Our primary aim in this article is to explore vernacular constructions of Europe’s so-called ‘migration crisis’ from the grounded everyday perspectives of EU citizens. We do so as a critical counterpoint to dominant elite scripts of the crisis, which are often reliant upon securitised representations of public opinion as being overwhelmingly hostile to migrants and refugees and straightforwardly in favour of tougher deterrent border security. In addition to broadening the range of issues analysed in vernacular security studies, the article seeks to make three principal contributions. Theoretically, we argue for an approach to the study of citizens’ views and experiences of migration and border security that is sensitive to the performative effects of research methods and the circular logic between securitising modes of knowledge production and policy justification. Methodologically, we outline and apply an alternative approach in response to these dynamics, drawing on the potential of critical focus groups and a desecuritising ethos. Empirically, we identify a vernacular theory of ‘the border’ asinformation management, and a significantinformation gapprevalent among participants with otherwise opposing views towards migration. These findings challenge bifurcated understandings of public opinion towards migration into Europe and point to the existence of vernacular border security imaginaries beyondeither‘closed’or‘open’ borders.

中文翻译：

---

公民对欧洲边境安全的白话想象：从围墙到信息管理

我们在本文中的主要目的是从欧盟公民的扎根日常角度探讨欧洲所谓的“移民危机”的白话结构。我们这样做是为了与危机中占主导地位的精英剧本形成鲜明对比，后者往往依赖于公众舆论的安全化表述，即对移民和难民充满敌意，并直接支持更严厉的威慑性边境安全。除了扩大本土安全研究中分析的问题范围之外，本文还试图做出三个主要贡献。理论上，我们主张采用一种方法来研究公民对移民和边境安全的看法和经验，这种方法对研究方法的执行效果以及知识生产安全化模式与政策正当性之间的循环逻辑敏感。在方法论上，我们概述并应用了一种替代方法来应对这些动态，利用关键焦点小组的潜力和去证券化的精神。根据经验，我们将“边界”的白话理论确定为信息管理, 和一个显着的信息鸿沟在对移民持相反观点的参与者中普遍存在。这些发现挑战了公众舆论对移民欧洲的分歧理解，并指出存在超越本土的边境安全想象任何一个'关闭'要么“开放”边界。