Minority Youth and their perceptions of borders and the EU
Abstract
Abstract This report examines how young adults from national minority communities in European border regions perceive borders, Europe, and the European Union (EU), drawing on research conducted within the B-SHAPES project. Through semi-structured interviews and zine-making workshops with participants aged 18–31 across five case studies—South Tyrol (Italy–Austria), Zaolzie/Těšín Silesia (Poland–Czechia), North and South Schleswig (Denmark–Germany), Southern Slovakia (Hungary–Slovakia), and Western Thrace (Greece–Bulgaria–Türkiye)—the study provides bottom-up insights into everyday experiences of borders and European integration. The findings reveal a marked divergence between minority media narratives, which often portray borders in politicized or securitized terms, and the more pragmatic, functional views expressed by young people. For most participants, borders are experienced as open, ordinary, and opportunity-enhancing, shaped by Schengen mobility and cross-border routines, though cultural and linguistic differences remain salient symbolic boundaries. Episodic disruptions, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed the fragility of this openness and reinforced young people’s reliance on mobility. Perceptions of Europe and the EU were similarly pragmatic: youth valued concrete benefits—free movement, educational mobility, and regional funding—more than symbolic identification, contributing to a form of banal Europeanism. While some viewed the EU as a guarantor of minority protection, skepticism persisted regarding its consistency and effectiveness. Strong regional and minority identities often superseded national or European ones. Overall, the study shows that minority youth normalize European integration in daily life yet articulate limited emotional attachment to the EU, underscoring both the resilience and vulnerability of Europe’s borderlands and the importance of integrating youth perspectives into future European policy and narratives.
Full text
Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are, however, those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Execuve Agency (REA). Neither the European Union nor the granng authority can be held responsible for them. Deliverable 4.2: Report “Minority Youth and Their Percepons of Borders and the EU” Project acronym B - SHAPES Project name Borders shaping percepons of European sociees Grant agreement no 101095186 Work Package WP4 Document name Minority Youth and their percepons of borders and the EU Lead Partner Eurac Research
D.4.2, V1 2 Document Informaon Work Package Number 4 Responsible Task Leader Eurac Research Authors Alice Engl (Eurac Research) , Johanna Mierhofer (Eurac Research), Marcus Nicolson (Eurac Research), Péter Balogh (ELTE), Marn Kla (SDU), Elżbieta Opiłowska (UWr), Hynek Böhm (TUL), Nazrin Gadimova-Akbulut (independent) , Petranka Nedelcheva (HISTORYMUS), Anna Tüdős (independent) Project Coordinator Marn Kla (SDU) Sensivity Public Deliverable type Report Date of submission 29 September 202 5 History of Revisions Version, date Summary of changes made V.0 , 15.09.2025 Dra f or comments to B - Shapes Consorum V.1 , 29.09.2025 Report finalized on the basis of partners ’ comments
D.4.2, V1 3 Execuve Summary ......................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introducon ................................................................................................................................ 6 2. Conceptual Background and Study Raonale ............................................................................. 6 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................... 9 4. Case study contexts ................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 South Tyrol in the Italian-Austrian borderland ................................................................... 12 4.2 Zaolzie /Těšínské Slezsko in the Polish-Czech borderland................................................... 13 4.3 North and South Schleswig in the Danish-German borderland ......................................... 14 4.4 Southern Slovakia in the Hungarian-Slovak borderland ..................................................... 15 4.5 Western Thrace in the Greek-Bulgarian-Turkish borderland .............................................. 16 5. Case Study Reports ................................................................................................................... 18 5.1 Italian-Austrian Borderland ................................................................................................. 18 5.2 Polish-Czech Borderland ..................................................................................................... 25 5.3 Danish-German Borderland ................................................................................................ 32 5.4 Slovak-Hungarian Borderland ............................................................................................. 42 5.5 Greek-Bulgarian-Turkish borderland ................................................................................... 50 6. Discussion .................................................................................................................................. 58 7. Concluding Remarks .................................................................................................................. 61 8. References ................................................................................................................................. 63 9. Annex: Translaons of the Execuve Summary ........................................................................ 68
D.4.2, V1 4 Execuve Summary Please see Annex 1 for translaons in the following languages: Czech, Danish, German, Hungarian, Italian, Polish.1 The B-SHAPES project focuses on how people perceive Europe, paying close aenon to how border narraves and processes of re-bordering can influence these percepons. This report specifically explores how young people from naonal minority communies in European border regions perceive borders, Europe, and the European Union (EU). It draws on five case studies—South Tyrol (Italy–Austria), Zaolzie/Těšín Silesia (Poland–Czechia), North and South Schleswig (Denmark–Germany), Southern Slovakia (Hungary–Slovakia), and Western Thrace (Greece–Bulgaria–Türkiye)—to provide boom-up insights into everyday experiences of borders and European integraon. The study, conducted in 2024-2025, focused on young adults aged 18–31, using a combinaon of semistructured interviews and zine-making workshops. These approaches enabled parcipants to express their narraves both visually and verbally, generang perspecves that move beyond the elite-level and media discourses. By comparing youth accounts with minority media narraves (Engl et al., 2024) the study highlights both convergences and disconnecons between public and personal understandings of Europe. The analysis reveals a notable gap between minority media narraves and young people’s percepons. While media outlets oen frame borders and Europe in policized or securized terms, young people tend to adopt pragmac, funconal perspecves. This divergence underscores that youth voices are oen underrepresented in public narraves, despite their importance for the future of European integraon. Findings show that for most study parcipants, borders are experienced as open and largely invisible, a result of Schengen mobility and normalizaon of cross-border pracces. Borders are frequently understood as opportunies rather than barriers, associated with educaon, work, shopping, leisure, and family es. However, they remain symbolically significant: many young people frame cultural and linguisc divides, rather than state borders, as the “real” froners in their lives. Historical legacies and family memories also connue to shape how borders are imagined, even where physical border controls have disappeared. Moments of disrupon, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, exposed the fragility of this sense of openness. Recent re-bordering events have highlighted how strongly minority youth rely on mobility, reinforcing the value they place on Schengen but also reminding them of the potenal precarity of European integraon. Comparisons with securized external borders, such as Greek-Turkish border, further underscored the contrast between everyday openness and the reality of exclusion elsewhere. Percepons of Europe and the EU were generally pragmac. Parcipants emphasized the tangible benefits of EU membership, especially free movement, Erasmus, Interrail, and EU regional funding, rather than symbolic idenficaon with Europe. The EU was oen taken for granted as a background condion of daily 1 Translaons were machine-translated and checked by the respecve project partners.
D.4.2, V1 5 life, producing a form of “banal Europeanism”. While some young people valued the EU as a guarantor of minority rights and a source of funding, others regarded it as distant, inefficient, or inconsistent in its protecon of minories. The posive percepons of the EU’s role in two of the cases (South Tyrol and North and South Schleswig) were strongly shaped by earlier minority rights selements that were established independently of the EU. While these arrangements originated from naonal or bilateral agreements and broader Council of Europe frameworks, the research parcipants in these border areas associated them with the EU, seeing it as a guarantor of diversity and minority protecon. Regional and minority idenes emerged as parcularly strong. Many parcipants idenfied foremost with their borderland or naonal minority community (eg. South Tyrolean, Zaolziak, Schleswigian, Hungarian in Slovakia (felvidéki)), rather than with broader naonal or European categories. These localized idenes oen offered a way to transcend naonal divisions while affirming cultural disncveness. Overall, the report shows that minority youth in border regions normalize European integraon through their everyday pracces but do not necessarily arculate strong emoonal aachment to the EU. Their views reflect a pragmac embrace of mobility and opportunity, tempered by skepcism about instuonal commitment to minority rights. These findings highlight both the achievements and vulnerabilies of European integraon in mes of crisis, while underlining the importance of listening to young people’s voices in shaping inclusive visions of Europe’s future.
D.4.2, V1 6 1. Introducon Authors: Alice Engl, Marcus Nicolson, Johanna Mierhofer The objecve of this report is to invesgate the percepons of young naonal minority borderlanders (aged 18-31) in relaon to borders and Europe, as well as the narraves associated with these concepts. Specifically, we focus on naonal minority and borderland case study sites in Czechia, Denmark, Greece, Germany, Italy, and Slovakia. In each of these sites, we have used semi-structured interviews and parcipatory arts-based methods to explore the key research quesons of the study: How do young naonal minories perceive borders? How do young people perceive Europe and the European Union? These quesons reflect the B-SHAPES project’s overarching aim to understand beer how percepons of borders and European integraon are shaped from below, in borderland regions, especially considering ongoing re-bordering trends and sociopolical crises. The report is structured as follows: we first set out our jusficaon for the study and present a summary of the exisng research on the atudes of young members of naonal minories towards borders and Europe. We then explain our methodology, outlining our use of semi-structured interviews as well as the parcipatory creave arts research method, zine-making. In this secon, we also outline the framework used for data analysis. Next, we provide the contextual background for each case study, drawing on historical and socio-economic data, and present the results and empirical data from the five case study sites. Each case study provides valuable insights into how young people in minority borderland communies perceive borders, experience bordering pracces in daily life, and engage with the ideas of Europe and the EU. We then contrast the findings with the results from our earlier media analysis of minority media to explore convergences and tensions between public and individual narraves (Engl et al. 2024). The subsequent discussion idenfies and compares key themac paerns that emerge from the data gathered across the case studies. In the conclusion secon, we summarise the main findings, present our concluding remarks of the report and outline the key contribuons that the study makes to knowledge, suggesng possible lines for future inquiry in this area. 2. Conceptual Background and Study Raonale Authors: Alice Engl, Marcus Nicolson, Johanna Mierhofer This report explores how young adults from naonal minority communies in European border regions perceive borders, how they relate to the idea of Europe, and how their views are shaped by both everyday experiences and narraves operang at different levels of inference. It forms part of a broader invesgaon into how borders connue to shape European sociees. The B-SHAPES project focuses on how people perceive Europe, paying close aenon to how border narraves and processes of re-bordering can influence these percepons (Opiłowska et al., 2023; Sarmiento-Mirwaldt et al., 2025). While the EU envisions itself as a space without internal borders, recent events such as the 2015 so-called ‘migraon crisis’ and the COVID-19 pandemic have triggered the
D.4.2, V1 7 reintroducon of border controls. These developments have revealed the fragility of the European idea of open borders and confirmed the ongoing power of borders to divide, shape idenes, and impact people’s everyday lives (Medeiros et al., 2020; Wassenberg, 2020). In this context, border regions become key spaces both where European integraon is experienced most directly and where tensions between unity and division are most visible. This report focuses on naonal minority communies living in five selected border regions: the Germanspeaking community in South Tyrol, the German and Danish minories in the German-Danish border region, the Hungarian minority in Slovakia, the Polish minority in Czechia, and the Turkish minority in northeastern Greece (Thrace). These regions are historically marked by shiing borders and overlapping cultural influences. For naonal minories, borders are not just geopolical lines but are entangled, experienced, and connuously negoated in everyday crossings and social interacons. In focus of this report are the perspecves of young adults from these minority groups. Through a series of interviews and workshops, we engaged with young people to explore how they think and feel about borders, how they perceive the European Union, and how their views reflect or differ from the narraves they encounter in the local media that serve their (minority) communies. These methods allowed us to examine how personal experiences, family histories, and the local context each contribute to shaping young people's understanding of borders, European integraon, identy, and belonging. We also invesgate the possible role of key deand re-bordering events, including the so-called ‘migraon crisis’ of 2015 and the COVID-19 pandemic, in shaping percepons of borders and the European project in minority regions. This work contributes to the broader goals of the B-SHAPES project by offering a boom-up understanding of borders in contemporary Europe. Young people’s polical percepons in border regions may be influenced by historical border legacies, and, at the same me, these individuals have the potenal to act as agents shaping how Europe is imagined and built. Throughout this report, we argue that young borderlander voices are essenal to understanding the challenges and possibilies facing European cohesion today. In placing naonal minority voices at the forefront of discussions around borders, this report aims to invesgate how borders shape percepons of Europe in everyday life. It highlights the diversity of experiences and understandings that exist within minority communies and calls aenon to the importance of studying the percepons of under-researched actors and communies, such as minories living in borderlands. The report also considers the context and culture in which the research parcipants are embedded. Each border region included in this study has a disnct history of shiing borders, minority experiences, and cross-border relaons, which shape the everyday realies and idenes of its inhabitants. These local contexts influence how young people understand borders. The central aim of this report is to idenfy common themes that run across these borderland minority communies and the young people who live in them. At the same me, we seek to highlight how these themes might be arculated differently depending on local histories and border dynamics. Finally, we compare the public narraves idenfied in daily minority newspapers with the personal narraves gathered through interviews and workshops with
