Centre for European and International Studies Research (CEISR)

Conference 2012 Report: Towards a European Society?

Report 1: Mark Field and Christopher Huggins – University of Portsmouth.

The Centre for European and International Studies Research (CEISR) at the University of Portsmouth held its flagship three day conference in Portsmouth on 28 – 30 June. The conference brought together practitioners and academics from across disciplines under the theme of ‘Towards a European Society: Transgressing Disciplinary Boundaries in European Studies Research’.

Conference 2012 theatre
ceisr - conf2012 - reception

Opened by Professor John Craven, the University’s Vice Chancellor, the keynote lecture by Professors Thomas Risse and Tanja Börzel of the Free University of Berlin addressed the value of interdisciplinary research. This launched a diverse range of panels throughout the conference, each bringing together scholars from a number of disciplines including politics, international relations, history, linguistics and sociology.

In keeping with the interdisciplinary nature of the conference, the plenary session provided an opportunity for the audience to engage with the ideas from political science (Professor Martin Schain, New York University), political sociology (Professor Didier Georgakakis, University of Strasbourg), history (Professor Kiran Klaus Patel, University of Maastricht) and anthropology (Professor Nikolai Vukov, Bulgarian Institute of Sciences). Their stimulating discussion reflected on the benefits of engaging in interdisciplinary research whilst acknowledging that this is not without challenge in an academic environment in which, as Professor Schain observed, ‘the walls of disciplines are getting higher and stronger and are increasingly well defended’.

The conference closed with an address by Professor Michael Shackleton of the University of Maastricht. With wide experience across the EU institutions and latterly the head of the European Parliament office in the UK, Professor Shackleton is the author of a number of books on the European Parliament. His unique practitioner insight into the value of conducting interdisciplinary research in the context of a Europe in flux was a fitting close to a successful and stimulating conference.

Slides

Report 2: Carine Germond, Department of History, Maastricht University / Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

The Centre for European and International Studies Research at the University of Portsmouth (UK) held its flagship conference on 28-30 June 2012 with the sponsorship of the Union Association for Contemporary European Studies (UACES). This three-day international conference brought together academics and practitioners from a broad range of disciplines including History, Sociology, Politics/International Relations, Linguistics and Gender Studies.

The parallel panels addressed the topic of the conference from various thematic and methodological angles. This thematic and methodological variety provided a rich conceptual and empirical grounding for a more interdisciplinary practice of EU/European Studies.

A number of panels investigated the manifold Europeanization processes, highlighting the growing popularity of the concept amongst political scientists, historians, sociologists, and International Relations scholars. Looking at the EU external relations, a panel discussed the value of the concept of Europeanization as an interdisciplinary tool in the analysis of European studies. Another panel focused on the Europeanization of both cultural policy and cultural practice in the EU, a theme, which the panellists argued, requires cross-disciplinary cooperation combining and even integrating, political science, sociological, historical and cultural studies conceptual and methodological approaches to better understanding linkages between multiple actors in the EU and between policy-making at different levels and cultural change. The discursive dimension of Europeanization was the key theme of another panel whose papers explored the interconnection of commonly experienced moments of crisis and challenges on a European scale with the Europeanization of the related media discourses.

Several panels also explored a variety of non-state actors, reflecting the growing interest of scholars from various disciplinary backgrounds in these actors. Engaging with different kinds of interest groups involved in key transnational policy fields, such as trade, agriculture, and industry, a panel explored from an historical and political science perspective the change over time of the role and influence of economic and business interest groups in EU integration and discussed their long-term, formal and informal, influence on EU governance practices. Social policy represented another policy area in which non-state actors, and in particular international organisations (IOs) such as the International Labour Organization (ILO) or the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), were active. A panel investigated the attempts to develop an integrated social policy, emphasizing the activities of these IOs in the construction of social housing for European workers. International non-state actors as experts and network of expertise were the central theme of another panel that considered issues arising from the inclusion and exclusion of 'non-expert' voices and forms of knowledge. Drawn from the fields of political science, international relations and European studies, the papers provided an interdisciplinary survey of emerging trends in multi-level governance. 

