The Narrative Construction of European Identity. Meanings of Europe ‘from below’

There is a vast body of theoretical and empirical literature on European identity. Since identity is one of the EU's contemporary challenges, linked to the legitimacy deficit of the European integration process, many scholars deal with this argument and have developed it in different ways, exploring the intersection between culture and politics, national and European belongings, cultural diversity and Europe's boundaries. The variety of contributions allow us to compare approaches and redefine problems from different perspectives, but this multiplicity of interpretations raises the questions: What is the specific contribution of sociology on this topic? Which concept of identity can provide a useful tool for the analysis of the European sense of belonging?

This article draws on sociological tools for exploring the change of identities related to the process of European integration. In the first part, it sets out the definition of the sociological approach to identity and outlines the current scientific debate and previous research on European identity. It then proposes an original contribution operationalizing the approach of ‘narrative identity’ (Eder 2009) to explore the construction of European identity. It is assumed that narrative reflects the values, interests and conflicts of the social context in which people live and in which identity develops. By giving meaning to experience and social action, narratives can contribute to the formation of social bonds among Europeans, can strengthen networks, generating solidarity and identity. The article also presumes that, within the conceptualization of Europe and people's relationship with the EU, the local context together with its institutions have a role which is usually underestimated. In fact, these can intervene and generate particular meanings of Europe as well as a bond with the EU which are conditioned by local–supranational interconnections.

The second part of the article is devoted to the analysis of the empirical research. With the intention of examining the narratives of Europe circulating among Europeans from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, four networks – in the sense of group of people connected to each other – have been identified in two different local contexts in Italy, in Florence and Prato. School relationships have been chosen as samples and linked pupils, parents and teachers in diverse secondary schools have been selected.

The analysis of the narratives of Europe collected in focus group discussions and individual interviews allows us to assess different meanings of Europe ‘from below’, how they take shape and affect European identity. Results demonstrate the intersection between the local, national and supranational dimensions in people's conceptualizations of Europe. The narratives of Europe are multi-level stories, a mixture of values and references coming from the local and national cultural heritages and linked to the European post-national plot. European identity is locally embedded and influenced by subjective autonomy, experience and structural social conditioning. The analysis of some variables, such as socio-economic and cultural background, media exposure as well as transnational participation and experiencing Europe, will enable us to create a typology of European identity.

In providing concluding remarks, the findings of the analysis will be linked to the broader issues of Europeanization and EU politics for strengthening social cohesion and Europeans’ engagement.

Studying identity means dealing with an abstract concept, and even though this can initially appear obvious and clear, it turns out to be fleeting and ambiguous. According to the sociological perspective, identity refers to the dynamics of self-conception and recognition. It concerns the faculty to define oneself as individual and as part of various groups and the capability of finding a proper coherence over time (Sciolla 1983). Moreover, identity deals with the meanings and the social norms that shape and connect individual and social behavior: they are the value systems and social representations of reality that can be found in the cultural heritage of a society. Social meanings and norms allow individuals and groups to see themselves and their ‘place’ and to develop processes of group membership or ‘othering’. We cannot talk about identity without referring to relationships with others (Crespi 2004).

In this article, I will neither separate the individual and collective dimensions of identity, nor its personal and social components. Instead, I will consider them interdependent. Identity formation, defined as a reflexive social and historical process which develops through symbolic exchanges learned in social relations, will be connected with the structural change related to EU integration.

The sociological interpretation is helpful to clarify the terms adopted in the debate regarding national and European identities: ethnic, cultural and political identities are forms of collective identity. It is also useful to understand the different logics related to defining this concept: essentialist identity, based on cultural and ethnic features, and constructive identity, founded on political, symbolic and social elements.

