Paradoxes of Identity Change

Identity change is a core element of political and social transformation. Processes of identity change play a key role in both generating and resolving many contemporary challenges in domestic and global politics, ranging from rise of nativism and populism, peace-building and coexistence in divided societies, integration of migrants and refugees in host societies, political polarization, enhancing the resilience of international interdependence and cooperation. Despite this centrality, research on identity change has remained scattered around different disciplines, paradigms, and levels of analyses. Within political science and international relations, identity change has been studied in diverse fields such as conflict resolution; Europeanization; party politics and voting behavior; political attitudes; socio-political mobilization; ethnic and nationalism studies; migration studies; feminist/queer theory; and foreign policy analysis. Recent works have emphasised the diverse ways the concept has been used and developed in sociology (Owens et al 2010); in psychology (Schwartz et al 2011); in political science and international relations (Rumelili and Todd 2018). Rumelili and Todd (2018) have proposed a cross-paradigmatic conceptual framework, which thematically links micro, meso, and macro-level identity change processes, and underscores the paradoxes inherent in identification/differentiation, continuity/change, and consensus/ contestation dynamics in identity change. This section aims to further this cross-paradigmatic effort. Building on the recent Identity Standing Group Sections, it provides a forum for sustained discussion between scholars who take different approaches to identity change, through different cases and comparisons, in the context of different research fields. It promises to reveal convergent findings and complementary approaches between those working in separate sub-disciplines (from feminist international relations to social movement theory to ethnic boundaries to political attitudes) and to show how emergent approaches in one sub-field can fruitfully be used in analysis of others.