Transnational contacts also featured prominently in a number of panels. A panel explored and discussed the various aspects of transnational groups of elites as well as networks and organisations. The papers focused more specifically on questions of the emergence of transnational networks, the main objectives of the organisations and associations who establish and promote them, and the impact of such co-operations on the national and international level. Transnational networks were discussed in another panel that brought together political scientists, sociologists and historians. The papers discussed the two main research traditions in which the concept is embedded, comparing the research agendas, central claims as well as strengths and weaknesses. 

The conference also served as a platform to present a number of studies, recently published or to come out soon. A panel discussed for instance three of six books in a new book series provisionally entitled 'Making Europe, 1850-2000' that will come out from 2013. All three books and papers took a pan-European transnational perspective and addressed interlinked dimensions of European integration broadly speaking, studied here through the lens of technology. The books focus in particular on the role of International Organizations, of experts and knowledge societies, and of users of technology. In another panel, three monographs on EU staffs and elites from three different disciplinary areas (history, anthropology/ethnography, political sociology) were presented. The panel experimented with an innovative cross- and interdisciplinary reading, each author having to discuss the other papers in order to build bridges between topics and disciplines. 

Keynote lectures and a plenary session gave ample opportunities to elaborate upon particular issues and aspects of transdisciplinary research in European Studies and to foster dialogue among the participants. 

In their opening joint keynote lecture, TANJA BÖRZEL and THOMAS RISSE (both Freie Universität, Berlin) addressed the issue how to research and understand the role of Europe in a changing global world. In the second part of their lecture they introduced the focus of the second part of their DFG-funded Kollegforschergruppe "Transformative Power Europe" at FU Berlin. In this four year research period they plan to concentrate on comparative regionalism and the present-day EU as a recipient of inward diffusion. In this context they stressed the great importance they attach to working with historians in particular in developing a refined theory and approach to the negotiated character of diffusion, or what historians normally call cultural, political or policy transfer. 

Organized at the end of the second day of the conference, a plenary session allowed to take stock and to discuss the benefits and pitfalls of multi- and cross-disciplinary research in a broader setting. The panel featured representatives from four different disciplines and sub-disciplines: History (KIRAN KLAUS PATEL, Maastricht University), Political Sociology (DIDIER GEORGAKAKIS, Institut d'études politiques, Strasbourg), Comparative Politics (MARTIN SCHAIN, New York University), and Anthropology (NIKOLAI VUKOV, Bulgarian Academy of Science). In short presentations the panellists addressed what they considered as the potential and challenges of transdiciplinarity not solely in terms of academic production but also career progression. The lively discussion that followed the presentations raised a number of additional issues related to interdisciplinary research and teaching. It demonstrated that, although cross-disciplinary studies create useful synergies and result in heuristic play-offs, disciplines are - to paraphrase Stanley Hoffmann - obstinate rather than obsolete. 

The conference was concluded with the keynote lecture by MICHAEL SHACKLETON (Maastricht). In his lecture Professor Shackleton, a former head of the European Parliament office in London, provided a practitioner's perspective on the work of European institutions. He advanced the claim that the shape and powers of European institutions are not just the result of the interplay of the Member States' interests but also of powerful ideas. 

All in all, the conference provided a fascinating overview of the variety of interdisciplinary studies currently undertaken in the field of European Studies as well as a welcome opportunity for researchers with an interest in the EU and the wider Europe to engage with one another's work and methodology. The conference also showed that transdisciplinary dialogue and cooperation across disciplinary boundaries have much to offer to refine our understanding of the increasing complexity, depth and breadth of European integration broadly speaking and of the manifold dimensions of the emerging European society. 

URL zur Zitation dieses Beitrages: http://hsozkult.geschichte.hu-berlin.de/tagungsberichte/id=4355. Copyright (c) 2012 by H-Net, Clio-online, and the author, all rights reserved. This work may be copied and redistributed for non-commercial, educational purposes, if permission is granted by the author and usage right holders. For permission please contact H-SOZ-U-KULT@H-NET.MSU.EDU.