D.4.2, V1 8 young adults. This comparison reveals how public discourses in minority media are interpreted, challenged, and somemes reimagined by the young people living in these regions. Historical experience, polical expectaons, and instuonal dynamics shape naonal minories’ percepons of Europe and the EU. A dominant view in the literature frames the EU as a condional supporter of minority rights. This percepon stems from the Copenhagen Criteria, which imposed minority protecon standards on candidate countries, especially in Central and Eastern Europe during the 1990s and 2000s (Malloy, 2022). However, this condionality applied only to applicants, not to exisng member states, creang a double standard between older members like France or Greece and new member states. The EU is thus seen as inconsistent, promong minority rights when polically useful but neglecng them once accession is complete (Constann, 2017; Nagy & Vizi, 2022). The lack of enforcement tools and declining priorizaon of autochthonous minories has led to growing disillusionment (Masse & Schakel, 2021, 427). Alongside this, the EU is also perceived as an enabler of connecvity, parcularly through de-bordering policies such as Schengen, the Single Market, and cohesion funding. These instruments have helped minories, especially in border regions, to maintain cross-border cultural and economic es and pursue transnaonal cooperaon (Engl, 2020; 2022; Hoch, 2022). However, integraon does not always foster mutual trust. Some communies feel le out of Europeanisaon processes, and increased mobility can even trigger resentment (Decoville & Durand, 2019). Moreover, EU efforts to build a common European identy may undermine regional disncveness, leading minories to view the EU as a cultural homogenizer (Kiraly, 2022). During so-termed crisis moments like the increased migraon in 2015-2016 or the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been pressure to align with naonal or European idenes at the expense of local ones (Tarvet & Kla, 2023). The EU is also seen as an instuonal resource and as a plaorm offering legal tools, funding, and polical visibility for minority advocacy. Iniaves such as the European Parliament’s InterGroup on minority rights and the Minority SafePack have been used by minority actors to advance their claims (Nagy & Vizi, 2022; Waterbury, 2021). However, symbolic setbacks, such as the EU’s rejecon of the SafePack despite strong public support, reinforce the percepon of the EU as distant and unresponsive (Crepaz, 2014) and have led to dissasfacon with the EU’s perceived lack of acve support (Sco 2020, 665; see also Tárnok, 2022). The gap between instuonal access and praccal influence has been said to have eroded trust in the EU as a reliable actor for minority concerns (Smith et al., 2019). Finally, minority and regionalist enthusiasm for European integraon that has been idenfied by scholars is parally waning. The EU’s reluctance to engage in internal territorial disputes or clarify kin-state relaons has led to frustraon and a rise in Euroscepcism among groups previously seen as pro-European (Masse & Schakel, 2021; Waterbury, 2008). The securizaon of minories, where they are framed as security threats, further strains interethnic relaons and can deepen distrust between minories and their home states (Bourne, 2003; Liebich, 2019). While some minority instuons connue to pursue sub-state diplomacy and peacebuilding through EU channels (Kla, 2018; McCall & Itçaina, 2017), the broader trend suggests that the EU’s capacity to act as a stable guarantor of minority protecon is perceived as increasingly uncertain. A review of the exisng literature on naonal minories and their relaonship with the EU reveals a clear predominance of top-down analycal frameworks. Much of the research tends to focus on the role of
D.4.2, V1 9 European instuons, legal instruments, polical elites, and policies in shaping the experiences and rights of minority groups. Studies oen examine how EU enlargement criteria, cohesion funds, and various polical plaorms support or neglect minority issues. In parallel, another dominant approach concentrates on minority representaon. It examines how minority interests are arculated and mobilized through formal polical actors such as ethnic pares, NGOs, advocacy networks, and transnaonal alliances. Scholars have invesgated how these representave structures engage with the European polical system, make use of EU channels, or parcipate in campaigns like the Minority SafePack iniave. These perspecves, while crucial, sll operate within elite or organizaonal domains, largely viewing minories from their intermediaries rather than the communies themselves. What remains underexplored in the literature is the boom-up dimension of how minority individuals, especially those outside instuonal or polical leadership roles, understand, experience, and narrate Europe in their everyday lives. In parcular, minority voices themselves are oen absent from the analycal frameworks that dominate the field. This results in a paradox; while naonal minories are frequently discussed, their voices are rarely heard in scholarship. The B-SHAPES project adds this boom-up perspecve by invesgang the micro-level perspecves of young adults from minority communies living in border regions. Indeed, border research tradionally centers on adult perspecves, thereby neglecng how borders shape—and are shaped by—younger populaons. Yet, children and young people are not passive parcipants in bordering processes; they impact borders and borderlands through their own acvity and agency (Venken et al., 2021). With regards to the study of percepons of Europe, compared to older generaons, young people across the EU tend to hold more favourable atudes towards the European Union (e.g. Lauterbach and De Vries, 2020; Lubbers and Scheepers, 2010). Around three in five respondents are generally in favour of the EU (Eurobarometer, 2024). Youth percepons of the EU vary notably across Europe, shaped by naonal contexts and regional priories. While young people from Denmark, Czechia and Italy had slightly more posive views on Europe than the EU average, young Slovaks, Germans, Poles and Hungarians were below average. By foregrounding their personal narraves, the B-SHAPES project seeks to enrich our understanding of how the EU, and the European integraon process are perceived not by elites or intermediaries, but by those living at the margins of the state. By incorporang voices that have oen been overlooked, the BShapes project aims to move beyond convenonal top-down narraves and contribute to a more inclusive and nuanced account of how Europe is lived and imagined by its diverse populaons. 3. Methodology Authors: Marcus Nicolson, Alice Engl, Anna Tüdős The methodology employed in this study combines qualitave approaches that include creave arts research, specifically zine-making, alongside semi-structured interviews with young adults aged 18-31 from naonal minority communies.
D.4.2, V1 16 ups and downs (experiencing low points around 1993–1998 and 2006–2011, respecvely) but have improved overall in recent years. This is largely thanks to the general post-1998 democrasaon of Slovakia and the cauous but ongoing official bilingualisaon process at least on the municipal level. At the same me, Hungary’s now long-incumbent government has priorised kinstate policy since 2010, when the country’s cizenship law has been modified to allow a simplified naturalisaon process largely for ethnic Hungarians in the neighbouring countries. As a response, Slovakia immediately banned dual cizenship for its cizens. A few Slovakia Hungarians have reportedly sll obtained Hungarian passports, which first led to considerable tensions between the two states but was later downplayed by former Slovak President Čaputová (Pósa Homoly, 2019). Since 2023, Slovakia and Hungary are led by similarly minded governments which however has so far had few concrete impacts on the former’s Hungarian minority. In the context of the EU, the two countries’ incumbent governments count as black sheep due to their frequent objecons to mainstream Union policies and norms. Yet not just the two countries but also Slovakia’s Hungarian minority are divided polically, with the laer’s main polical force (a party called Hungarian Alliance) being represented neither in the European nor in the Slovak Parliament but just on the local and regional levels. At the same me, since both countries joined the EU (2004), and the Schengen Area (2007), cross-border mobility has intensified, with many bridges having been (re)built – with considerable EU support – along the rivers Danube and Ipel’ which constute a long secon of the joint border. Accordingly, the openness of internal Schengen borders is hugely appreciated by Slovakia Hungarians, but less so their experience of the EU’s inacon regarding autochthonous minority rights. 4.5 Western Thrace in the Greek-Bulgarian-Turkish borderland Authors: Marn Kla, Petranka Nedelcheva This case study focuses on the area inhabited by the Muslim Turkish-speaking minority centered around the cies of Xanthi and Komoni in Greece. The region belonged to the Ooman Empire unl the First Balkan War (1912), when it came under Bulgarian rule. Aer World War I, it was ceded to Greece. The Muslim populaon of Thrace was exempted from the populaon exchange regulated by the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923. This treaty sll remains the only legal basis of minority protecon for the Muslim/Turkish minority (the treaty only refers to Muslims), Greece has neither rafied the Council of Europe’s Framework Convenon for the Protecon of Naonal Minories, nor the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. Greece does not allow NGOs or associaons named “Turkish”, leading to the peculiar situaon that the minority’s main associaon, the European Federaon of Western Thrace Turks, is registered in Germany. Currently, Muslims living in Western Thrace are the only group in Greece with a religious minority status dang back to the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923, which regulated the populaon exchange between Greece and the young Turkish Republic. Greece does not accept their status as naonal Turkish minority. Greece has signed but not rafied the Council of Europe’s Framework Convenon for the Protecon of Naonal Minories and has not signed the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. According to the official data of Greece, Western Thrace Turks are esmated at 49,000 comprising half of the total Muslim populaon of the region of 98,000. Unofficial data though suggests a higher number of the Turkish
D.4.2, V1 17 populaon between 130,000 and 150,000 according to the socio-cultural organizaons in Western Thrace (FUEN, nd.). The border between Greece and Bulgaria was fenced and militarized during the Cold War, interrupng the local populaons’ contacts and rural herding habits. Greek-Turkish relaons have been difficult since 1923, not least because of the trauma of the populaon exchange. The Cyprus crisis of 1975 and the establishment of the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (only recognized by Türkiye) in 1983 have furthermore complicated the relaonship and the situaon of the Turkish minority in Greece (as well as the Greek minority in Istanbul). Greece joined the EC in 1981, Bulgaria in 2004. Türkiye has candidate status, but membership negoaons have been stalled. Bulgaria became a full member of Schengen in 2025 (aer the field research conducted by B-SHAPES). The border to Türkiye is thus an EU external border. There has been an Interreg program BG-TR-GR, but it appears to be inacve. Migratory pressures have resulted in a militarizaon/fencing of the border to Türkiye.
D.4.2, V1 18 5. Case Study Reports 5.1 Italian-Austrian Borderland Authors: Alice Engl, Johanna Mierhofer, Marcus Nicolson The 17 young South Tyrolians who parcipated in our interviews and zine-making workshops, aged 18-31, were all members of the German-speaking minority, and born and raised within 10 km of the AustrioItalian border. Some of the parcipants were socially or polically acve in their community: three were involved in local polics, three were part of the same local feminist group. Nine had aended university, most of them abroad, and were now employed. Eight parcipants were currently aending the final class of the local high school. In short, all of them had grown up in a Europe characterized by open borders, with a Schengen border in their close vicinity that had only been closed once during their lifeme, in the COVID-19-pandemic. They all had direct experiences of the freedom this offered, travelling extensively and spending, or planning to spend, periods of study as Erasmus students in other European countries. At the same me, they all had relaves who had experienced and remembered the border controls of preSchengen mes, and great-grandparents who had lived through the effects of shiing borders aer WW1. These direct and indirect personal experiences of bordering processes shaped the ways in which the young research parcipants presented their narraves on borders and on Europe, as will be presented in the next secons. Narraves on the border The young minority borderlanders experience the state border as physically open and somewhat “invisible” in their everyday lives. Nonetheless, the border remains symbolically powerful and connues to influence their pracces. When discussing borders, language emerges as a more tangible divider than the state border, reinforcing cultural boundaries that persist beyond lines on the map. The invisible state border Most research parcipants described the state border as invisible. They perceive the border as simply exisng without strong polical or emoonal weight. This percepon reflects a de-policized and praccal understanding of the border, where it funcons more as a formality than a barrier. This percepon points to a post-Schengen mindset, in which the presence of the border is acknowledged, but it no longer imposes significant constraints or obstacles. The parcipants in the zine-making workshops generally approached the topic of borders conceptually or symbolically, rather than as a lived, local experience, represenng borders metaphorically using images of fences, walls, or barbed wire, and choosing images of securized borders far. This was described as far from the lived reality of the open border between Austria and Italy. In their day-to-day lives, parcipants only ever noced the existence of the border through banal instances such as changing traffic signs or phone signals upon crossing into Austria:
D.4.2, V1 19 It doesn't actually exist. Unless we have a global pandemic, it's effecvely not there. … Only when you're on the phone, the conversaon stops for a moment, that's the only thing. (ST_1) However, the invisibility of the border cannot be equated with a percepon of the borderland as borderless. Very few interviewees regularly crossed the border and if they did, it was most oen for a quick shopping trip. Interesngly, interviewees described that their cross-border movements and relaonships had decreased over the years: with the increase of both petrol and food prices, there were few incenves to cross the border anymore. A degree of detachment from the people and places across the border characterised the interviewees’ narraons. Indeed, the linguisc and cultural proximity of Eastern Tyrol to South Tyrol rarely emerged as strong social or emoonal incenves to cross the border. While there were some reflecons on identy — especially around South Tyrolean identy and a sense of belonging that transcends or is complicated by borders — there was a notable absence of personal relaonships or meaningful connecons that cross the border. The Austro-Italian border, while barely perceived by the interviewees, thus connues to demarcate people’s spaces of everyday acon and interacon. Very few of the research parcipants menoned direct personal memories or experiences related to the nearby state border. When such memories were present, they typically revolved around leisure acvies such as shopping trips across the border or hiking in the mountains, rather than interpersonal or cultural connecons (see image 1). A few years ago, we used to go to the border to fill up with petrol and diesel, because it was significantly cheaper. Since the coronavirus, that's no longer the case. We also like to go shopping in Sillian, because there are various grocery stores there that are not available in the immediate vicinity… Otherwise, we don't go to Austria that oen, maybe to go up a mountain, but otherwise there are no specific reasons. (ST_5) I think you can sll feel a border there, because the coexistence between South Tyrol and East Tyrol is not really cross-regional, and although you would have the opportunity, you don't [cross/interact]. (ST_2)
D.4.2, V1 20 Image 1: Zine image showing everyday cross-border acvies, including hiking and skiing, with the words ‘No Border’ to show how the local border remains open in these mountain areas Some parcipants made references to family memories involving the border, parcularly in the context of past border crossings or smuggling. In these instances, the idea of the border is preserved more through familial memory than direct personal experience. The frequent use of historical images in the zines may further indicate that borders are primarily associated with the past and not directly related to contemporary experience (see image 2). Image 2: Zine images made using black and white photos to signify historical closed borders, including border stones, barbed wire, and checkpoint offices Several parcipants also menoned internaonal travel, but even these reflecons tended to focus on the mechanics of border crossings rather than emoonal or relaonal aspects. Only a few parcipants associated borders with humanitarian or migraon-related narraves, possibly reflecng the extent to which open borders are normalized and taken for granted by young people in this region. Image 3: Image displaying the text ‘No Border Crossing without Control’ Overall, the findings suggest that while the border is a recognizable and somemes symbolic theme for young people in South Tyrol rooted in local history and family memory, it does not evoke strong personal or emoonal associaons. For most, the local border “simply is there”.