Europeanization and globalization are affecting the sense of belonging of Europeans, changing its logics of formation, which are conditioned by the continent's complex socio-political development, cultural history and institutional configuration. Cultural pluralism, migration flows and information and communication technology development are also challenging the traditional spatial and symbolic references of belonging and are affecting the boundaries of social action and interaction, which are disembedded from the national contexts and replaced in the transnational dimension (Giddens 2007). New forms of spatial re-embedding and different cultural and institutional references enable original and composed identities to be experienced and allow people to feel attached to several, distant and culturally different places (Beck and Grande 2007). The sense of belonging in late modernity (Giddens 2007) can no longer be considered as a static, coherent and enclosed entity. The ‘inherited’ belonging is replaced by multiple identities, which are overlapping, hybrid and coexisting (Delanty 2003).

Reactions to the transnationalization processes also include the re-emergence of particularistic identities, which are locally defined and related to rediscovered territorial, ethnic or traditional roots. As has emerged from the empirical study illustrated below, sometimes, these responses are an effect of marginalization from the ‘cosmopolitan center’ and a way of re-establishing strong social ties in late modern society (Habermas 1999; Bauman 2000).

These complex processes do not seem comprehensible when using the theoretical and methodological tools conceived by sociologists for the study of identity in modern society, in particular national identity (Kohli 2000). The critique of methodological nationalism (Beck and Grande 2007) motivates the need to look for a new conceptual structure which is more fitting with the European social context and which is able to redefine concepts beyond the nation state.

Simplifying the current debate on European identity, it is possible to find two main interpretative trends. Some scholars believe that European history and civilization are a cultural heritage in which all Europeans can recognize themselves (Morin 1987; Passerini 1998). Other authors, on the contrary, point out the variety of national and regional traditions, norms, institutions and values, which are so different and sometimes even contrasting, that it is not possible to find either a European society or a European identity (Mendras 1997; Crouch 1999).

The debate also addresses the possibility of development of a European identity. It involves scholars who believe that a European identity can be realized as a political project. A post-national citizenship identity can be based on the founding principles of the EU, on civic solidarity and ‘constitutional patriotism’ (Habermas 1999). Different arguments are expressed by those who think that some prerequisites like a community bond and a common ethnolinguistic background are indispensable in order to make people perceive a common sense of belonging (Smith 1991; Grimm 1996).

Social scientists have also looked for empirical evidence of the existence of a European sense of belonging. Large-scale, cross-national and longitudinal surveys on attitudes, values and opinions of Europeans have increased since the ratification of the Maastricht Treaty. Survey research programs such as European Values Survey, European Social Survey and Eurobarometer provided data for a rich academic literature, where European identity is measured using indicators on support for the EU and attitudes of attachment, loyalty and pride toward EU institutions, compared with national ones. Survey data highlight that EU citizens do identify themselves with Europe, but national and regional identities are highly predominant and this result does not seem to vary over time. Although survey questions have been improved over the years, this tool has been criticized as seeming to assume a tension between European and national identities (Bruter 2005). ‘Pride’, ‘loyalty’ and ‘attachment’ are part of those categories conceived for studying identity at the national level, which have also been contested since they tend to shape meanings attributed to Europe by connecting them to the ‘national sense’ (Herrmann et al. 2004; Bruter 2005).

However, disaggregated data show interesting differences in the attitudes of Europeans within each country and a persistent social divide in support for the EU related to demographic, socio-economic and cultural variables: the lower educated and less wealthy people are, the more they tend to feel nationalist and Eurosceptic; the positive perception of the EU increases with knowledge of the EU and decreases with age (Gabel 1998; Coenders et al. 2003; Citrin and Sides 2004; Petithomme 2008).

By using quantitative tools, it remains difficult to understand the subjective conception of identity and to find one definition to measure it across countries, since its meaning depends on contexts, languages, individual variables and social belonging (Risse 2004; Bruter 2005). Moreover, from this kind of data, it is not easy either to distinguish between the emotional feeling of belonging toward Europe and the sense/absence of trust toward the EU (Karolewski and Kaina 2006).

