Collective Identities and the Integration of Core State Powers: Introduction to the Special Issue

Abstract

This special issue explores the relationship between collective identities and the integration of core state powers, that is, the delegation of powers to a centralized institution in policy areas that are essential for the functioning of the modern state. In this introductory article we present the main conceptualizations of the contributions to the special issue that define our understanding of collective identities and core state powers. We discuss the multi‐level nature of collective identities and we discuss theoretical expectations over the link between collective identities and core state powers. Finally, we briefly present each of the contributions to the issue and discuss how they relate to the broad research goals, the special issue and to each other.

Collective Identities, European Solidarity: Identification Patterns and Preferences for European Social Insurance

“…The evolution of European identity and its relationship with the process of European integration has been well explored in recent research (Fligstein et al, 2012;Fligstein and Polyakova, 2015;Kuhn, 2019;Risse, 2010). For a review of this literature, see Kuhn and Nicoli (2020) in the introduction to this special issue.…”

“…Following the set-up of Kuhn and Nicoli (2020), we conceptualize the multi-level character of collective political identities by building on Díez Medrano and Gutiérrez's (2001) concept of nested identities. Individuals with multi-level identities can have many different attachments; local, national and European, that can be combined in several ways.…”

“…We expect that identities are linked to support for European social policy through two main channels: general concerns with national sovereignty and concerns with the Source: author's adaptation from Kuhn and Nicoli (2020). Note that Kuhn and Nicoli (2020) use a broader ideal-type labelling individuals with supranational attachment as 'Supranationals'. However this article operationalizes the original conceptualization by using survey questions on European identity, we therefore opt for replacing 'Supranationals' with 'Europeans' in our discussion.…”

In Search of Lost Time: Memory‐framing, Bilateral Identity‐making, and European Security

“…Borrowing the language of the Introduction in this issue (Kuhn and Nicoli, 2020), which follows Genschel and Jachtenfuchs' work on core state powers, we show that some memory frames lend themselves to policy-based integration, while others lead to resource-based integration. Although these two kinds of power are not mutually exclusive, we argue that framing memory around reconciliation (that is, where the actors involved were in an antagonistic relationship previously) enables the integration of state policies, symbols and institutions (policy-based powers), while framing memory around lost individual powers emphasizes state capabilities, capacities and joint actions (resource-based powers).…”

“…Bilateral relations are the backbone of European security and defence cooperation, which emphasizes crisis management and Between the national and the European levels, however, we argue that there is room for crafting other kinds of collective identities: for instance, among two countries with mutually understandable pasts. Although this approach complicates Kuhn and Nicoli's (2020) neat typology, which includes only the local, the national and the European, it fits into Díez Medrano and Gutiérrez's (2001) notion of nested identities as well as with Risse's (2010) image of the marble cake.…”