D.4.2, V1 21 Border as a site of opportunity A number of interviewees viewed the border not as a liming or restricng factor, but rather as a place of opportunity: The border can always be crossed, and that in itself is understood as the embodiment of freedom. But also, more concretely, the border allows South Tyrolians to differenate themselves against what is on the other side of the border, with benefits for the local economy, parcularly the tourist industry, but also in terms of identy, as the following quote shows: I think of a border as a place of opportunity, because it seems to me that we are more likely to encounter opportunies than to be restricted, especially with the barrier-free crossing between the border of Austria and Italy. [...] For me, that is just a feeling of freedom, when I can just go wherever I want, because I don't think about it, okay, now I could get to Austria. I just go and that is already a place of possibilies. (ST_5) Borders and minority identy: The percepon of the language border as the “real” border When reflecng on the meaning and significance of borders, parcipants frequently referred to language borders. For many, the “real” border was not the state border nearby, but the internal regional border, which also marks a linguisc separaon between the predominantly German-speaking province of South Tyrol and the Italian-speaking region Veneto: When I think of the [Austrian] border, I would say that the culture and language are prey much the same. [...] But when I think of Belluno [in Veneto], it's totally different. The culture is very different there; the tradions are different, the language is different, and that's where I really noce the real border. (ST_3) While many interviewees idenfied as Italian cizens, some highlighted the recurring instances of othering, even alienaon, when meeng people belonging to the (Italian-speaking) naonal minority, parcularly in the context of encounters with, or as, tourists, when their imperfect Italian was commented on or even cricised. I was on holiday in Calabria two years ago and we were in a hotel. Then we went into the recepon, and the receponist asked us if we were from Germany. It's difficult for them to communicate down there. With us, they have the advantage that they can speak German with us. (ST_1) I was once in the south of Italy, at an Italian championship. Then I asked them if they didn't know where that (South Tyrol) was. Then they really scolded me for not knowing Italian when I'm already Italian. But the fact that we speak German here was half the end of the world for them. So, they didn't really know it anymore. So that was weird. (ST_6) The interviews reveal a sense of a disncve collecve South Tyrolean identy. Influenced by Italian and Austrian/Tyrolean culture, it does not fully align with either of these naonal narraves. Indeed, there is a sense of detachment from dominant naonal narraves, reflecng a desire to preserve and assert a unique South Tyrolean identy, which for many interviewees translated into a sense of being “in between” – embracing elements of both cultures while maintaining a disnct regional character. This fosters a sense
D.4.2, V1 22 of local pride and reinforces a feeling of belonging to a self-defined community different from both the Italian and the Austrian ones. We are a border area and identy... I don't feel that I really belong to the Italian border area or the Austrian border area. I just am. When someone asks me where I come from, which was oen the case when I was abroad, I said Italy at first. At some point I said I was from Austria, because it was easier for people to understand, because nobody really knew what South Tyrol was. And at some point, I formed an identy within myself. We come from such a unique place. I am a South Tyrolean. We are the ones in the north of Italy. A small minority. And we are proud to be this minority. (ST_6) Narraves on Europe Parcipant narraves on Europe were also more nuanced than we had first hypothesized. Born mostly aer the Schengen Agreement became effecve at the local-state border, the young parcipants’ first associaon with Europe was free movement across borders. Indeed, the main themes related to Europe idenfied in the parcipants' narraves include free movement and the resulng opportunies, as well as the role of the European Union for minories. Europe as an opportunity Research parcipants tended to have a posive view of the European Union, highlighng the opportunies the EU provides parcularly in terms of free movement within the Schengen area, related to travelling and EU iniaves such as the Erasmus program, as well as economic opportunies. Image 4: Zine image showing the European Union flag which was elaborated on in discussion and during the interviews. Various interviewees juxtaposed the free movement of European cizens with the restricons placed on Third Country Naonals and at Europe’s external borders, emphasizing the selecve nature of a borderless Europe, and related it to their own experience of closed borders during the pandemic:
D.4.2, V1 23 You realise in such situaons that the EU project, although it started with a great idea of opening up across borders, each country sll works for itself. (ST_1) Despite the generally very positive outlook on Europe, interviewees also noted the limitations of the EU, its inefficiency and its distance from the everyday life of EU citizens. Various interviewees maintained that there could be more European influence and less borders as the following quote shows: Personally, I think the EU is a great project, but we don't give the EU enough chances because everyone is afraid of getting too little or the others getting too much. (ST_2) Europe as a protector of minorities A core theme that emerged in mulple interviews was the EU’s role in protecng naonal minories from potenal threats from the central state: Well, I think that for us, the EU is primarily an addional protecon, to keep Italy from coming up with very, very stupid ideas, to put it that way. Simply because Italy is then once again interwoven into this construct of states, and that of course makes it much more difficult to say that ‘I'm now going to do something that may not be good and beneficial.’ And luckily, I think we currently have a mood throughout Europe that is rather humane and perhaps also minority friendly. (ST_1) The relaonship of minories with the EU was also defined in economic or financial terms, with one interviewee highlighng how minories may benefit financially from the EU: The advantages definitely outweigh the disadvantages for South Tyrol and also what we minories can make of it. I have seen that we, because we are a minority, always get funding for certain projects, for bridge building, road construcon, forestry, etc. We gladly accept everything, we always want to look ahead, keep going, keep going. And yes, when we receive something through our status, I always say yes, I'm happy to accept it! (ST_6) Europe in the Background Many parcipants were born in the late 1990s or early 2000s, and hence their view on Europe has not been shaped by any major integraon narraves related to borders and de-bordering, such as the abolion of border controls through the Schengen Agreement or the introducon of the euro as a common currency. While they recognize Europe as an important framework, they view it as something normal that has always been there in their lives. I just think that I am having a hard me with these quesons because the EU is so logical for us, because we were simply born into the EU, our generaon, that it is not really thought about. Okay, we live in the EU. What is the EU good for? What if it didn't exist? What was it like before? We don't know. We were just born into it, and it simply existed from the beginning. We learned in school about what the EU is and why it should be good or bad for us. And that has always just been the case, so I don't think young people think much about what the EU does for them. Because it has always just been there for as long as they can remember. (ST_6)
D.4.2, V1 24 Other research parcipants argued that many of their contemporaries were unaware of the many advantages and opportunies brought by the EU, which may contribute to a certain degree of Euroscepcism they observed among young colleagues and classmates: The younger generations don't really know what [border controls] mean [...] I think we only appreciate many things when they are restricted. We have been given the great gift of open borders, and we don't really appreciate it... (ST_2) Comparison of individual young adults’ narraves with public narraves in local media In this secon we contrast the results gathered in our research interviews and workshop with those from the findings from the minority newspaper analysis conducted in the first phase of the project (Engl et al. 2024). A comparison of the media narraves analyzed in South Tyrol and the narraves of young members of minories reveal that borders are generally perceived as a less emove issue by young people than in minority media. The young parcipants displayed a more pragmac and depolicized stance that diverges from the more dramazed or ideologically charged portrayals in Dolomiten newspaper. Furthermore, it appears that borders have less relevance in young people’s everyday lives than in the media we studied earlier, suggesng a disconnect between tradional media narraves and young people’s lived experience. Rather than viewing borders as sites of division, or rigid structures of exclusion, our research parcipants tend to frame them as fluid opportunies—resources for mobility, personal growth, or leisure. This interpretaon is reinforced by their reacons to "crisis moments", such as the COVID-19 pandemic and ‘migraon crisis’. While minority media put a strong emphasis on these, research parcipants rarely perceived these as crises. The absence of strong emoonal or polical responses to such events could indicate a form of distancing from macro-level narraves that feel removed from personal relevance. References to these “crises” are rarely brought up in discussions, underscoring the limited impact such media frames have on the everyday consciousness of young people. The local border featured heavily in media narraves but appeared to be less relevant to young South Tyrolians, who crossed it infrequently and associated it primarily with parcular moments of leisure, such as mountain hikes. This ulitarian and recreaonal view suggests that local borders are stripped of their historic-polical weight in the eyes of the youth, becoming instead markers of lifestyle or nature rather than identy or conflict. Their reflecons on borders included, instead, abstract and general reflecons of borders. This abstracon may signal a conceptual rather than experienal relaonship with the idea of the border. Borders are intellectually acknowledged but rarely felt in tangible ways. Significantly, while naonal borders featured heavily in their narraves, the intra-state linguisc border between South Tyrol and nearby Veneto, and between the German-speaking minority and the naonal majority, constuted another central theme. This focus on internal cultural and linguisc boundaries over geopolical borders points to the persistent salience of identy polics at the regional level, even in an otherwise globalized or border-transcending youth culture. The idea of a cross-border Tyrolean imagined community or identy, central to media narraves on borders, is largely absent from interviewees’ narraves. Border-crossing as a daily and local act is not
D.4.2, V1 25 significantly present. Instead, there is a greater relevance of crossing other (European) borders for purposes such as traveling, studying, and working. This shi indicates a reorientaon of spaal imaginaries from the local to the European scale, reflecng a mobility-based identy in which Europe, not the region, becomes the dominant frame of reference. Finally, regarding narraves of Europe, the media and the narraves of young people are similar: in both cases, the European Union is framed in rather posive terms, parcularly regarding free movement, while remaining a somewhat distant enty. The EU is seen as an instuon that cares about, and for, minories rather than a community or a common identy. Even in mes of crises, such as during the pandemic rebordering, the EU’s role in managing the crisis was not crically addressed. This convergence suggests that while the EU is viewed as generally beneficial, it also fails to inspire a strong sense of emoonal belonging. For these young people who grew up in, and with, a Europe with open Schengen borders, the EU was largely taken for granted rather than an issue that merits conscious reflecon, poinng to a ‘banal Europeanism’. The normalizaon of European integraon among youth may reflect the success of the Schengen project in embedding itself in daily rounes, but it also raises quesons about the depth of European identy and the potenal fragility of support in mes of instuonal or polical strain. 5.2 Polish-Czech Borderland Authors: Elżbieta Opiłowska, Hynek Böhm In the zine-making workshop and interviews, 22 young members of the Polish minority in the Czech Republic, aged 18 to 20, parcipated. The gender was balanced, consisng of 12 female and 10 male research parcipants. They were all students, primarily aending Polish minority schools in the region. While all had completed or were compleng their secondary educaon, their levels of engagement in Polish minority organisaons varied. Some were acve in cultural or folklore groups, while others did not parcipate in formal minority structures. The zine-making workshop took place in Polish language, on 25th June 2024 at the Pedagogical Centre for Polish Naonal Educaon (Centrum Pedagogiczne dla Polskiego Szkolnictwa Narodowościowego) in Český Těšín. The interviews were conducted in two rounds, in December 2024 and February 2025, in various informal sengs, ensuring a comfortable environment for discussion. They were conducted in the Silesian dialect, which reflects the parcipants' strong regional identity and bilingual background. Participant experiences with personal mobility were predominantly shaped by the open-border environment of the Schengen area. Many crossed the Polish-Czech border on a regular basis for shopping, leisure, or visiting family members. Unlike previous generations, they did not perceive the border as a significant obstacle but rather as a normal part of everyday life. In terms of self-identification, all participants were from the region and expressed a strong regional identity and identification with Zaolzie—the historical region they inhabit—rather than strictly as Polish
D.4.2, V1 32 The open borders in the Schengen area are part of their identity, as was directly expressed by the interviewees. Against this background, in the media narratives, interviews, and the zine-making workshop, the border is perceived as a bridge, a connecting space, rather than a source of division. Moreover, the very local focus of Głos could be compared to the strong regional identity of our interviewees, which supersedes a strict Polish or Czech national affiliation. They feel a sense of belonging to the Zaozie region, of which they are proud, which is also manifested in speaking the local dialect and belonging to folklore groups. The use of dialect allows them to escape the bi-national, Czech-Polish categorization and to express the third identity rooted in regional history and heritage. Even if they referred to the history of the division of the border region, it was not seen as an obstacle for the borderlanders living here. Regarding identified narratives of Europe, the media and vernacular narratives of minority youth are also similar. In general, references to Europe were made mainly in relation to the Schengen area. Europe is seen as a practical framework for mobility but not necessarily as an identity. A Europe with open Schengen borders is taken for granted. As in Głos, Europe is in the shadows here, offering opportunities but not defining the identity of our interviewees. However, they perceived the achievements of European integration - the ability to travel without restrictions - as a value worth defending. As in the case of the media analysis, the re-bordering associated with COVID-19, rather than a 'migration crisis', was a lived experience of young minority members that had shaken their certainty about open borders as a matter of course. They expressed concerns about the future of open borders, reflecting a growing awareness of political debates within the EU. In conclusion, it can be argued that young minority members have internalized an expression of everyday, banal Europeanism in the Czech-Polish borderland. Their strong regional identity is rooted in the crossborder region, allowing them to avoid national categorization. For them, Europe is not an ideology but an everyday social practice. 5.3 Danish-German Borderland Author: Marn Kla The data collected here stem from a zine workshop, a discussion about “Europe”, and six interviews. The zine-making workshop was held on 19 August 2024 with a group of high school students (grade 12) from Deutsches Gymnasium Nordschleswig (the German language high school of the German minority in Denmark) at the Jugendbildungsstäe Knivsberg, an educaonal boarding school-like retreat in North Schleswig operated by the German minority’s youth organizaon (Deutscher Jugendverband Nordschleswig). This seng ensured confidenality as well as familiarity, as the parcipants had been there before at other events and knew the facility well. In effect, some of the German minority high school students resided in Germany, commung to school, and some had only recently migrated to Denmark from Germany. This diversity reflects the situaon at