From the late 1990s, qualitative and mixed methods begun to be applied to the field, with the aim of investigating in-depth processes that affect the construction of identity. By assuming a post-national approach, which supposes a European single dynamic society that can be studied on the micro- and mesolevels of analysis (Trenz 2008), identity is examined through a bottom-up approach which entails analyzing Europeans’ daily social relations and practices as well as the discourse contextualized in the transnational space. A European public sphere is hypothesized and common narratives of Europe are found in national media discourses (Kantner 2006). By applying frame analysis to different types of documents and data, Díez-Medrano (2003) demonstrates how diverse narratives of historical events, national cultures and of the European project influence different degrees of identification as Europeans and support for the EU.

The sense of belonging of groups socialized in the transnational dimension – such as Erasmus students, highly skilled migrants, EU civil servants, journalists and Parliament members – has been investigated (Shore 2000; King and Ruiz-Gelices 2003; Siapera 2004; Wodak 2004). The nexus between the manifold activities of Europeans across the borders of nation states and their identities has also been examined (Recchi and Favell 2009). These studies demonstrate a gap between the above-mentioned ‘European elite’, among whom cosmopolitan and European identities are strongly felt, and the larger public, where such belonging is weaker. Nevertheless, a shared European ‘consciousness’ is observed (Gabel 1998; Coenders et al. 2003; Citrin and Sides 2004; Petithomme 2008; Recchi and Favell 2009). A cumulative combination of regional, national and European identities is demonstrated. Such identities can be complementary or can contradict each other. They refer to different communities and are activated under different social conditions (Diez-Medrano 2003; Risse 2004). A generalized and multiple European identity is identified, which is not the expression of homogeneity, but fosters and includes differences (Sassatelli 2005).

Although a vast body of research about European identity exists, there is no consensus about the mechanisms that generate it. The historical, political, civic and cultural components of European identity have been extensively discussed, but the relation between transnational processes and the local context where identities take shape in everyday life is not examined. New forms of distribution of economic, cultural and social capital in Europe (Kauppi 2003) affect subnational territories, and new forms of inequality and social divide, which Europeans experience in their daily life (Leonardi 2012), influence the construction of their sense of belonging. Also, participation at different territorial levels and the development of bonds and common meanings beyond national borders enhance identity, but which categories of citizens, and in what territories, are affected by processes of internationalization of lifestyles have not been clearly assessed yet.

Identity can be characterized by local, national, supranational or transnational layers of attachments, depending on the connection between transnational processes and local experience. Europeanization is experienced by people in their everyday activities in local communities. The meanings which are collectively shared in local areas are affected by events occurring in different places (Geertz 1999) and by the intermediation of social institutions. These processes, that lead people to re-think their ‘place’ and belongings, still need to be explored.

This study expands the narrative identity theory (Eder 2009) and proposes to operationalize it using the narratives of Europe as an experimental tool to investigate the construction of European identity. According to Eder's hypothesis, many narratives and meanings of Europe circulate in the multiple transnational networks developed in the course of Europeanization and globalization. Sharing narratives contributes to the emergence of a sense of belonging, also in the transnational and multicultural environment which characterizes Europe.

Narrative is a ‘dense social act’ (Melucci 1991). It concerns connections and common meanings because it links individual and collective actions, memories and events through agreed understandings and shared meaning constructions produced by individuals, groups, communities, institutions and cultures. Narrative shows the significance that events have for one another, it gives coherence to experiences, ‘pervades’ social relations and can strengthens networks, generating solidarity and social ties. Narrative can also cause conflicts and social division. Social reality and narratives are related to each other: narrative language reflects the values, interests and conflicts of the social context in which people live and identity develops. Narrative identity is an outcome of human experience of meaningful actions and intentions (Ricoeur 1991).

The feeling of belonging to Europe is here analyzed through the narratives of Europe and is embedded in the networks where the stories are found. Narrative is an analytical concept that allows us to avoid the use of categories such as ‘pride’, ‘attachment’ and ‘loyalty’, to circumvent the direct question concerning the sense of belonging to Europe and to distinguish between the meanings attributed to Europe and to the EU, since the use of the two words is ambiguous in everyday conversation (Karolewski and Kaina 2006).

This approach highlights the normative dimension of the stories and gives a long-term perspective, connecting events and experiences from the past to the present. As collective memories and personal stories are linked and recalled through narratives, they become a part of who we are and how we see and understand the world around us.

