Qu’en est-il de la science politique ? À cette question, notre section thématique entend apporter des éléments de réponse, en visibilisant et en confrontant des travaux sur les discriminations menés par des politistes en ordre dispersé. La focale est délibérément large, puisque sont a priori inclues toutes les formes de discrimination à raison de l’ensemble des critères prohibés ou susceptibles de l’être. Le présent appel à communications vise potentiellement toutes les composantes de la science politique (sociologie politique, politiques publiques, politique comparée et relations internationales, théorie politique). 

AFSP Conference, Bordeaux (July 2-4, 2019)

Co-supervisors of the group

• Laure Bereni, CMH, CNRS researcher, laure.bereni@ens.fr
• Juliette Galonnier, INED, post-doctoral fellow, juliette.galonnier@gmail.com
• Daniel Sabbagh, Sciences Po (CERI), research director, daniel.sabbagh@sciencespo.fr

Argument

Long absent from the French public debate, the notion of discrimination has  eventually gained traction over the last two decades (Fassin, 2002). Yet, it has witnessed an uncontrolled expansion. Formerly ignored, the term is now overused. But inequality does not always imply discrimination. Stricto sensu, discrimination is defined as any act or practice, within a zero-sum game, that determines the allocation of a short supply of goods and proves prejudicial to at least one individual on the basis of his/her belonging to a salient group identified through a distinguishing criterion which is, or should be, prohibited – such act or practice being unessential to the completion of an overriding objective. As such, discrimination is only one of the various processes that produce inequalities, and interacts with others, such as segregation, stigmatization, physical violence, socialization itself, etc. (Anderson, 2015; Loury, 2015).

Largely stemming from the legal domain (Lochak, 1987), from where it derives its value as a widely-recognized point of reference and as a potential basis for collective action, the notion of discrimination has been the object of alternative, and at times competing, conceptualizations in a plurality of disciplines. In particular, economic theory has devised the notion of statistical discrimination, which relates to decisions that prove detrimental to members of a group and which are primarily motivated, not by hostility towards that group or adherence to a particular ideology legitimating their exclusion, but by the existence of a correlation between belonging to that group – a feature that is not relevant in itself but directly observable – and another feature that is not directly observable but relevant to the decision- maker’s objectives, which are usually deemed legitimate (Arrow, 1973). Social psychology has demonstrated that discrimination often arises from the unconscious interplay of internalized stereotypes (Hamilton Krieger, 2008). Philosophy has investigated the tenets of the immorality of immoral forms of discrimination and has reflected upon the potential justifications for those forms of discrimination that would not necessarily be unethical (Singer, 1978; Hellman, 2008; Lippert-Rasmussen, 2013; Eidelson, 2015). With the partial exception of the sociology of law (Bereni and Chappe, 2011), sociology as a discipline has failed to provide its own thorough definition of the concept. This is apparent in the tendency to call “discrimination” every single form of ethno-racial exclusion (Castel, 2007) and, conversely, in the development of complex typologies of inequality-producing mechanisms without making any reference to the term “discrimination,” in spite of striking similarities (Brubaker, 2015).

Where does political science stand in these debates? This thematic session aims at providing some answers to this question by showcasing and engaging with research on discrimination conducted by political scientists from various parts of the field. Our focus is purposefully wide, for we wish to cover all forms of discrimination that arise from all the criteria that are or could be prohibited, and which can be investigated from a variety of analytical standpoints (local, national, international and/or comparative).

Axis 1 – Epistemological and methodological issues

One first axis of reflection could be to initiate a reflexive and critical epistemological analysis on the uses of the discrimination concept in political science. In this perspective, one avenue for thought could be to question the very definition of discrimination in the discipline. While the concept partially inherited the theoretical perspectives brought by law and economics, some authors have emphasized the specificities of discrimination as it is framed by the social sciences, which pay attention to power relations between majority and minority groups and go against a strictly individualistic and intentionalist approach (Stryker, 2001). It remains that the very idea of discrimination is still marked by the “universalizing abstraction” of law (Sabbagh, 2003) – which equates and brings together a variety of social relations within a single grammar – and focuses upon differential treatment in the allocation of scarce resources within markets (employment, housing, goods and services, etc.) (Bereni and Chappe, 2011; Chappe, Eberhard and Guillaume, 2016). We therefore welcome an examination of its heuristic value as well as its limits in accounting for the various mechanisms that produce inequalities.

