Borders on the mind: re-framing border thinking

Language(s)

Anglais

Type

Note on a scientific paper, a conference paper, etc.

Main Category

Regional Development – Sustainability

Governance – Power – Cooperation

Language – Culture – Identity

Introduction

Addressing the issue of borders as an element we need to always reweigh, this article motivates us to see in them more than just artefacts leading to the fencing off of chunks of territory and people from one another. Borders’ character is more equivocal than what it may seems.

Summary

We, most of the time, look on border as simple artefacts on the ground serving a variety of practical reasons and that can be classified according to the purposes (political, social, economic, etc.) they serve and how they serve them. If they are necessary for all sorts of reasons, borders are also inherently problematic. Instead of adopting a rigid position about them, we need to consider them as movable structures that have advantages and disadvantages. Borders should define ‘dwelling’ rather than national spaces and motivate political responsibility for pursuit of a ‘decent life’ as not restricted to any particular state.

Content

After a short introduction on borders meaning and the two main viewpoints people have on them, this article is divided in 3 main sections. The author has tried to reframe the questions about borders in practical and ethical terms in such a way that moves beyond the simple either/or stipulation on the current debate. Borders are very complex entities.

1. ENABLING BORDERS

This section explains why borders matter as facts on the ground, why they are inherently problematic and finally encourage people to look at it differently. From an understanding as simple boundaries lines between self-evident states to borders that serves various economic and social functions, borders are nowadays socio-territorial constructs reflecting the discourses and practices of national identity.

2. DISABLING BORDERS

This section explains that borders are the result of the spread of a model of territorial statehood, a state-centred political economy, and the association of democracy with territorial citizenship from Europe into the rest of the world.

It shows us that they are not just another example of boundaries and are qualitatively different in their capacity to both redefine other boundaries and to override more locally based distinctions. Borders have a specific historical and geographical origin.

We are in a time when they may start to lose their grip because of the emerging spatial ontology of transnational and globalized world.

3. EQUIVOCAL BORDERS

This section suggests reframing the understanding of borders by focusing on how much borders enhance or restrict the pursuit of a decent life. Complex borders can be more than boundaries around a territory. Looking at the case of airport for example, we have a totally different apprehension of what borders are. It is important to re-frame the discussion about borders in terms of the impacts they have, what they do both for and to people.

Conclusions

As a result, this article brings to light interesting findings.

Borders are nowadays socio-territorial constructs reflecting discourses and practices of national identity.
Borders are expressive of distinctive national identities that can only be appreciated at the border. They are necessary for intergroup expression.
As suggested by Michel Warschawski, borders can be places of exchanges and enrichment where pluralist identities can flourish. They serve several vital socio-political purposes like clearly demarcate institutional and public-goods based externality fields, in addition to define who is eligible and who is not to share in the benefits of infrastructure projects.
Borders helps focus on political identity questions in four aspects:
- The claim to sovereignty and its realization since the eighteenth century as a territorial ideal for a people endowed with self-rule.
- Identities themselves, our self-definitions as inherently territorial.
- A broadly social democraatic emphasis on how social solidarity within national borders furthers goals such as diminished poverty, increased equality of opportunity, and given the absence of effective global-level institutions, macroeconomic regulation and stabilization.
- The idea of the exception in relation to borders control.
There is nothing physically or socially natural to borders. They are literally impositions on the world. They cannot secure spaces in which identities and interest can go unquestioned. They frequently transgress cultural and political difference.
Three trends are militating against borders as relevant social facts:
- Technological and geopolitical changes that have enabled more globalized types of economic organization.
- The universality of claims to equal freedom and inherent rights attached to one’s status as a human rather than a specific nationality.
- Citizenship as an association with a singular territorial political identity and its mutual exclusivity.
We can look on borders from different angles and address the impacts they have, what they do both for and to people.

Key Messages

This article helps us to look differently on borders. Things are more complex than what we may imagine; borders have advantages and disadvantages. Beyond the viewpoint according to which borders are simple facts on the ground or the one defining them as artefacts of dominant discursive processes, we need to evaluate their impact on our environment thinking about what they do to and for people. Today, we need to realize that borders are part of our everyday life in several ways. If technological progress and geopolitical changes have managed to build a more globalized economy, borders have not disappeared yet.

Lead

John Agnew, Institute of Geography, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, États-Unis

Author of the entry

Eva

NOSSEM

Links

https://doi.org/10.3402/egp.v1i4.1892

Keywords