In line with the bottom-up approach, I assume that the meanings associated with Europe are closely related to the local context, the site where everyday social practices take place. Since narratives give meaning to experience and social action, this study aims to understand the role of shared (local, national, supranational and transnational) narratives in the sense of belonging and boundary construction processes.¹ European identity is investigated through the analysis of narrative networks of social relations. The empirical research focuses on the meanings, stories and values attributed to Europe and shared in networks of European citizens. The objective is to understand how diverse conceptualizations of Europe have developed, among whom they circulate, which variables influence such imaginations of Europe and whether they can be related to diverse habitus² and types of European belonging.

This analysis enables us to verify whether and how local and European identities coexist and communicate with one another and the role played by national and European public spheres in these processes.

The study investigates also the role of the local context and institutions in the conceptualization of Europe and people's relationship with it, because it assumes that local institutions could generate particular meanings of Europe as well as a bond with the EU. The European vocation of Tuscany and the active involvement of this Italian region in European affairs have provided an interesting case study for verifying these hypotheses.

Tuscany has traditionally been considered a ‘European region’ due to its history, cultural heritage, political orientation, engagement in European issues and cooperation with the EU.³ Tuscan cities are often the venue of EU-/Europe-related events, and the regional authorities use European funds for developing community-led initiatives, involving local actors and citizens. Europe is studied and discussed by the Tuscan cultural and political institutions.

Moreover, in Tuscany, we find different local realities, characterized by diverse socio-economic and cultural developments which have turned them into distinct local societies. In order to investigate different contexts, two local societies have been selected, Florence and Prato, which are very different in their economic organization, cultural and political traditions, local history and social composition.

Florence is the capital city of the region and is an international and prestigious tourist and university center. The municipality is governed by a mayor from the left-wing coalition, and the city is a major national cultural and economic hub where commercial and cultural interests take place. Tourism is the most important of all these industries and most of the Florentine economy relies on the money generated by international arrivals. International students live in the city and regional institutions as well as international organizations, such as the European University Institute, are located here. In 2002, the city witnessed the first meeting of the European Social Forum, which was repeated in 2012. Florence hosts cultural events such as the ‘Festival of Europe’ and ‘The State of the Union’.⁴ The city is influenced by transnational flows of people, cultures and meanings that shape everyday social practices.

Prato is an industrial district specialized in textile production.⁵ Its growth, after the Second World War, was stimulated by internal migration from the South of Italy. Today, Prato is Tuscany's second largest city, which has experienced significant immigration from African, Eastern European and Asian countries. The second largest Chinese immigrant community in Italy is located here. From the 1980s onwards, the textile industry began facing an economic crisis, and a profound transformation due to the Chinese ethnic economy that had developed within the industrial district. This in turn led to demographic and socio-economic changes in the city and difficulties for immigrants trying to integrate as well as to high levels of unemployment. The conjunction of all these factors led to political change in 2009 with the election, for the first time since 1949, of a right-wing mayor.

With the aim of analyzing the narratives of Europe circulating among Europeans from different socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, four networks have been identified in these two local contexts. Here the term ‘network’ is adopted for sample groups of people connected to each other, through links such as through family, work and friendship. With the intention of investigating linked persons with common experiences and values, school and family relationships between teachers, pupils and their parents have been chosen as sample social spaces for analyzing everyday life. School and family environments are also sites of particular interest for exploring the dynamics of socialization, through which pupils acquire knowledge and dispositions that make them aware and effective members of European society.

The rationale guiding the selection of the school groups aimed at identifying networks which typify different socio-economic and cultural characteristics: class, economic condition, cultural background, political position, international experience and cross-border relationships. The choice of the schools, which are used as proxies for the type of community they serve, was made by evaluating their international activity and engagement, educational objectives, as well as the socio-economic development of their location.

Thus, the networks have been identified in four different secondary schools: two licei (high schools) and two technical institutes (Table 1).