Following on these first interrogations, we also welcome papers that investigate how the concept of discrimination interacts with other useful concepts in the study of power relations, be they generic (violence, stigmatization, socialization, etc.) or focusing on a particular criterion (racism, sexism, ableism, heteronormativity, homophobia, etc.). Finally, we welcome contributions that explore whether and how the concept of discrimination helps understand the entanglement of social relations. While the concept of intersectionality was initially created as a critique to non-discrimination law (Crenshaw, 1988), a good portion of contemporary sociological research investigates the intricate relationships between various forms of discrimination (for instance, on the entanglement between racial and religious discrimination, see Galonnier, forthcoming; also see for a more general perspective, Jaunait and Chauvin, 2012).

Axis 2 – The organizational production of discrimination

A second axis of investigation could explore the production of discrimination by and within political organizations and institutions, such as administrations, local authorities, political parties, unions, or associations. Contributions could rely on the substantial literature studying discrimination within work organizations, which emphasizes the role of management norms and practices, corporate culture and sociability networks in fostering discrimination (Baron and Bielby, 1980; Acker, Reskin, McBrier and Kmec, 1999; Acker, 2006; Sala Pala, 2013; Bonnet, 2014; Marry et al., 2017), in spite of the non-discrimination rule that is supposed to be in effect.

We also welcome contributions that explore how administrative and political organizations have reacted to the various equality policies that have been implemented in  their midst, specifically affirmative action policies based on sex (parity, quotas) (Bereni and Jacquemart, 2018; Milner, Demilly and Pochic, 2018).

Axis 3 – Inequality and discrimination as driving forces for collective action

A third axis of analysis could address the experiences and perceptions of inequality and discrimination (Eberhard and Simon, 2016) as a source and/or an issue for political action. In this perspective, one first line of inquiry could explore the lived experience of discrimination as a driving force for social engagement. How do individuals respond to discrimination and inequality (Dubet et al., 2013; Lamont, Moraes Silva et al., 2016)? How does the experience of discrimination shape their relationship to politics and collective commitment (Carrel et al., 2017; Talpin et al., 2017)? We welcome contributions investigating the various forms of mobilizations and repertoires of action that the experience of discrimination is likely to foster (Lefranc and Mathieu, 2009), especially in resorting to the law (Israël, 2012; Chappe, 2013; Lejeune and Yazdanpanah, 2017), and moving from individual outrage to collective organization (Thévenot, 2006; Fillion and Torny, 2015). Contributors can either focus on social movements that put the fight against inequality and discrimination at the center of their action (Laplanche-Servigne, 2014; Mesgarzadeh, 2018; Chappe and Keyhani, 2018), or on other forms of engagement which, albeit initiated by the experience of discrimination, may unfold in other directions, as it is the case in some trajectories of radicalization (Bonelli and Carrié, 2018). In this regard, we may also consider that the experience of inequality can be a factor of disengagement and retrenchment from civic life (Lagrange, 2008).

As part of this third axis, contributors may also explore the various forms of collective action focusing upon non-discrimination policies and/or affirmative action policies. We welcome papers studying social movements advocating the implementation of such policies, or social movements that, on the contrary, fervently oppose them (Massei, 2017; Hsu, 2018).

Finally, an additional line of inquiry could focus on the voting behavior of the discriminated, and more broadly, on the electoral configurations of societies that are marked by strong inequalities. How do discriminated individuals or groups position themselves on the political spectrum (Le Texier, 2006; Brouard and Tiberj, 2007)? Can we identify and prioritize determinants of their vote? Beyond that, are relatively unequal societies in terms of class, gender, age or race characterized by specific political and electoral patterns (Jacobs and Skocpol, 2007)?

