Free movement, Social Citizenship, and the Production of the EU’s legal territory as a “Social Milieu.” Reading the Laval case through Foucault
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper raises the question of how freedom of movement, attached to EU citizenship, affects forms of social citizenship at the national and at the EU level. It does so through a double analytical lens. It discusses the well-known Laval case through the angle of the category of circulation and “social milieu” as proposed by the work of Michel Foucault. The hypothesis I want to raise in the paper is that there is a need to rethink social citizenship through an understanding of governmentality and territory as shaped by people circulating and producing a social environment, or milieu, at the European level. Specifically, the study deals with the controversies concerning the Laval dispute : it discusses the Posted Workers Directive, the principle of the free movement of workers and services and the Services Directive. It suggests that the encouragement and management of circulations, both of workers and of services, across Member States, as it is visible in the Laval case, ushers in the “becoming territorial” of the EU.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.073 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".