Machiavelli high school in Florence (network1) and Cicognini high school in Prato (network3) are prestigious schools attended by middle and upper class students coming from the wealthiest and most influential families of local societies, but Machiavelli is more internationally engaged (many pupils, parents and teachers have international backgrounds and mixed heritage) and traditionally left-wing. Peano technical school in Florence (network2) and Datini technical school in Prato (network4) are vocational schools in the city suburbs attended by pupils from working class and immigrant families. Datini is located in a deprived area of Prato district, strongly affected by unemployment and social exclusion difficulties.

Between March and June 2012, 40 individual interviews were carried out in the four schools. The interviewees included teachers, students and parents. For each school, half of the interviewees were selected among those people who had international experience/background, while the other half did not have any international connections. In addition, eight focus groups were organized within the classes. The number of students per class for the focus groups varied between 10 and 15, involving a total of 122 in all, aged between 15 and 20.⁶

The study collected many narratives of Europe. Although it has been possible to identify diverse stories circulating through the networks, these stories have something in common: the narratives of Europe are locally constructed. Elements coming from the political, economic, cultural and institutional local context are connected and combined with references to the European culture and tradition. As the quotes in the following reveal, the local perspective plays an important influence.

To the question ‘What comes to your mind when you think of Europe?’, many interviewees predictably told stories related to the historical roots of the continent. In particular, in network1, ‘European civilization’ narratives prevail, but every story arises from the local dimension.

In the broad range of stories which emerged, the influence of the local context where the narratives originate can always be identified. Also, in network2, components of Tuscan traditions are developed in a European perspective.

The weight of the national context emerges in the institutional narratives of Europe collected in network3, focused, for instance, on the personality of Altiero Spinelli, Italian politician and one of the EU founding fathers.

The narratives of Europe are multi-level stories, a mixture of values and references coming from the local cultural heritage, from national history, and linked to the European post-national plot. Biographical and personal stories weave together with collective memories and shared meanings. The subjective and the objective dimensions interact in the European identity construction process.

Negative and reflexive narratives of Europe's past are also shared among the networks. The memory of partisan resistance fighting against Fascism in Tuscany is deep-rooted and underlined in many stories. Critical accounts are referred also to Europe's present:

Counter-stories show the critical capacity of the narratives ‘from below’, which are able to counter the conflicting institutional narratives ‘from above’. Reflexive and critical narrative processes lead to alternative constructions of European reality, contrasting with the ‘official story’ (Boltanski and Thévenot 2006).

A dialectical relationship between personal autonomy and structural social conditioning emerges. Both dimensions influence the stories. The weight of the social structure in the dynamic of identification (Bourdieu 1972) and the effects of the socio-economic local context on the ideas of Europe are evident in the narratives collected in network4:

Different narratives of Europe circulate within the four networks, which are related to diverse types of European belonging. Considering under what conditions and social context the narratives emerge, it follows that three main sets of variables influence people's conceptualization of, and closeness to, Europe: first, the social, economic and cultural capital distribution within the networks, the individual socio-economic and cultural backgrounds and international experiences; second, media exposure, transnational networking and participation in the European public sphere and civil society organizations; third, the role of intermediation played by social institutions in the local context (school, administrations, family) in the way Europeanization is experienced, which shape the socialization process with Europe. In an institutional environment ‘open’ to Europe, cosmopolitan narratives and a general positive attitude toward Europe are shared. In a more closed context, shared meanings are based on traditional common symbols, experiences and close relationships.

According to these variables, it has been possible to construct a typology of European identities characterizing the four networks (Table 2).

A cosmopolitan and civic European identity distinguishes network1. A hybrid identity, made up of local, national and supranational layers of attachments, is built through the participation in many communities and places. Such an identity is open toward different types of belonging and aware of its diverse components. It is a cosmopolitan identity since Europe is included in a transnational dimension and linked to a multicultural society. It is a post-national identity based on critical interpretations of Europe's past and on the acceptance of universal and democratic values. It is a civic identity, founded on participation, trust and civic culture, also beyond national borders.