D.4.2, V1 33 the German minority high school, which, according to an assessment of its principal, is aended by ca. one third of students from core minority families, one third of students from local Danish families and Germans who have migrated to the region from Germany, and one third of students commung from Germany, who oen have aended a Danish minority school before. Interesngly enough, one of the interviewed Danish minority members consequently talked about the Danish-German minority (det dansktyske mindretal) (DKDE_1). Zines were produced along a headline the students had drawn previously out of ten different headlines from the media analysis (D4.1) of the two minority language newspapers in the region (Der Nordschleswiger and Flensborg Avis) selected to reflect the different codes used in the media analysis. Zines were produced for all ten headlines. Almost all students were producve and creave in producing a zine. Only one student had difficules with the task and produced an incomplete zine. A few others commented that they would have preferred to produce a free zine – without a chosen/drawn headline from the media analysis. The zines reflect that all parcipants had specific border experiences and documented that the border was a factor shaping their percepon of the border region, cross-border living and their specific borderland minority situaon. Narraves on the border The high school students of the German minority as well as the interviewed university students of the Danish minority have all experienced the Danish-German (and other EU-borders) as open, most have crossed it frequently in their daily lives for educaonal purposes, work, and leisure acvies, especially family visits and shopping. The Danish-German border is an important factor shaping their percepons of belonging. It’s not just a border (DKDE_1) The students had no or only distant memories on the special situaon of migraon in autumn 2015, but all remembered the closures from March-May 2020, which had an impact on all informers. The border was a key theme in the interviews and in all zines, showing that the students here had a personal relaonship with different aspects of the border in the region. Narrave of the Border as a Bridge of Everyday Pracces Even though hardly physically visible, quite a few menoned that they perceive the border crossing as a change of system, language and culture – even on a personal base: But I feel a bit like it also feels a bit strange. I mean, I know when I drive into Germany that I am in Germany. I don’t know what it is, but I can definitely feel that I just crossed the border. (DKDE_2) While this young Danish minority member felt very conscious about which side of the border she was on, generally parcipants tended to perceive the border as "just there”. Their minority background has induced them to cross the border regularly for private acvies, as well as educaonand workrelated acvies. Many perceive the local border as an open border with lots of opportunies, especially for them as members of borderland naonal minories. Some perceive it even as a best
D.4.2, V1 34 pracce case and role model for other border regions; which is in line with the narrave spread by key stakeholders in the region (Kla, 2024). While in general this applies to all informants, both from the Danish minority in Germany and the German minority in Denmark, there is a percepon of difference and so discriminaon in the interview narraves. These percepons are about being othered by the Danish majority in form of being ridiculed or teased as Nazis (German minority in Denmark) or not accepted as real Danish (Danish minority in Germany). Narrave of the border as opportunity Narraves of the border as a site of opportunity emerged frequently in the interviews but not so much in the zines. Interviewees generally felt that it was an advantage to live in a border region with an open border and to grow up in a naonal minority with a kinstate on the other side. Living on the border is advantageous because it makes you feel close to both countries and you don’t live so isolated in the interior [of a country] (DKDE_3) Youth from the Danish minority (who all had le high school some years before) were especially keen on menoning the perceived beer educaon opportunies in Denmark. For the students from the German minority, the aspect of cross-border shopping was relevant and pracced regularly as a key opportunity. One informant from the Danish minority menoned that bordercrossing opened up student job opportunity (working in one of the supermarkets catering specifically for customers in Denmark). This reflects the professionalized cross-border shopping structures of the region, resulng mainly from a connuous, sectoral price level difference between the two countries. I chose this picture of the supermarket with the border shop. I do that a lot. I like these cheap things. In our family, we usually make it a fun oung. We all go together, then we eat, then we shop, and then we drive home. (DKDE_3)(speaks Danish in the discussion)
D.4.2, V1 35 Image 1: Zine image showing the ‘return’ to normal border life after the COVID-19 pandemic: shopping and the beach. One student from the German minority also mentioned the possibility to cross-border commute to high school as a great opportunity. Narraves of the border as a site of control A dominant theme in the interviews, the zines, and the discussion was border control. Overall, narraves were crical of border control at the local border (Denmark-Germany), while some informants voiced understanding for the need to control other borders, which represented more conflictual sengs, such as the US-Mexican border and external EU borders. The zines were crical of border control in general, expressed in different ways. Referring to the two periods of crisis used in the media analysis, it became clear that the informants did not or only faintly remembered the so-called ‘migraon crisis’ of autumnwinter 2015-16, but they did remember the impact of the border closures induced by the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020, as well as the insecurity during the restricted re-opening from summer 2020. Some of the research parcipants felt themselves to be privileged because of dual cizenship, or as German cizens residing in Denmark – these persons could always leave their country of residence to enter their country of cizenship. Others faced challenges when aending educaon facilies on the other side of the border, as well as complicated rules on exempons from the general travel ban. The “temporary” border controls introduced in January 2016, relaxed in summer 2023, but sll in effect when entering Denmark, as well as recently introduced border controls by Germany, are widely considered out of proporon, and some students recounted experiences of racial profiling by the police when picking out cars for inspecon. A general sense of insecurity about border controls was menoned by several parcipants. It was also menoned that border controls pose the risk of construcng borders in people’s minds and increasing stereotypes: If you start controlling at the border, you imply that something about this country is criminal, or something bad is coming from there, that you do not want to have in your country, and this builds up stereotypes against the people of that country (DKDE_4) Narrave of the border as a fence/security device The direct associaon of the border as a fence was not very present in the interviews, as the informants had not experienced crossing fenced borders. A special feature at the Danish-German border is a wild boar fence constructed unilaterally by Denmark in 2019 to prevent transmission of the African Swine Fever into the Danish pork producon industry. The fence, about 1.5 m in height, covers the whole land border and is the first visible demarcaon/fencing of the border, except for a short period aer WWII. It does not hinder free movement of people, as there are gates even at small paths crossing the border. Nevertheless, the fence caused widespread anger in the region (Eilenberg and Harrisson, 2023). It was featured in several of the zines and described as an intrusion into the cross-border landscape, seng parallels to other border fences.
D.4.2, V1 36 Image 2: the Wild Boar fence at the Danish-German border dividing a nature idyl, and the fenced and militarized border between Israel and Egypt in the Sinai/Negev. Both reflect a securized approach to borders, cung tradional lifeways of wildlife (DE-DK) and Bedouins (IL-EG). When the researcher told the students that the headline “The trip ended shortly aer the border”, used as moo for some zines, referred to criminals being stopped, there was a discussion about crime and the effecveness of borders and border control to stop crime. The zines based on this headline were associated with border control stopping people from perceived (or real) transgression of the border. The students did not know that the headline referred to a police record but associated the narrave with more regular stoppings and selecve inspecons fing racial profiling. Then we travelled from Denmark to Germany, and at the German border, I think it was a black family who were rudely pulled out of the bus, just this one family. (DKDE_4) Our informants did not perceive the border as a place of transgression, but rather as a place perceived by state authories to be a place of transgression: When they said I should drive back home, I had to drive back home – it’s not at the border you can solve a problem, you must look where the problem comes from. (DEDK_3) Border security and border identy
D.4.2, V1 37 One of the headlines used for the zines was “The Minories were le out”, referring to the headline of an arcle in the German minority’s daily newspaper Der Nordschleswiger, 23 May 2020 (“die Minderheiten wurden im Sch gelassen”), in which a Danish majority polician cricized the Danish government for not having taken the situaon of the borderland minories into consideraon when closing the border. In these zines, the young parcipants explored the specific percepons of minories regarding border closures. One zine reflected young people’s dreams of the freedom provided by open borders, now destroyed by the border closures of the pandemic. A (ficonal) diary reflected on the isolaon and loneliness at home many teenagers experienced in March 2020. Parcipant narraves reflected not being able to visit family members living in the neighboring country because of travel restricons. All informants menoned the impact of the pandemic-induced border closures on their daily cross-border living pracces. Zine Image 3: This story of a border crossing reflects insecurity: “we are allowed to drive on. But you don’t really feel like it anymore. One feels foreign in a part of one's home (Heimat), which one can only enter with an uneasy feeling”. Borders and minority identy The impact of the border on shaping minority identy was very present in the interviews, while not directly present in the zines. “No minority without the border”, was a frequent statement, reflecng the historic reality of the constuon of the two reciprocal minories aer the border delineaon in 1920, as well as the strong role of minority-kinstate relaons in the region. One interviewed went so far as to define herself differently when crossing the border: It's also because my life in the different countries isn't the same. I have two different lives, and I know that. When I cross the border, I'm a different person because I'm surrounded by different people and, well, I go to different places. (DEDK_2) All four of the interviewed Danish minority youth reflected on their specific minority identy shaped by their socio-cultural living pracces within the triangle minority-kinstate-home state nexus (Brubaker, 2010). Danish minority youth menoned their special experience of cultural immersion with the kinstate
D.4.2, V1 38 when moving to Denmark for secondaryor higher educaon as a “wow” effect of experiencing difference, a percepon of a cultural border not only between Denmark and Germany, but also between the Danish minority and its kinstate. This may result in an in-between percepon, which is shared by youth from the German minority. I also have to say […] that the same border, because I come from the Danish minority, is perhaps something like a so border. (DEDK_4) This in-between or “both-and” percepon is not perceived as a barrier or disadvantage, but as a resource and opportunity. It is an experience common to both minories, but none of the informants perceived it as a basis for a joint Danish-German minority identy. Narraves on Europe The interviews asked specifically about the EU and its role for the border region and naonal minories, and the zine-making workshop included a specific discussion round on the EU. All parcipants reflected an awareness and sense of gratude for being European. Both the German minority and Danish minority parcipants were aware of the Schengen agreement of open borders and the EU’s role in securing the openness of borders, as well as other privileges of being EU cizens (travel, work). Europe as opportunity All parcipants supported an open Europe narrave and the opportunies it gave them, such as the Erasmus study exchange program or the possibility to live and work in the kinstate. Yes, I think that what a person experiences here in Europe with a border and what a person can experience in Europe at a border is very different from other countries and other connents, because we have the European Union and therefore things like the Schengen Agreement. (DEDK_3) The informants from the Danish minority all had experiences of border crossing for educaon and/or work, and frequent border crossing is part of their daily life, due to their border region minority identy and socializaon. This has not been the case with the informants from the German minority, very probably because they were sll in high school. The informants expressed a percepon of cross-border regional life. Only a few idenfied barriers concerning taxaon and/or recognion of educaon. Most informants expressed a percepon of a backlash on border openness, fearing restricons to the freedom of movement, a return to more naonalism and more border control. There was no difference between the members of either minority. One member of the German minority stressed the opportunity of being able to cross-border commute to high school – which, in fact, is not a general opportunity but restricted to residents of Germany. Some interviewees from the Danish minority ed the perceived best pracce of minority-majority accommodaon and relaons in the region to Europe; Europe being an actor making border-regional diversity possible (in fact, it is a bilateral Danish-German arrangement which has preceded European integraon).
D.4.2, V1 39 Europe as a protector of minories “If Europe becomes more unified, the minories will be overshadowed and not get as much aenon because everything can then be presented in such a simple and straighorward way.” (DEDK_1) The quote above is the only quote directly expressing fear that too much European integraon could harm small minority communies because of assimilaon threats. Most other informants perceived the EU to have a posive role in supporng diversity and protecng minories. Quite a few informants ed the EU to the relaxed minority-majority seng of the region, as well as to the opportunity to aend minority schools. The students were aware of the more difficult situaon of other minories living in the EU (though none was menoned specifically). One informer from the Danish minority was also aware of the failure of the Minority Safe Pack Iniave, nevertheless she appropriated the EU a special role for minories and menoned the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages (passed by the Council of Europe). This reveals a posive percepon of the EU as norm-seer for the treatment of naonal minories, when in effect the norms have been set by the Council of Europe in general, and for the Danish-German border region by the two naonal governments, in fact decades before the menoned Council of Europe frameworks. Europe in the background Europe or the EU were not key themes in the interviews or zines, unless asked for specifically. This indicates the “it’s just there” percepon or what we have idenfied as banal Europeanism. Freedom of movement and open borders are taken for granted in principle. “Okay, it's Europe and I can travel through the countries and stuff, but it's not something I think about that much.” (DEDK_6) Disrupon of this freedom through border controls was considered as an annoyance by one student specifically. Narraves of open/closed Europe Europe was reflected on in the zines referring to the German minority’s chairman’s quote of European failure, when Denmark reintroduced border controls in January 2016 to migate the perceived threat of migraon. In effect, though, neither of the two zines with these headlines made specific reference to the EU as a decisive actor with the power to close or open borders. Open borders vs. closed borders (borders as bridges or barriers) were a clear focus, where the EU was idenfied with open borders, or, reciprocally, open borders were idenfied with the EU. The students agreed that life in internal EU/Schengen borderlands was very different from life in other borderlands. But they also menoned the challenges of re-bordering and border controls on this percepon of open borders and an EU where cizens enjoy equal rights and freedom of movement. There was a percepon of policians reverng to naonalism as the main cause of border securizaon: people fearing open borders and border controls resulng in a percepon of more security. Border controls could create a border in
D.4.2, V1 40 the minds, a percepon that something bad or criminal comes from the other side, which you do not want to have in your country and thus building up stereotypes about people from the other side. Zine Image 4: Direct criticism of the EU not interfering with the national governments’ extension of border controls. Nevertheless, EU borders were perceived as peaceful borders, despite border controls at internal EU borders. EU: United in diversity? Another theme touched on in the workshop discussion and the interviews was about a united or divided Europe/EU. Here, the students reflected on the perceived contradicon of the EU’s cultural diversity with a strong focus on perceived naonal cultures. This cultural diversity was seen as an immaterial wealth to be preserved, perhaps contradicng the aims of European integraon, acknowledging the perceived difficulty of having all these cultures to funcon together. A student (f) commented, though, that most cultures in Europe probably were very similar, but perceived as different because of a focus on differences or lack of knowledge about the other. One student (m) remarked on a cleavage between the perceived more similar cultures of the founding EC members on the one side and the post-socialist countries’ culture on the other – with the similarity of each block creang an antagonism making European integraon more difficult. EU and identy When asked directly, European identy did play a role for all informers, but not necessarily straighorward, and not ed to specific characteriscs. It was a vague, “it’s just there” form of acknowledgment of being European, an awareness of the advantages of being from a European country. I don't really know how to describe my feelings about Europe, because I feel quite secure in Europe, I must say. I'm quite happy that I come from a European country. But I also see a lot of things that are very complicated. Especially when you think about the different instuons we have. (DEDK_5) Here, security, the welfare state, good educaonal opportunies, and easy travel around the EU were menoned. No informer named directly the disadvantages of being an EU cizen.
