If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.
You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

Discursive Approaches

Page history last edited by Jasmine Ganeshalingam 13 years, 4 months ago

Origins
Key Thinkers
Theory
Impact
Critique
Bibliography

Origins

As suggested in the name, discursive approaches do not constitute a theory; rather the use of discourse analysis can aid the understanding of some aspects of European Integration. It is a post-postivist approach that challenges realism. Although 'grand theories’ such as federalism and neo-functionalism offer insight into the theory of Europe’s integration, disciplines such as discursive approaches allow for an alternative view on a number of integration issues. Because the European Union is a unique entity, the communication of meaning through discourse is a very important tool.

Key Thinkers

There are no thinkers who have particularly created this approach to integration analysis. However, Edward Said has contributed a great deal to a concept of ‘orientalism’, explored below. This approach has only been recognised in relation to European Integration in fairly recent times and so much of the writing on this subject is very contemporary. Historically, the discipline of discourse analysis as a methodology of research was developed by the French philosopher Foucault. The application of these ideas into politics as a whole was pioneered mainly by Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe. (Wæver, 2004)

Theory

Discursive approaches offer a critique of rationalist theories of integration, such as federalism. The approach challenges the idea of fixedness that is presented by the main rationalist theories.

The discourse of the European Union has changed hugely over the years since the Union’s inception, and those who theorize discursive approaches believe that it is a discipline that will continue to evolve in the future. This is due to the fact that discourse is ever-changing and words and their meanings change all the time. Discourse analysis is justified as important by Wæver (p. 199) when he says ‘discourse is the layer of reality where meaning is produced and distributed.’

This approach aims to address the complexities of Europe, which other theories fail to do. It supports the social-constructivist idea that Europe and European identity are constructed from the perspective of the individual. Wæver (p. 198) states that ‘things do not have meaning in and of themselves, they only become meaningful in discourse.’ Each individual has a different perspective which means that there are multiple subjective truths, which makes it extremely difficult to form a general theory based on these ideas. Gallie (1962 cited in Diez 2004 p. 320) called Europe ‘an essentially contested concept.’ Wæver (p. 198) continues by saying that everything in the world is ‘necessarily categorized and conceptualized.’ Diez (p. 433) compounds this account when he states that ‘all our accounts of the world… are embedded in certain discourses.’

When applied to the subject of European identity, discourse analysis has many insights to offer. Edward Said has been prolific on this topic, especially in his book Orientalism. The process of ‘othering’ is detailed as a form of discourse used by Europe to define what Europe is and what a European identity is. Diez (2004, p. 319) simply describes the discourse of ‘othering’ as ‘articulating a difference.’ Said focuses on the idea of the Orient (unknown ‘East’) and the Occident (familiar ‘West’). Said references a long history between the East and the West in which there has been overwhelming differences (culturally, ideologically and experience-wise). These differences have created a relationship of ‘othering’ in which the ‘West’ (especially Europe) has defined an identity in sharp contrast to that of the Orient.

Impact

Discourse analysis, when applied to European integration, has provided reasons to challenge the status quo. It has shown an alternative way to think about Europe and the European identity. Ruggie (p. 172) stated that the Union 'may constitute the first multiperspectival polity' and the discursive approach of analysis and reasoning allows for the exploration of this fact. Another impact is the critical approach reflectivist theories take with the realist general theories. This critique has opened the doors to new theories of European integration and the development of new ideas concerning issues, such as identity.

Critique

Wæver (p. 197) explains that discourse analysis 'has hardly gained a clear profile as either a contender for the position as one of the ‘leading schools’ or as a distinct interpretation of ‘the nature of the beast’.

Realists would criticise this approach for its lack of universality. One of the approaches greatest strengths (the prominence of many meanings) can be one of its weaknesses. Advocates of rationalist theories of European integration would argue that the individualistic way language can be analysed can lead to an incoherent message of what integration means for Europe.

Bibliography

Diez, T. 2004. Europe’s Others and the Return of Geopolitics. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, [ONLINE] 17 (2),

Available at: http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Direct.asp?AccessToken=8UOUYPUV607Q4ALXL3MW6LOWNT7MVYOO9&Show=Object [Accessed 1^st May 2010]

Diez, T. 2006 Speaking ‘Europe’: The Politics of Integration Discourse. In M. Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, ed. Debates on European Integration: A Reader. Palgrave MacMillan: Basingstoke. Ch.17.