By analyzing the social characteristics and practices of interviewees, it emerged that this identity is expressed by people integrated in international/multicultural networks, by those who participate in transnational civil society organizations and use international media. Experiences such as trips, marriages and friendships with people from different countries, working abroad, and engagement in European projects or affairs also affect the sense of inclusion in the European society and the construction of bonds among Europeans.

High schools, more than vocational schools, show a higher level of interest in the international dimension. Parents and teachers in networks 1 and 3 are actively involved in school exchange programs and aware of the chances offered by the EU.

Living in the regional capital city is also positively correlated with a cosmopolitan belonging. Cultural and political institutions located in Florence, which organize events related to Europe, help the EU to be recognized by people as a familiar institution. The metropolitan and industrial district's cultures and behavior patterns have a different impact on belonging. In the metropolitan context, the consciousness of being involved in a transnational dimension is expressed. A sense of separation from the international dynamics emerges in the district of Prato.

Material and cultural factors have some influence. Middle and upper class pupils experience Europe and think in terms of extended periods of further education, planning their future in European universities and hoping for qualified jobs and international careers. These students are motivated and supported by parents and teachers in sharing positive European narratives and having experiences abroad.

Working class parents’ knowledge of international opportunities is restricted and students coming from these families and from deprived areas of the region are excluded from European experiences and tend to feel more insecurity about their future.

The narratives collected in network2 refer to a social and political European identity. This network expresses a multiple identity mostly correlated to the places of socialization, where the local and national dimensions prevail. The sense of belonging to the local dimension is correlated with the micro relational networks in which people are involved, where close relationships of family and friends dominate, and with a lack of international social relations and engagement with the supranational level. European affiliation is based on critical interpretations of social and political Europe.

What makes local identities open toward Europe is considering Europe as a positive fact of everyday life. Interviewees affirm that Europe becomes ‘real’ in people's lives when they realize that the EU is not just a distant political project but it affects the territories in which they live, intervening into everybody's life and providing rules and resources for all Europeans. The economic crisis, on the contrary, increases the perception of the imbalance in the distribution of costs and benefits among Europeans. Inequalities become a salient topic. Inequalities in income, welfare, education and employment conditions affect cohesion among Europe's population. Interviewed people demand common social and labor policies from the EU, in order to create equal opportunities and entitlements. Inter-European differences weigh heavily from the standpoint of assessments of social justice and in the construction of solidarity.

The stories collected in network3 represent an institutional and ethno-cultural European identity. The strong sense of belonging to the subnational dimension is emphasized. Although such belonging is felt as ‘ascribed’, it is not considered as a contradiction with European identity, which is based on institutional elements and combined with ethno-cultural factors.

Narratives of Europe are related to several cultural sources. The media participate in the spread of ideas, values, interests and opinions on Europe/EU. Interviewees who receive and go in search of in-depth information about European issues, through a number of media sources – radio, newspapers, specialized and international magazines, internet – express more awareness of belonging to a social group called Europeans.

The socio-economic characteristics of the local context emerge in particular in the narratives collected in both Prato networks, where interviewees, involved in the production and commercial sectors, criticize the EU trade policy, ask for European intervention into the problem of delocalization of industrial activities, which deeply affects the district, and for a common immigration policy.

These topics are also addressed within network4, which broadly shares an economic perspective on Europe and a functional and localistic European identity. Europe is here referred to as nothing more than economic integration and as the synonym of the common currency. People learn about Europe only through the national newspapers and TV news, which shape the national public debate by focusing mainly on the European political and economic crisis. In translating EU policies into the national level, the political class and the national media act as filters for EU communications and this go-between role has a direct effect on the conceptualization of Europe.

A lack of confidence toward national and EU political institutions and, more in general, toward the future, is expressed by this network. This result is directly related to socio-economic problems that characterize the industrial district: unemployment, immigrant integration, criminality, poverty. A strong contradiction is felt between the institutional and official narratives of Europe coming from ‘the top’ and everyday life experienced in the local context. Being European for them seems to represent an extremely abstract condition.