D.4.2, V1 41 Comparison with media analysis The media analysis conducted in the Danish-German borderland region (Engl et al., 2024), extrapolated around the “Border as a bridge” and “Border as a fence” narrave, with almost one arcle coded per day referring to “border as a bridge”. This reflects the periods of crisis (migraon, COVID-19) that were analyzed. While giving room for other opinions in quotes of policians etc., editorials of the newspapers Flensborg Avis and Der Nordschleswiger, as well as quotes of minority policians, were biased towards open borders, cricizing re-bordering and the introducon of border controls as detrimental to the border region’s development, as a step back, and as harming the minories more severely than others. As a surprising result, the “border as a place of transgression” was coded rather frequently, appearing in about 40% of the newspaper edions selected for the analysis. The arcles studied usually referred to police reports about pey criminal acvies stopped at the border. This narrave did not feature in the interviews and zines. It was also apparent that voices of young people were underrepresented in the media analysis, as well as a very male bias (about ¾ of the quotes were from male actors). Furthermore, a key narrave presented in the media analysis was the percepon of being le out – decisions (on border controls) were made without consulng the minories, and without consideraon of the special impact they had on their cross-border lives. Our interviews and zines were intended to present boom-up percepons of young minority members. As the border was open in principle and only controlled randomly at the me of the data collecon (spring 2024–spring 2025), these percepons were not so directly impacted by the border crises of 2015–16 and 2020, and thus differed from the media narraves. The situaon at the border was perceived as peaceful and the border as open, and the informants did not experience difficules crossing in person – only stories about others who encountered difficules because of racial profiling or not being EU-cizens. There was, however, a percepon of the open border as being threatened: the pandemic has demonstrated that borders can be physically closed in an instant. The students are also aware of populist demands for more control or closed borders, as well as a threat to the EU as they perceive it today (with open borders and the freedom to work and live in any EU country). Altogether, the material collected demonstrates a very balanced percepon of European sociees and border region life by the young minority members, combined with a consciousness that the border shapes percepons and impacts their daily lives and their identy as borderland residents belonging to a naonal minority with the kinstate across the border. The young minority members expressed a clear desire for open borders in the region and within the EU, while threats were idenfied that could jusfy control and more closed borders elsewhere. Specifically, southern Europe and the US-Mexican border were named here. This applies for informants from both minories, with the slight difference that the interviewees from the Danish minority in Germany had already graduated from high school, and all of them had gained border-crossing life experience by studying and/or working in Denmark.
D.4.2, V1 48 Europe as a space for opportunies Overall, the parcipants were expressing different atudes toward Europe and especially the European Union (EU). The only thing they all shared was the high level of appreciaon of the open intra-Schengen borders, which was even seen as the single most important benefit of EU membership generally. Other advantages idenfied included various EU programs such as Erasmus, the youth voluntary service program, opportunies related to employment and various youth camps, as well as feelings of security. One interviewee said: ‘I believe there are many advantages for young people. For instance, Interrail… I’m travelling around a lot and it’s great that there are no border controls.’ (SKHU_5) Some of the Euroscepc voices were formulated in a strongly emoonal and even vulgar manner. One research parcipant believed that the EU was ‘ramming stupid ideologies’ and ‘spreading nonsensical bullshit’. Others cricised its governance and priories, where too much focus and resources were invested into the wrong issues. One contributor opined that ‘they are trying to interfere in domesc polics way too much, which is not good’ (SKHU_Zine_workshop_3). Another parcipant claimed that ‘it is an economic alliance that is basically trying to make its own countries bankrupt through its dumb economic decisions’ (SKHU_Zine_workshop_4). EU and the lack of minority protecon The aspect pertaining most to WP4 is that several respondents lamented the EU’s lack of acon in the field of (autochthonous) ethnic minority protecon, as the following two quotes reflect. I’m rather against the EU as while it holds human rights important, it isn’t really concerned with the rights of minority Hungarians [...]. The EU should play a bigger role in embracing minority rights. If everyone is equal then members of minories should be equal, too. It’s not just the Hungarians – there are numerous other minories in Europe, and I feel the EU isn’t doing much for them either. The opposite is being communicated externally but not perceived locally. (SKHU_1) Europe and Security While all research parcipants appreciated the openness of internal borders, as was shown above, their majority considered the protecon of external borders important (Image 5). As one informant put it: ‘Borderless Europe is good within, but Fortress Europe would be good toward the outside’ (SKHU_1). Another one had a different opinion: ‘I think there is some truth in both noons. Recently, Fortress Europe has received more emphasis, unfortunately. I also think the reading of someone living in Europe will be different from that of someone living on another connent.’ (SKHU_2) When debang the pros and cons of EU membership, one parcipant thought that ‘small states such as Slovakia need military protecon […] and can feel being part of a larger enty and thus stronger’ (SKHU_Zine_workshop_5). When the discussion revolved around the EU’s external borders, one parcipant believed that the current level of openness and protecon is ‘well-opmised’ (SKHU_Zine_workshop_1). He recalled travelling to Egypt and having to pass all kinds of checks but assessed that these were jusfied. Another parcipant had much more radical views:
D.4.2, V1 49 The EU’s external borders are a disaster! All Frontex staff should be fired and the competences handed over to the naon-states. There should be fire command at the border to stop people from even aempng to cross illegally. There is no other way to protect the border. Just as Russia or the US have fire command at their borders.’ (SKHU_Zine_workshop_4). Image 5: The le zine page acknowledges the freedom of mobility within the EU. The right one shows a historical map of a fort in Komárno, with the label ‘Fortress Europe’ added right below. Then the quote: ‘If we don’t win, the Carpathian Basin will be a country of immigrants!’ Comparison of workshop and interview analysis with media analysis The three different points of analyses all pointed to a plurality of views within Slovakia’s ethnic Hungarian community. In the media analysis (of hundreds of arcles), a conscious choice was made to pick two different news portals with diverging polical leanings; ujszo.com and felvidek.ma, which are also the two largest ones. But even within those two media, different opinions were present. Concerning the first, much smaller sample, the parcipants of the zine workshop (especially the more vocal ones) were a bit more ethno-naonaliscally tuned. This can be explained by the fact that they have chosen to study history at the Pedagogical Faculty of Slovakia’s small and only Hungarian-language highereducaon instuon. The J. Selye University is located in Komárno in southwestern Slovakia, yet the majority of the parcipants have moved there from the south-central and southeastern parts of the country – oen hundreds of kilometres away. These young people could have chosen to study at universies in Hungary that are geographically closer to their nave regions. But their choice to go for a history program in more distant Komárno can be interpreted as reflecng an ambion to stay in Slovakia and probably become a teacher in Hungarian-language schools in their nave communies. Although we did not ask about their future migraon plans, when this topic popped up only one expressed a desire to potenally move to Hungary in the future. Regarding EUrope, different viewpoints were shared even by the same parcipants. These included posive and negave percepons, but no one expressed any desire for either Slovakia or Hungary to exit the EU just as no one could be deemed an explicit Europhile. Open
D.4.2, V1 50 internal open borders and concomitant opportunies were seen as the main plus, while a perceived interference into certain domesc issues (like migraon policy) as the main minus. The other minor sample was even smaller, but the nature of data collecon – interviewing – has allowed for deeper engagement with different individuals. With one excepon, the informants in this case were living in the border city of Štúrovo (two now in Budapest but even they regularly commute home). They generally seemed happy with their lives as well as their community, which was now oen understood to incorporate the neighbouring Hungarian city of Esztergom as well. Hence, they were all crossing the border on a regular basis – and not just for short visits (like shopping or eang out) but also for acvies that imply greater commitment, like studying or engaging in extracurricular acvies. Quesons around selfidenficaon were even more explicit than in the zine workshop, and it became clear that the interviewees primarily idenfied as Hungarians from Slovakia or Felvidék (the two labels refer to the same territory, but their respecve use was explained by the respondents and thus also in the interview analysis). As explained in the interview analysis, there was just one identy label taken from the media analysis that they found peculiar and could not relate to: ‘szlovmagy’ – a label some journalists may have used to refer to a hybrid identy. The rejecon of (or unfamiliarity with) that label does not mean that the informants have not shared any self-idenficaon narraves that resemble the sort of hybrid features oen encountered in border situaons. But it seems that people are more comfortable with indicang one or another identy label even in mulcultural contexts, or at least to rank one above another – perhaps to maintain the illusion of a stable self. That again does not imply that the interviewees have not selfidenfied as Europeans (which several of them explicitly have), but that comes secondary and is of course also another scale of socio-spaal idenficaon. Regarding EUrope, their percepons were mixed but were overall more posive than among the zine parcipants. Sll, several of the interviewees have lamented the EU’s lack of agency concerning autochthonous ethnic minority rights. 5.5 Greek-Bulgarian-Turkish borderland Authors: Marn Kla, Nazrin Gadimova-Akbulut, Petranka Nedelcheva B-SHAPES arranged a combined zine-making and interview workshop on 12 October 2024 in Xanthi, Greece, facilitated by the European Federaon of Western Thrace Turks (ABTTF), an NGO represenng different Turkish minority organizaons and instuons in north-eastern Greece. The workshop was aended by 25 young (18-30) members of the Turkish minority, 11 male and 14 female. Petranka Nedelcheva explained the procedure in Greek, assisted by facilitators from ABTTF explaining it in Turkish. Aer the zine-making, nine parcipants were interviewed in Turkish by other parcipants, using the standard interview guide, which had been machine-translated into Turkish and edited by a facilitator from ABTTF. All workshop parcipants stressed the importance of their Turkish identy and the difficult situaon of the minority, which is characterized by non-recognion and discriminaon. They emphasized an inbetween situaon within the triad of Europe/the EU, the Greek state and their Greek cizenship, and the
D.4.2, V1 51 Turkish kinstate and their Turkish identy. Their religious identy as Muslims in a predominantly Chrisan Greek-Orthodox country did not play an important role in the narraves – with only a few comments to the conflict of who may appoint imams of Muslim communies: in most cies, there is a mosque led by an imam appointed by the Greek state in compeon to a mosque led by an imam chosen by the community. In that sense, respondents reported that while the Greek government does not recognize the ethnic identy of Turks in the region, it also restricts their religious rights even though they are protected by the Treaty of Lausanne. Narraves on the border The parcipants perceived borders as being constructed by naon states, not by communies. Borders were seen to enforce sovereignty, security, and economic control, but also segregate people who share language, culture and identy. This is evidenced in the following quote: We are Turks, but we live in Greece and there is a border with Türkiye that separates us (GKBUTK_1) All informants frequently crossed the Turkish-Greek border for educaon, work, family visits, and other leisure acvies. The border crossing experience is described as cauous, reflecng the community’s vulnerability, and fear. The border is perceived as very visible to the Turkish-Greek minority workshop parcipants and interviewees. In contrast to the other case studies, there were no narraves about the invisible border. Border as a fence/barrier The Greek-Turkish border is an external EU border and has at mes been a hot-spot of irregular migraon. It is both heavily fenced and militarized. As EU cizens, no visa restricons apply for members of the Turkish minority in Greece when entering Türkiye, but relaves and friends from the kin state usually need a visa to enter Greece. Parcipants of the workshop and in the interviews shared personal accounts of racial profiling, inmidaon, and psychological pressure applied by Greek border police when crossing the border: You get scared when you’re about to cross the border – when the border security sees our names, some of them are racists … some act as if we have commied crimes. (GKBUTK_2) Crossing the border is not just perceived as a bureaucrac act, it is a moment of fear and self-censorship, shaped by historical trauma and current policies. The symbolic power of the border is not only about territory, but about who is seen as a threat. The act of crossing is not neutral, it is policized. This is evidenced in the following quote: Strict controls, fear of being stopped, or being treated as suspicious – it makes you feel like a criminal for simply crossing. (GKBUTK_3) The policizaon of borders was linked to broader reflecons on passports, ID cards, and the invisible walls that structure daily life for non-recognized, not acknowledged minories like the Turkish one in Greece. That said, many parcipants accepted the principle of sovereignty: that countries control or even close
D.4.2, V1 52 borders to guard against migrants and the influx of illegal contrabands as drugs or weapons. Nevertheless, the young adults’ narraves emphasized the impact of border closures on the people residing in the border region (who cannot cross and visit) as well as on trade. They highlightedthat fences and other obstacles placed in front of people to prevent them from freedom of expression, communicaon and socializaon. Fences were also seen to symbolize a lack of communicaon, and the increased security checks on the Turkish-Greek border that have le the minority in a dead end situaon. Image 1: The zine page on the le describes the feelings of being limited within borders. The capon under the picture says: “Doesn't the feeling of boredom in the picture describe people stuck within their own boundaries?” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_3). The zine page on the right explains the loss of me bringing another dimension of border as a barrier: “When it comes to borders, the first thing that comes to mind is losing me. The concept of me challenges us all! And it gets harder every day.” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_11). Border as a site of opportunity The parcipants made only a few direct references to the border as a site of opportunity. Several parcipants emphasized the economic significance of crossing points, with shopping trips across the Bulgarian border becoming part of everyday life. Others stressed how economic changes have made crossings easier “comparing to the old mes”. Beyond economics, the border was also imagined as a bond that connects different sides. The Evros river bridge was described as a symbol of cultural transfer, where people, ideas, and tradions flow across. Some of the parcipants referred to the Turkish minority of Western Thrace as a potenal bridge of friendship between Türkiye and Greece (GKBUTK_1). Finally, despite the physical and polical borders, the shared Turkish language across the region funcons as a powerful connector, which was seen as soening the harshness of borders. While here it implies minority-kin state relaons, this focus on language as a tool to bridge borders could inspire other border sengs as well.
