Supranational Citizenship

Abstract

Supranational citizenship, as a concept, sits somewhat uncomfortably between the regional experience of European citizenship and discourses on global or cosmopolitan citizenship.European citizenship is too narrow to exhaust the concept, and global or cosmopolitan citizenship is too broad to embrace it firmly. Hence the contours of supranational citizenship remain rather fuzzy. This chapter endeavors to dispel this fuzziness. It traces a conceptual definition of supranational citizenship focusing on the re-articulation of citizenship beyond national boundaries on the basis of a norm of mutual recognition of belonging. It then distils from the concrete experience of European citizenship further elements to reinforce this definition. Ultimately, the chapter relies on the reinforced definition to identify contemporary examples of supranational citizenship beyond the EU context - such as Mercosur citizenship or CARICOM citizenship - and to chart the theoretical prospects of the concept.

Understanding Membership in a World of Global Migration: (How) Does Citizenship Matter?

“…However, in countries such as the People's Republic of China, internal migration can be experienced 3 For a sense of the evolving dialogue on citizenship among political and social cultural geographers, see Painter and Philo (1995); Desforges, Jones, and Woods (2005); Staeheli and Diener (2017). 4 For recent reviews, see Maas (2017) and Strumia (2017). On overlapping "citizenship constellations," see Baub€ ock (2010).…”

“… For recent reviews, see Maas () and Strumia (). On overlapping “citizenship constellations,” see Bauböck (). …”

Varieties of citizenship in regional organisations: A cross-regional comparison of rights, access, and belonging

“…The latter conceptualisation is, for example, illustrated by Luis Cabrera and Caitlin Byrne (2021) in their research of the informal ASEAN citizenship regime. Building on the early conceptualisation of citizenship as membership in a political community (Marshall, 1950;Bauböck, 2017), scholars increasingly theorise citizenship as a multilevel concept (Maas, 2013;Strumia, 2017). This theorisation has led to increased scrutiny over the dimensions and locus of citizenship (Auvachez, 2009), and three main theoretical approaches guide the theoretical and conceptual debates on studies of citizenship: the liberal, the republican, and the communitarian (Habermas, 1994).…”

“…This development led to an increased focus on the new role of ROs as spaces for the development, regulation, and provision of citizenship beyond national boundaries (Wiener, 1998;Hanagan and Tilly, 1999). In particular, scholars focused on the case of European Union citizenship, which arguably remains the most politically advanced type of regional citizenship (Strumia, 2017). Scholars have examined the changing structure and conceptualisation of citizenship in Europe (Soysal, 1994), European citizenship practices (Wiener, 1998), the institutional processes leading to the official establishment of European citizenship (Meehan, 1993), and practices of the EU citizenship regime (Jenson, 2007).…”

“…Scholars have examined the changing structure and conceptualisation of citizenship in Europe (Soysal, 1994), European citizenship practices (Wiener, 1998), the institutional processes leading to the official establishment of European citizenship (Meehan, 1993), and practices of the EU citizenship regime (Jenson, 2007). In this literature, the scholars predominantly take a rights-based approach to regional citizenship and focus on the legal aspect of this extended membership status (Jenson, 2007;Strumia, 2017).…”