This kind of story raises hostile rejections toward Europe. A feeling of dependence, and at the same time of exclusion and marginalization from the cosmopolitan center, is expressed. Reaction to transnational processes reinforces particularistic identity, locally defined and based on strong and emotional ties with the place of origin and well-known ‘safe’ symbolic places.

Europe is here also associated with globalization, mentioned in the sense of cultural homogenization and commercialization processes, which are considered in contrast with the traditional local heritage. Cultural differences within EU populations are underlined and many stereotypes still persist. Above migration flows and the enlargement process, people place their fear of loss of national identity, linked to local habits and customs.

In spite of some negative attitudes toward Europe, asked whether the EU makes sense, none of the interviewees declared they would prefer to return to a ‘pre-EU era’ and abolish the EU, irrespective of their political opinion. All of them declared they were in favor of a stronger and binding political union. The general opinion is that the integration process is still in its initial phase and has to be improved and perfected. This interesting finding, which would need more context and evidence in support of an explanation, could be connected by some means to the favorable regional context, since Tuscan political institutions have been traditionally in favor of EU integration.

This study underlines the relevance of the local dimension, everyday life context and socio-economic divide on the ideas of Europe and in the shaping of European identity, and suggests interesting reflections both in terms of research and policy.

Europeanization is not just a matter of political and economic regulation, but also of social relations, expectations and normative values which overlap, and of lives transnationally interconnected. The local dimension is part of these processes and the regional traits are fundamental to make the EU inclusive and closer to Europeans.

There is a dynamic relation between the local, national, supra- and transnational dimensions. These levels interact in the identity construction process, thus they cannot be considered separately in academic research and policy-making.

European identity has its social roots in regional areas. Regional identities and subcultures can be enhanced and conciliated in the European dimension. At the same time, a growing awareness of the interdependence between these levels, which affect each other, suggests that concepts such as ‘identity’ and ‘citizenship’ and the debate on social rights need to be included in the wider framework of Europeanization and global transformation. The question of inclusion for European citizens and the closeness of European institutions to the countries themselves comes from the local context and plays a large part in the EU's crisis of legitimacy and in the spread of Euroscepticism.

This study partially confirms findings from previous research that sustain the positive correlation between educational capital, economic status, cross-national practices, support for European integration and development of European identity (Gabel 1998; Coenders et al. 2003; Citrin and Sides 2004; Petithomme 2008; Recchi and Favell 2009). At the same time, including the local context as a variable, it suggests that socio-structural and economic inter-territorial differences in Europe weigh heavily in the construction of a common sense of belonging and solidarity among Europeans. There are great differences in the ways in which European citizens are embedded in the process of Europeanization. The local context together with its institutions plays a role in informing and involving people in the European dimension. ‘Locality’ here means not only local economic condition, but also opportunities for getting to know, participating and gaining experiences with Europe and Europeans and increasing the awareness of being integrated into the transnational space of Europe. Europeans from different social strata who are informed about the EU and also experience Europe in the place where they live, share meanings which allow them to develop a European sense of belonging and common purpose.

Results highlight that in order to bring Europe closer to its citizens and increase social cohesion in the EU, effective social policies need to be implemented to combat social exclusion. The aim of improving and equalizing economic and social conditions across and within regions remains a primary objective for the EU.

Local and global are negotiated through daily practices. Policies which facilitate people's involvement in the European dimension and the development of transnational lifestyles can increase this process. The public discourse on Europe is a central element in constructing a European society and spaces for communication between Europeans. EU institutions can sustain this process by including ever more citizens in the European public sphere, reinforcing the means of communication for European matters and creating a multi-level and plurilinguistic European public dimension, able to penetrate the national public spheres.

European institutions promoting transnational spaces for participation and communication can support a European sense of belonging which is based on shared practices and active participation, that is to say, an identity able to reconcile the differences between the various narratives of Europe and its many cultures spread across the European area.

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Gemma Scalise is a research fellow in the Department of Political and Social Sciences at the University of Florence. Her research interests focus on the social dimension of European integration, identity change in post-national Europe and social citizenship challenges in the EU. She is currently working on the strategies and practices of active inclusion in Europe from a multi-level perspective.