D.4.2, V1 53 Image 2: “There are no boundaries actually. The boundary is just our creaon” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_14). Border as an element of security Borders were also understood as protecve tools that safeguard society from external threats. As some parcipants menoned, borders play an essenal role in sustaining cultural uniqueness in the face of European integraon. One interviewee argued that: Having borders is very important to preserve culture. Because cultures become homogenized, the things that disnguish countries from each other disappear and nothing will be different, special, beauful (GKBUTK_4). Others stressed the importance of borders in maintaining order and security. Border controls and technologies such as X-rays were seen as necessary (“Border control should be done more oen, there are many mes things and people that cross the border which should not cross it”, GKBUTK_2). In this perspecve, borders are not only symbolic lines but also mechanisms of regulaon: “Borders exist to separate two naons, to prevent a messy, chaoc situaon” (GKBUTK_2). Finally, borders were seen as a protecon device prevenng the onset of new conflicts and wars, but also the place of a potenal clash between the two sides, the place where new conflicts might emerge. On the other hand, respondents warned against reducing borders to mere fences or obstacles. Instead, they suggested that borders can also serve as opportunies for cooperaon and mutual recognion: “Polics means not a fence, but solidarity (of reaching hand in hand)” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_2). Border and minority identy For members of the Turkish minority in Western Thrace, the border is inseparable from quesons of belonging and identy. It was a central focus of parcipants’ narraves, and border experiences were described as decisive for their percepon of minority identy. This applies to the physical border between Greece and Türkiye, which is experienced differently than the internal EU Greek-Bulgarian border, but it also applies to experiences of societal bordering within the region (minority/majority). Minority identy
D.4.2, V1 54 is clearly shaped by the border triad of Turkish-Greek, minority-suppressive majority, and Greece-Rest of the EU/The “true” Europe. This is highlighted in the following quote: The border shows that even though I am a Turkish minority, I live in Greece and not in Türkiye. And this way I understand that I am a minority because I am a Turk (GKBUTK_4) This perspecve reflects the layered idenes many parcipants expressed, defining themselves simultaneously as Turks, members of the Turkish minority, Thracians, European cizens, and Greek cizens. Others, however, emphasized the exclusivity of Turkishness, rooted in language, religion, and heritage: “Because my mother tongue is Turkish, my homeland is Türkiye. I have never felt myself as a Greek and I have never had this nature” (GKBUTK_4). Experiences of discriminaon and repression shaped these narraves. Parcipants spoke of assimilaon pressures, unequal schooling condions, bans on associaons using the word “Turkish,” and exclusionary treatment at border checkpoints. One of the interviewees referred to the percepons of modernity vs. ignorance dominant in Greek society about the usage of Turkish language: If you are in Western Thrace, you can speak any language you want, except Turkish. If you spoke Greek, you were considered a modernist, educated. If you spoke Turkish, you were a reaconary, a bigot, an ignorant (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_10). Also, the sense of being treated as a threat was menoned in the answers of several interviewees. One of the respondents referred to the policy of de-minorizaon implemented by the Greek government: This policy forces Turks to migrate in Western Thrace through methods such as economic sancons, heavy taxes and restricons on job opportunies. The goal is to remove the Turks from Western Thrace, a border region, and to fully mobilize the region (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_15). At the same me, for some, bilingualism and belonging to several cultures were described as privileges, offering the ability to navigate across naonal and cultural landscapes. Most importantly, minority identy was framed as a source of resilience:“If we are not courageous, if we do not take risks and if we do not uphold unity as a minority, then and only then, we will disappear” (GKBUTK_Zine_workshop_2). Image 3: The le zine page presents the queson of belonging in the symbolic pictures of Greek and Turkish flags standing side by side. The capon under the picture says: “Two countries, two homelands. What is homeland?”
D.4.2, V1 55 (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_6). The right zine page shows a lonely soldier on the balefield with a capon: “Being a minority is like loneliness. A minority individual deprived of minority rights in their homeland and feeling homesick for their motherland” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_ 9). Narraves on Europe There is a clear percepon of Europe’s borders, where Türkiye is perceived to be outside, but also their home state Greece not really perceived as European because of its restricve minority policies. The EU to the north of Greece, on the other hand, is perceived as real Europe, with a lot of hopes that it will put pressure on Greece to stop discriminatory pracces, or as a space to migrate to if Greek policies become too suppressive. Greece, in contrast, was not perceived as a true European country, while Türkiye was perceived to be outside Europe, too, despite being a candidate country of the EU. Some parcipants have sharply challenged the percepon of Europe as a space of openness and civil rights referring to Europe as an expression of colonialism and the failure to respect human rights. Despite being EU cizens, parcipants felt excluded from Europe’s promises, experiencing the EU as an abstract idea that has failed to protect their rights. Europe as a place of progress and safety For many respondents, Europe represents a space of aspiraon and advancement. It is described as a “gateway, dreamland, or paradise,” though these images are usually associated with Western and Northern Europe rather than Greece. In this framing, Europe is equated with prosperity, stability, and modernity. Technological innovaon and rich history are central to this image: “When I think of Europe, I think of technological developments and that Europe has a great history” (GKBUTK_9). The European Union is also seen as a space of personal safety, a place to turn to in moments of uncertainty (“a place that we can see as an escape point if we get into trouble in Greece, if it gets worse”). Beyond material progress, Europe embodies values of freedom, human development, and integraon, offering opportunies for individuals and communies to flourish. Image 4: Both zine pages describe one message with the pictures of a European airport and a border field: “There is no need for borders within Europe” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_4/19). Europe as a distant space
D.4.2, V1 56 Despite these posive associaons, Europe is also depicted as distant, divided, and at mes disappoinng. Eastern Europe is perceived as “not really Europe,” reflecng an imagined hierarchy within the connent. Similarly, Greece is judged to be “European in name only,” falling short of the standards of development and minority protecon associated with Europe. This sense of distance extends to the European Union as an instuon. Respondents cricize Europe’s “introversion”, which they believe has historically limited economic, cultural, and social development” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_5). The EU is also seen as “not doing enough,” and in some cases “doing nothing” for the region, failing to exert adequate pressure on Greece or provide meaningful engagement. Such shortcomings are viewed as undermining the EU’s credibility as a normave power. In parcular, parcipants expressed hope what Europe could be, a Europe that lives up to its own ideals and protects minories rather than ignoring them: Communies such as the Turkish minority in Western Thrace are part of Europe’s cultural richness and historical diversity. In addion, the Western Thrace minority is an important example to test Europe’s commitment to human rights and democrac values (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_1) It was menoned that the real strength of Europe lay in embracing diversity and mutual understanding, bringing different communies together – something which they did not see happen in their home region. The difficult experiences of the Turkish community in Thrace were clearly perceived as contrary to the standards of human rights and minority rights in Europe. Several respondents called for more acve engagement from Europe, with some respondents expressing hope for the EU to support minority rights and reduce border hardships. According to the respondents, the EU should invest in educaon, and should put more pressure on Greece to improve the situaon of minories: The difficules experienced by the Turkish minority in Western Thrace are contrary to EU human rights and minority rights standards. It is vital that Europe takes a more acve role in this maer to protect the fundamental rights and identy of the minority. True unity is possible if the rights of minories are protected (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_5). In several statements hope was expressed on the future of Greece which might one day become “truly European” by fully accepng and safeguarding minority rights. Europe as a closed fortress Finally, Europe is also imagined as a fortress, parcularly in relaon to migraon. The EU’s restricve policies are seen as damaging not only to migrants but to Europe itself. As one parcipant menoned: The percepons and thoughts of the local populaon, polical rhetoric, and economic condions make the integraon of migrant communies difficult. Because of these reasons, migrants' efforts to return or move to other countries are increasing, and as a result, the European Union is experiencing difficules (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_1).
D.4.2, V1 57 Image 5: The zine picture on the le describes the growing security measures in Greece: “As a result of increased security checks at the borders, European countries have entered a posion where they are virtually declaring war on the world in terms of tourism, economy and polics (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_12). The zine picture on the right delivers the message of closed borders with the capon: “Why is Europe closing its doors?” (GKBUTK_zine_workshop_17). At the same me, parcipants recognized the social and economic challenges that hinder the integraon of immigrant communies, including local percepons and difficult condions. In this context, intercultural communicaon and integraon were highlighted as essenal both for human development and for supporng mutual understanding.
D.4.2, V1 64 Brown, A. (2024). Zine-making and crical reflecon: Portals of shared discovery. In: Piazzoli, E. and F. Dalziel. Performave Language Learning with Refugees and Migrants, 77-90. Abingdon: Routledge. Brubaker, R. (2010). Naonalism Reframed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Carlà, A. et al. (2025). Autonomiereport - Südrol 2025. Bozen/Bolzano: Eurac Research, hps://doi.org/10.57749/GTJ6-KR61. Constann, S. (2017). The Protecon of Autochthonous Minories in Europe: Developments and Challenges. In: V. Novotný (ed.) Unity in Adversity: Immigraon, Minories and Religion in Europe, 153164, Brussels: Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies. Crepaz, K. (2014). The Impact of Europeanizaon on Minority Communies. Springer. Decoville, A., & F. Durand (2019). A muldimensional measurement of the integraon between European border regions. Journal of European Integraon, 41(7), 879–900. hps://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2019.1657857. Eilenberg, M., & A.P. Harrisson, (2023). Boar-der Fencing: Human-Animal Relaons in the Danish Borderlands. Arcadia (8). hps://doi.org/10.5282/rcc/9610. Engl, A. (2020). Europe’s culturally diverse borderscapes: The EGTC from the perspecve of minority studies. In: Ocskay, G. (ed), 15 Years of the EGTCs: Lessons Learnt and Future Perspecves, 197–218, Brussels: Central European Service for Cross-border Iniaves. Engl, A. (2022). Between dynamic pracce and normave limits: minories and debordering processes in the European Union. In: Malloy, T.H. & B. Vizi (eds), Research Handbook on Minority Polics in the European Union, 289-308, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Engl, A., Mierhofer, J., M. Nicolson, M. Kla, E. Opiłowska, D. Bączkiewicz & P. Balogh, (2024). Comparave report on border discourses in minority media (Deliverable 4.1 of the Horizon Europe Project B-SHAPES), hps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14526872. Eurobarometer (2024). Youth Survey 2024. hps://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3392. FUEN (ND). Western Thrace Minority University Graduates Associaon. hps://fuen.org/en/members/Western-Thrace-Minority-University-Graduates-Associaon Golumbic, Y. N., D. Orr, A. Baram-Tsabari & B. Fishbain (2017). Between vision and reality: A study of sciensts’ views on cizen science. Cizen Science: Theory and Pracce 2(1). Hoch, T. (2022). European Union regional policy and naonal minories. In: Malloy, T.H. and B. Vizi (eds), Research Handbook on Minority Polics in the European Union, 272–288, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Király, M. (2022). The cultural policy of the European Union. In: Malloy, T.H. and B. Vizi (eds), Research Handbook on Minority Polics in the European Union, 230-249, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
D.4.2, V1 65 Kla, M. (2018). Minories as secondary foreign policy agents in peace-building and reconciliaon? The case of Denmark and Germany. In: Kla, M. & B. Wassenberg (eds.), Secondary Foreign Policy in Local Internaonal Relaons, 35-55, Abingdon: Routledge. Kla, M. (2024). Plebiscites, Minories, and the Right of Naonal Self-determinaon—Some Lessons from 1920. In: Bober, S. (Ed.), Post-World War One Plebiscites and Their Legacies, 189-202. Central European University Press. hps://doi.org/10.1515/9789633866115-011 Knowles, J. G., & A.L. Cole (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of the arts in qualitave research: Perspecves, methodologies, examples, and issues. SAGE. Lášcová, B., & A. Findor (2016). Developing Explicit Measures of Stereotypes and An-Roma Prejudice in Slovakia: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges. Human Affairs, 26(3), 233-252. Lauterbach, F. & C.E. De Vries (2020). Europe belongs to the young? Generaonal differences in public opinion towards the European Union during the Eurozone crisis, Journal of European Public Policy, 27(2), 168-187, hps://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2019.1701533. Liebich, A. (2019). The “Boomerang Effect” of Kin-State Acvism: Cross-border Ties and the Securizaon of Kin Minories. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 34(5), 665–84, hps://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2017.1402202. Lubbers, M., & P. Scheepers (2010). Diverging trends in euroscepcism in countries and regions of the EU 1994–2004. European Journal of Polical Research, 49(6), 787–817, hps://doi.org/10.1111/j.14756765.2010.01915.x. Malloy, T. H. & B. Vizi (Eds.). (2022). Research Handbook on Minority Polics in the European Union. Edward Elgar Publishing. Masse, E. & A.H. Schakel (2021). From staunch supporters to crical observers: Explaining the turn towards Euroscepcism among regionalist pares. European Union Polics, 22(3), 424–445, hps://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211001508. McCall, C., & Itçaina, X. (2017). Secondary foreign policy acvies in Third sector cross-border cooperaon as conflict transformaon in the European Union: The cases of the Basque and Irish borderscapes. Regional & Federal Studies, 27(3), 261–281. hps://doi.org/10.1080/13597566.2017.1343723. Medeiros, E., M.G. Ramírez, G. Ocskay & J. Peyrony (2020). Covidfencing Effects on Cross-border Deterritorialism: The Case of Europe. European Planning Studies, 29(5), 962–982, hps://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2020.1834752. Merskin, D. (2010). The S-Word: Discourse, Stereotypes, and the American Indian Woman. Howard Journal of Communicaons, 21(4), 345-366, hps://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2010.519616.
