabilisations are from then on regarded as processes which are driven and implemented by a multitude of protagonists. This involvement of various different identities allows discussion of border (de)stabilisation processes from a power relation relationship angle. As for the multiplicity shift the characteristic analytical perspectives are therefore the following: plurality of actors, diffusion (borders as spatially dispersed), social materialities (above all the question of the monitoring and control of bodies in the context of border (de)stabilisation processes) and multivalency (interrelationship between bodies and border (de)stabilisation processes).
Finally this approach goes even further. As part of the complexity shift the concepts from the processual shift and the multiplicity shift are expanded so that border (de)stabilisation processes are "understood as effects of dynamic formations" (p. 113). All of these elements are "seen as being held together by certain links and in their situational interdependency" (p. 113).
The outlining and categorisation of these scientific developments therefore clarify how terms, concepts and analytical categories in border research have been steadily differentiated to better chart the complexity and dynamics of border (de)stabilisation processes.
Conclusions
In his critical conclusion, the author remarks that theoretical concepts and considerations in the field of border research in keeping with macrosocial issues and against the background of conceptual upheavals in the social sciences and humanities continue to be developed and differentiated. The three shifts highlighted have therefore moved from an understanding of borders as fixed units to a focus on borders as social productions and processes. Following on from that, the approach expands to take into account the complexity and multiplicity of the aspects tied to borders and border (de)stabilisation processes. Finally then, based on these considerations, they are understood as effects of dynamic formations. However, the author also makes the critical observation that in these approaches certain concepts such as border practices for example, are still not adequately defined. This makes it more difficult to assess what border practices do or what special features these practices have. While the author considers a common social theoretical background for all the disciplines involved neither feasible nor desirable, he nevertheless points to the stronger integration of theories of practice in the debate around border (de)stabilisation processes – whether this debate concentrates on borders as social productions, as multiple processes or as complex formations. As the author outlines this interweaving of theories of practice and considerations of border (de)stabilisations, he highlights that their integration into border research may intensify the theoretical debates between scientists in different disciplines in the field of border research.
Lead
Christian Wille
Contact Person(s)
Date of creation
2021