D.4.2, V1 66 Nagy, N. & B. Vizi (2022). Inclusion and mobility in the mullingual region of Vojvodina: At the intersecon of internaonal minority rights law, state policies and local realies. In: Grin, F., L. Marácz, & N. K. Pokorn (Eds.), Advances in Interdisciplinary Language Policy. John Benjamins. Nedelsky, N. (2016). ‘The Struggle for the Memory of the Naon’: Post-Communist Slovakia and its World War II Past. Human Rights Quarterly, 38(4): 969-992, hps://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2016.0053. Opiłowska, E. (2021). The Covid-19 Crisis: The End of a Borderless Europe? European Sociees, 23(1), 589-600, hps://doi.org/10.1080/14616696.2020.1833065. Opiłowska, E. et. al. (2023). Study Report on Borders as Factors Shaping Borderlanders’ Percepons of Europe and the European Project (Deliverable 2.1 of the Horizon Europe Project B-SHAPES), hps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14527326. Opiłowska, E., et al. (2024). Progress report on borderlanders' percepons of European sociees (Deliverable D2.2 of the Horizon Europe Project B-SHAPES), hps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14526321. Plummer, K. (2019). Narrave Power: The Struggle for Human Value. Cambridge: Polity. Pósa Homoly, E. (2019) Čaputová nem ellenzi a keős állampolgárságot. Felvidék.ma, July 17. hps://felvidek.ma/2019/07/17/caputova-nem-ellenzi-a-keos-allampolgarsagot/ Ringelheim, J. (2010). Minority Rights in a Time of Mulculturalism—The Evolving Scope of the Framework Convenon on the Protecon of Naonal Minories. Human Rights Law Review, 10(1), 99128, hps://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngp038. Sarmiento-Mirwaldt, K., et al. (2024). Report on the results of the media analysis (Deliverable 3.1 of the Horizon Europe Project B-SHAPE). Zenodo. hps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15656527 Smith, A. (2002). Ethnicity, Economic Polarizaon and Regional Inequality in Southern Slovakia. Growth and Change, 31(2), 151–178, hps://doi.org/10.1111/0017-4815.00124. Smith, D. J., M. Germane & M. Housden (2019). ‘Forgoen Europeans’: transnaonal minority acvism in the age of European integraon. Naons and Naonalism, 25(2), 523-543, hps://doi.org/10.1111/nana.12401. SOSR [Stascal Office of the Slovak Republic] (2021a). Number of populaon by ethnicity in the Slovak Republic at 1. 1. 2021. hps://www.scitanie.sk/en/populaon/basic-results/structure-of-populaon-byethnicity/SR/SK0/SR. SOSR [Stascal Office of the Slovak Republic] (2021b). Number of populaon by mother tongue in the Slovak Republic at 1. 1. 2021. hps://www.scitanie.sk/en/populaon/basic-results/structure-ofpopulaon-by-mother-tongue/SR/SK0/SR. Strüver, A. (2005). Stories of the ‘Boring Border’: The Dutch-German Borderscape in People’s Minds. Münster: LIT-Verlag.
D.4.2, V1 67 Tarvet, R., & M. Kla (2023). The Impact of the Corona Crisis on Borderland Living in the Danish-German Border Region with a Special Focus on the two Naonal Minories. Naonal Idenes, 25(1), 35-52, hps://doi.org/10.1080/14608944.2021.1938522. van der Velde, M. (2012). Boring European Borders?! Integraon and Mobility across Borders. Eurasia Border Review, 3, 115-126. Venken, M., V. Kaisto & C. Brambilla (2021). Children, Young People and Borders: A Muldisciplinary Outlook. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 36(2), 149–158. hps://doi.org/10.1080/08865655.2021.1898447. von Löwis, S. (2015). Phantom borders in the polical geography of East Central Europe: an introducon. Erdkunde, 69(2), 99-106. Wassenberg, B. (2020). The Schengen Crisis and the End of the Myth of ‘Europe Without Borders orders’. Globalizaon Review 1(2), 30-39, hps://doi.org/10.18357/bigr12202019599. Waterbury, M. A. (2008). Uncertain Norms, Unintended Consequences: The Effects of European Union Integraon on Kin-state Polics in Eastern Europe. Ethnopolics, 7(2–3), 217–238. hps://doi.org/10.1080/17449050701413427. Waterbury, M. A. (2021). Divided Naonhood and Mulple Membership: A Framework for Assessing KinState Policies and Their Impact. Ethnopolics, 20(1), 39–52, hps://doi.org/10.1080/17449057.2020.1808323. Weida, C. L. (2020). Zine objects and orientaons in/as arts research: Documenng art teacher pracces and idenes through zine creaon, collecon, and cricism. Studies in Art Educaon, 61(4), 310–322. hps://doi.org/10.1080/00393541.2020.1779570.
D.4.2, V1 68 9. Annex: Translaons of the Execuve Summary Česky Projekt B-SHAPES se zaměřuje na to, jak lidé vnímají Evropu, přičemž zvláštní pozornost věnuje tomu, jak naravy o hranicích a procesy re-borderingu/návratu významu ovlivňují tato vnímání. Tato zpráva konkrétně zkoumá, jak mladí lidé z národnostních menšin žijících v evropských pohraničních regionech vnímají hranice, Evropu a Evropskou unii (EU). Opírá se o pět případových studií – Jižní Tyrolsko (Itálie– Rakousko), Zaolzie/Těšínské Slezsko (Polsko–Česko), Severní a Jižní Šlesvicko (Dánsko–Německo), jižní Slovensko (Maďarsko–Slovensko) a Západní Thrákie (Řecko–Bulharsko–Turecko) – aby nabídla pohledy zdola na každodenní zkušenos s hranicemi a evropskou integrací. Studie, uskutečněná v letech 2024–2025, se zaměřila na mladé dospělé ve věku 18–31 let a kombinovala polostrukturované rozhovory a workshopy tvorby zinů. Tyto přístupy umožnily účastníkům vyjádřit své naravy vizuálně i textově/verbálně, a m vytvořit perspekvy přesahující diskurzy elit a médií. Porovnáním výpovědí mladých lidí s menšinovými mediálními naravy (Engl et al., 2024) studie zdůrazňuje jak shody, tak i rozpory mezi veřejným a osobním chápáním Evropy. Analýza odhaluje výraznou mezeru mezi menšinovými mediálními naravy a vnímáním mladých lidí. Zamco média často rámují hranice a Evropu polizovaně nebo opkou bezpečnos, mladí lidé mají tendenci přijímat pragmacké, funkční pohledy. Tento rozdíl ukazuje, že hlasy mládeže jsou ve veřejných naravech často nedostatečně zastoupené, přestože jsou klíčové pro budoucnost evropské integrace. Zjištění ukazují, že pro většinu účastníků studie jsou hranice prožívány jako otevřené a do značné míry neviditelné – výsledek schengenské mobility a znormalizovaných přeshraničních prakk. Hranice jsou často vnímány jako příležitos, nikoli bariéry, a spojují se se vzděláním, prací, nákupy, volným časem a rodinnými vazbami. Přesto zůstávají symbolicky významné: mnozí mladí lidé označují kulturní a jazykové rozdíly, spíše než státní hranice, za „skutečné“ hranice ve svých životech. Historické dědictví a rodinné vzpomínky také nadále utvářejí představy o hranicích, i tam, kde fyzické hraniční kontroly již zmizely. Okamžiky narušení volnos překračování hranic, jako byla pandemie COVID-19, odhalily křehkost tohoto pocitu otevřenos. Nedávné procesy znovuohraničování ukázaly, jak silně jsou mladí lidé z menšin závislí na mobilitě, čímž posílily hodnotu, kterou přikládají Schengenu, ale zároveň jim připomněly i potenciální nejistotu evropské integrace. Srovnání s vnějšími hranicemi Schengenského prostoru, například mezi Řeckem a Tureckem, ještě více zdůraznilo kontrast mezi každodenní otevřenos a realitou vyloučení jinde. Vnímání Evropy a EU bylo obecně pragmacké. Účastníci zdůrazňovali hmatatelné přínosy členství v EU – zejména volný pohyb, Erasmus, Interrail a regionální fondy EU – spíše než symbolickou idenfikaci s Evropou. EU byla často brána jako samozřejmá součást každodenního života, což vytvářelo formu „banálního evropanství“. Zamco někteří mladí lidé oceňovali EU jako garanta menšinových práv a zdroj financování, jiní ji vnímali jako vzdálenou, neefekvní nebo nekonzistentní v ochraně menšin. Pozivní vnímání role EU ve dvou případech (Jižní Tyrolsko a Severní a Jižní Šlesvicko) bylo silně ovlivněno dřívějšími
D.4.2, V1 69 dohodami o menšinových právech, které byly vytvořeny nezávisle na EU. Ačkoli tyto dohody vycházely z národních či bilaterálních smluv a širšího rámce Rady Evropy, účastníci výzkumu v těchto pohraničních oblastech je spojovali s EU, kterou vnímali jako garanta rozmanitos a ochrany menšin. Výrazně se projevily regionální a menšinové identy. Mnoho účastníků se idenfikovalo především se svým pohraničním či národnostním menšinovým společenstvím – jako Jižní Tyrolec, Zaolziak (Polák žijící v české čás Těšínska), Šlesvičan či Maďar na Slovensku (felvidéki) – spíše než s širšími národními nebo evropskými kategoriemi. Tyto lokalizované identy často nabízely způsob, jak překračovat národní rozdělení, a zároveň potvrzovaly kulturní odlišnost. Celkově zpráva ukazuje, že mladí lidé z menšin v pohraničních regionech normalizují evropskou integraci prostřednictvím svých každodenních prakk, ale ne vždy arkulují silné emocionální pouto k EU. Jejich pohledy odrážejí pragmacké přije mobility a příležitos, doplněné skepsí vůči instucionálnímu závazku k ochraně menšinových práv. Tato zjištění poukazují jak na úspěchy, tak na zranitelnos evropské integrace v dobách krize a zároveň podtrhují důležitost naslouchání hlasům mladých lidí při formování inkluzivních vizí budoucnos Evropy. Dansk B-SHAPES-projektet fokuserer på, hvordan mennesker opfaer Europa, med særlig opmærksomhed på, hvordan grænsefortællinger og processer med genopreelse af grænser og grænsekontrol kan påvirke disse opfaelser. Denne rapport undersøger specifikt, hvordan unge fra naonale mindretalssamfund i europæiske grænseregioner opfaer grænser, Europa og Den Europæiske Union (EU). Den bygger på fem casestudier – Sydtyrol (Italien–Østrig), Zaolzie/Těšín Silesia (Polen–Tjekkiet), Nordog Sydslesvig (Danmark–Tyskland), Sydslovakiet (Ungarn–Slovakiet) og Veshrakien (Grækenland–Bulgarien–Tyrkiet) – for at give boom-up-indsigt i hverdagens oplevelser af grænser og europæisk integraon. Undersøgelsen, der blev gennemført i 2024-2025, fokuserede på unge voksne i alderen 18-31 år og anvendte en kombinaon af semistrukturerede interviews og workshops i zine-produkon. Disse lgange gjorde det muligt for deltagerne at udtrykke deres fortællinger både visuelt og tekstmæssigt, hvilket skabte perspekver, der går ud over eliteniveauet og mediediskurserne. Ved at sammenligne unges beretninger med minoritetsmediers fortællinger (Engl et al., 2024) fremhæver undersøgelsen både konvergenser og uoverensstemmelser mellem den offentlige og den personlige forståelse af Europa. Analysen afslører en markant klø mellem minoritetsmediers fortællinger og unges opfaelse. Mens medierne oe fremsller grænser og Europa i poliserede eller sikkerhedsmæssige termer, har unge en tendens l at anlægge pragmaske, funkonelle perspekver. Denne divergens understreger, at unges stemmer oe er underrepræsenterede i offentlige fortællinger, på trods af deres betydning for fremden for den europæiske integraon. Resultaterne viser, at de fleste deltagere i undersøgelsen oplever grænser som åbne og stort set usynlige, hvilket er et resultat af Schengen-mobiliteten og normaliseringen af grænseoverskridende praksis. Grænser opfaes oe som muligheder snarere end barrierer, der er forbundet med uddannelse, arbejde,
D.4.2, V1 70 shopping, frid og familiebånd. De forbliver dog symbolsk betydningsfulde: Mange unge betragter kulturelle og sproglige skel snarere end statsgrænser som de »rigge« grænser i deres liv. Historiske arv og familieerindringer fortsæer også med at forme opfaelsen af grænser, selv hvor de fysiske grænsekontroller er forsvundet. Forstyrrende begivenheder, såsom COVID-19-pandemien, afslørede denne følelse af åbenhedens skrøbelighed. De seneste begivenheder med genindførelse af grænser og grænsekontrol har understreget, hvor stærkt unge fra minoriteter er aængige af mobilitet, hvilket forstærker den værdi, de llægger Schengen-aalen, men også minder dem om den potenelle usikkerhed ved den europæiske integraon. Sammenligninger med sikrede ydre grænser, såsom den græsk-tyrkiske grænse, understreger yderligere kontrasten mellem den daglige åbenhed og virkeligheden med udelukkelse andre steder. Opfaelsen af Europa og EU var generelt pragmask. Deltagerne fremhævede de konkrete fordele ved EUmedlemskab, især fri bevægelighed, Erasmus, Interrail og EU's regionale finansiering, frem for symbolsk idenfikaon med Europa. EU blev oe taget for givet som en baggrundsbengelse for dagligdagen, hvilket skabte en form for »banal europæisme«. Mens nogle unge værdsae EU som garant for mindretalsregheder og kilde l finansiering, betragtede andre det som ernt, ineffekvt eller inkonsekvent i sin beskyelse af mindretal. Den posive opfaelse af EU's rolle i to af lfældene (Sydtyrol og Nordog Sydslesvig) var stærkt præget af dligere mindretalsreghedsaaler, der var indgået uaængigt af EU. Selvom disse aaler stammede fra naonale eller bilaterale aaler og bredere rammer nedfældet i Europarådets konvenoner, forbandt forskningsdeltagerne i disse grænseområder dem med EU og betragtede det som en garant for mangfoldighed og beskyelse af mindretal. Regionale og minoritetsidenteter fremstod som særligt stærke. Mange deltagere idenficerede sig først og fremmest med deres grænseområde eller naonale minoritetssamfund, sydtyroler, zaolziak, schleswiger, ungarere i Slovakiet, tyrkere i Grækenland, snarere end med bredere naonale eller europæiske kategorier. Disse lokaliserede identeter gav oe mulighed for at overskride naonale skel og samdig bekræe kulturel særpræg. Samlet set viser rapporten, at unge fra mindretal i grænseregioner normaliserer den europæiske integraon gennem deres daglige praksis, men ikke nødvendigvis udtrykker en stærk følelsesmæssig lknytning l EU. Deres synspunkter afspejler en pragmask lslutning l mobilitet og muligheder, tempereret af skepsis over for instuonernes engagement i mindretalsregheder. Disse resultater fremhæver både resultaterne og sårbarhederne ved den europæiske integraon i kriseder, samdig med at de understreger viggheden af at lye l de unges stemmer i udformningen af en inkluderende vision for Europas fremd. Deutsch Das Projekt B-SHAPES untersucht, wie Menschen Europa wahrnehmen, und achtet dabei besonders darauf, wie Grenznarrave und Grenzprozesse diese Wahrnehmungen beeinflussen können. Dieser Bericht untersucht insbesondere, wie junge Menschen aus naonalen Minderheitengemeinschaen in
D.4.2, V1 71 europäischen Grenzregionen sowohl Grenzen, als auch Europa und die Europäische Union (EU) wahrnehmen. Der Bericht stützt sich auf fünf Fallstudien (Südrol (Italien–Österreich), Zaolzie/Teschener Schlesien (Polen–Tschechien), Nordund Südschleswig (Dänemark–Deutschland), Südslowakei (Ungarn– Slowakei) und Weshrakien (Griechenland–Bulgarien–Türkei)), um Boom-up-Einblicke in die alltäglichen Erfahrungen junger Menschen mit Grenzen und der europäischen Integraon zu gewinnen. Die Studie, die zwischen 2024 und 2025 durchgeführt wurde, konzentriert sich auf junge Erwachsene im Alter von 18 bis 31 Jahren und kombiniert halbstrukturierte Interviews mit “Zine-Workshops”. Diese Ansätze ermöglichten es den Teilnehmern und Teilnehmerinnen, ihre Erzählungen sowohl visuell als auch textuell auszudrücken und Perspekven zu entwickeln, die über die Eliteund Mediendiskurse hinausgehen. Durch den Vergleich der Erzählungen junger Menschen mit den Narraven der Minderheitenmedien (Engl et al., 2024) hebt die Studie sowohl Konvergenzen als auch Diskrepanzen zwischen dem medial-öffentlichen und dem persönlichen Verständnis von Europa hervor. Die Analyse zeigt eine bemerkenswerte Klu zwischen den Narraven der Minderheitenmedien und den Wahrnehmungen junger Menschen. Während die Medien Grenzen und Europa o in polisierten oder sicherheitspolischen Begriffen darstellen, neigen junge Menschen dazu, pragmasche, funkonale Perspekven einzunehmen. Diese Divergenz unterstreicht, dass die Smmen der Jugendlichen in öffentlichen Narraven o unterrepräsenert sind, obwohl sie für die Zukun der europäischen Integraon von großer Bedeutung sind. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass die meisten Studienteilnehmer und -teilnehmerinnen Grenzen als offen und weitgehend unsichtbar erleben, was auf die Mobilität im Schengen-Raum und die Normalisierung grenzüberschreitender Prakken zurückzuführen ist. Grenzen werden eher als Chancen, denn als Hindernisse verstanden und mit Bildung, Arbeit, Einkaufen, Freizeit und Familie in Verbindung gebracht. Dennoch behalten sie ihre symbolische Bedeutung, wobei viele junge Menschen nicht ungbedingt Staatsgrenzen sondern eher kulturelle und sprachliche Trennungen allgemein als die „wirklichen” Grenzen in ihrem Leben betrachten. Familienerinnerungen und historische Bilder prägen weiterhin die Vorstellung von Grenzen, selbst dort, wo physische Grenzkontrollen verschwunden sind. "Störungsmoment” wie die COVID-19-Pandemie haben offenbart, wie fragil dieses Gefühls der Offenheit von Grenzen ist. Die Wiedereinführung von Grenzkontrollen haben deutlich gemacht, wie stark junge Menschen aus Minderheiten auf Mobilität angewiesen sind. Vergleiche mit gesicherten Außengrenzen, wie beispielsweise der griechisch-türkischen Grenze, unterstreichen den Kontrast zwischen der alltäglichen Offenheit von innereuropäischen Grenzen und der Realität der Ausgrenzung andernorts. Die jungen Studienteilnehmer und –teilnehmerinnen nehmen Europa und die EU im Allgemeinen pragmasch wahr. Sie betonten die konkreten Vorteile der EU-Mitgliedscha, insbesondere die Freizügigkeit, Programme wie Erasmus und EU-Förderungen, und weniger die symbolische Idenfikaon mit Europa. Die EU wurde o als selbstverständliche Rahmenbedingung des täglichen Lebens angesehen, was zu einer Form des „banalen Europäismus” führte. Während einige junge Menschen die EU als Garant für Minderheitenrechte und als Finanzierungsquelle schätzten, betrachteten andere sie als distanziert, ineffizient oder inkonsequent beim Schutz von Minderheiten. Die äußerst posive Wahrnehmung der Rolle der EU in zwei der Fälle (Südrol und Nordund Südschleswig) wurde stark durch frühere
D.4.2, V1 72 Vereinbarungen zum Minderheitenschutz geprägt, die unabhängig von der EU getroffen wurden. Obwohl diese Vereinbarungen auf naonalen oder bilateralen Abkommen und umfassenderen Rahmenwerken des Europarats beruhten, assoziierten die Forschungsteilnehmer und -teilnehmerinnen in diesen Grenzgebieten sie mit der EU und sahen in ihr einen Garanten für Vielfalt und Minderheitenschutz. Regionale und Minderheitenidentäten erwiesen sich als besonders stark. Viele der jungen Menschen idenfizierten sich in erster Linie mit ihrer Grenzregion oder naonalen Minderheitengemeinscha, also als Südroler, Zaolziak, Schleswiger oder Ungar in der Slowakei, und weniger mit übergeordneten naonalen oder europäischen Kategorien. Diese lokalisierten Identäten boten o eine Möglichkeit, naonale Trennungen zu überwinden und gleichzeig die kulturelle Besonderheit zu bekräigen. Insgesamt zeigt der Bericht, dass junge Angehörige von Minderheiten in Grenzregionen die europäische Integraon durch ihre alltäglichen Prakken normalisieren, aber nicht unbedingt eine starke emoonale Bindung zur EU zum Ausdruck bringen. Ihre Ansichten spiegeln eine pragmasche Akzeptanz von Mobilität und Chancen wider, die durch Skepsis gegenüber dem instuonellen Engagement für Minderheitenrechte gemildert wird. Diese Ergebnisse verdeutlichen sowohl die Erfolge als auch die Schwachstellen der europäischen Integraon in Krisenzeiten und unterstreichen gleichzeig, wie wichg es ist, den Smmen junger Menschen Gehör zu schenken, um eine integrave Vision für die Zukun Europas zu entwickeln. Italiano Il progeo B-SHAPES si incentra sul modo in cui le persone percepiscono l'Europa, prestando parcolare aenzione a come le narrazioni sui confini e sui processi di ridefinizione dei confini possano influenzare tali percezioni. In parcolare, questo report approfondisce il modo in cui i giovani appartenen a minoranze nazionali nelle regioni europee di confine vivono i confini, l'Europa e l'Unione europea (UE). Si basa su cinque casi di studio che riportano esperienze quodiane di confini e di integrazione europea: Alto Adige (Italia-Austria), Zaolzie/Slesia di Těšín (Polonia-Repubblica Ceca), Schleswig seentrionale e meridionale (Danimarca-Germania), Slovacchia meridionale (Ungheria-Slovacchia) e Tracia occidentale (Grecia-Bulgaria-Turchia). Lo studio, condoo tra il 2024 ed il 2025, ha coinvolto giovani adul di età compresa tra i 18 e i 31 anni, ulizzando una combinazione di interviste semi-struurate e laboratori di creazione di “fanzine”. Ques approcci hanno permesso alle e ai partecipan di esprimere le loro narrazioni sia visivamente che testualmente, generando prospeve innovave che si differenziano dai discorsi delle élite poliche e dei media. Confrontando i resocon dei giovani con le narrazioni dei quodiani pubblica dalle minoranze in tali territori (Engl et al., 2024), lo studio evidenzia sia le convergenze che le divergenze tra ciò che il pubblico e le persone pensano e comprendono dell'Europa. L'analisi rivela un notevole divario tra le narrazioni dei quodiani delle minoranze e le percezioni dei giovani. Mentre ques giornali spesso inquadrano le fronere e l'Europa in termini policizza o di sicurezza, i giovani tendono a adoare prospeve pragmache e funzionali. Questa divergenza soolinea che le voci dei giovani sono spesso
D.4.2, V1 73 soorappresentate nelle narrazioni pubbliche, nonostante la loro importanza per il futuro dell'integrazione europea. I risulta mostrano che, per la maggior parte delle e dei partecipan allo studio, i confini vengono vissu come passaggi aper e in gran parte invisibili, grazie alla mobilità garanta dalla zona Schengen e alla normalizzazione delle prache transfrontaliere. I confini sono spesso intesi come opportunità piuosto che come barriere, associa all'istruzione, al lavoro, allo shopping, al tempo libero e ai legami familiari. Tuavia, essi rimangono simbolicamente significavi: mol giovani considerano le divisioni culturali e linguische, piuosto che i confini statali, come le “vere” fronere nella loro vita. Anche l'eredità storica e i ricordi familiari connuano a plasmare il modo in cui vengono immagina i confini, anche laddove i controlli fisici alle fronere sono scomparsi. Grandi momen di sconvolgimento, come la pandemia di COVID-19, hanno, tuavia, messo in luce la fragilità di questo senso di apertura. I recen even di riprisno delle fronere hanno evidenziato quanto le persone giovani appartenen alle minoranze facciano affidamento sulla mobilità, rafforzando il valore che aribuiscono alla zona Schengen, ma anche ricordando loro la potenziale precarietà dell'integrazione europea. Il confronto con le fronere esterne chiuse e rese “sicure”, come quella greco-turca, ha ulteriormente soolineato il contrasto tra l'apertura quodiana e la realtà dell'esclusione. Per quanto riguarda le percezioni dell'Europa e dell'UE, esse sono generalmente pragmache. Le persone partecipan hanno soolineato i vantaggi tangibili dell'adesione all'UE, in parcolare la libera circolazione, la partecipazione a programmi come l’Erasmus, i viaggi Interrail e i finanziamen regionali dell'UE, piuosto che l'idenficazione simbolica con l'Europa. L'UE è stata spesso data per scontata come condizione basilare della vita quodiana, producendo una forma di “banale europeismo”. Mentre alcuni giovani apprezzano l'UE come garante dei diri delle minoranze e fonte di finanziamen, altri la considerano distante, inefficiente o incoerente nella sua protezione delle minoranze. La percezione posiva del ruolo dell'UE in due dei casi (Alto Adige e Schleswig seentrionale e meridionale) è stata fortemente influenzata dai preceden accordi sui diri delle minoranze, stabili indipendentemente dall'UE. Sebbene tali accordi abbiano avuto origine da accordi nazionali o bilaterali e nel quadro più ampio dell’azione del Consiglio d'Europa, le persone partecipan alla ricerca in queste zone di confine li hanno associa all'UE, considerandola una garante della diversità e della protezione delle minoranze. Infine, è emerso che le identà regionali e minoritarie sono parcolarmente for. Molte persone partecipan si sono idenficate principalmente con la loro comunità di fronera o minoritaria nazionale, altoatesina, zaolziak, schleswigiana, ungherese in Slovacchia, piuosto che con categorie nazionali o europee più ampie. Queste identà locali hanno spesso offerto un modo per superare le divisioni nazionali, affermando al contempo la peculiarità culturale. Nel complesso, il rapporto mostra che le persone giovani appartenen alle minoranze nelle regioni di confine normalizzano l'integrazione europea araverso le loro prache quodiane, ma non esprimono necessariamente un forte aaccamento emovo all'UE. Pur essendo sceci nei confron dell'impegno istuzionale dell’UE a favore dei diri delle minoranze, le loro opinioni rifleono un approccio pragmaco alla mobilità e alle opportunità. Ciò evidenzia sia i risulta raggiun, sia le vulnerabilità dell'integrazione