Axis 4 – Public policies fighting against discrimination and affirmative action

As part of this last axis, contributions could focus primarily on the genesis, the implementation and the effects of public policies to fight against discrimination, as well as programs of direct or indirect affirmative action (Calvès 2010; Skrentny 1996; Sabbagh 2003; Sabbagh 2011; Sabbagh 2015). Papers could investigate the international circulation of concepts and instruments to fight against discrimination, especially in the context of Europeanization (Guiraudon 2004; Jacquot 2014); they could focus on the incomplete social and political construction of discrimination as a public problem and explore the reasons for such incompletion – among which might appear the partial absence of statistics that could enable its measurement, the collection of such statistics encountering serious opposition in some countries, which deserves examination (Peer and Sabbagh 2008; Simon 2008); or they could also – and correlatively – explore the implicit selection of prohibited grounds of discrimination, which defines the groups that might de facto benefit from an efficient protection (in France, sex, age and disability).

We also welcome contributions that build on the literature which, with regards to the modalities and limits of French anti-discrimination policies, has brought to light the existence of a double trend of territorialization and delegation to professional actors – chiefly from the private sector – operating under contradictory rationales (Noël 2010; Doytcheva 2015; Mazouz 2017; Flamant 2017; Cerrato Debenedetti 2018; Bereni 2018). These are just a few examples.

The current call for papers potentially encompasses all the various sub-fields of political science (political sociology, public policies, comparative politics and international relations, political theory, etc.). The axes mentioned above have been identified for clarification purposes but should not be seen as constraining frames. While they may constitute useful reference points on a variety of topics, we invite contributors not to artificially tie their papers to them, for their proposals will be assessed independently from this provisional structure.

Short bios of the group’s supervisors

• Laure Bereni is a researcher at CNRS and a member of the Centre Maurice Halbwachs, where she is in charge along with Amélie Le Renard of the axis “Imbrication of social relationships: gender, class, race.” Her research is situated at the intersection of three analytical fields: political sociology and sociology of law; sociology of gender and discrimination; sociology of work and organizations. After her doctoral research on women’s and feminist movements in France (the book deriving from her dissertation, La bataille de la parité, was published at Economica in 2015), she conducted several studies on discrimination and anti-discrimination policies in large organizations, especially on “diversity” programs in business firms: the manuscript of her Habilitation à diriger des recherches (2018) is entitled Aux frontières de la raison des affaires. Le management de la diversité à New York et à Paris. In particular, she has published « Discriminations et droit » (Politix, 94, ed. with V.-A. Chappe and Séverine Lacalmontie, 2011) and Le plafond de verre et l’État. La construction des inégalités de genre dans la fonction publique (with C. Marry, A. Jacquemart, S. Pochic and A. Revillard, Armand Colin, 2017). She is a member of the editorial boards of Politix and Sociologie du travail, she has been scientific secretary of section 40 in the CNRS (2012- 2016). She teaches at Sciences Po.
• Juliette Galonnier is a Postdoctoral researcher within the “Global Race” ANR research project at INED (Paris, France). She is also currently co-coordinating a project on “Muslims of African descent in France” (call for projects « Islam, religion, société » of the Bureau central des cultes 2017). Her work focuses on the social construction of racial and religious categories. She received in June 2017 a joint PhD degree from Northwestern University and Sciences Po Paris. Entitled Choosing Faith and Facing Race: Converting to Islam in France and the United States, her dissertation was awarded in 2018 the Best Dissertation Award of the American Sociological Association. She has published several book chapters and articles in journals such as Social Compass, Sociology of Religion and Tracés. She is a fellow at the IC Migrations, and a member of the editorial boards of Tracés and Books and Ideas. She is also part of the research team “Agenda for a critical sociology of religion” and the network “Islam, researchers and the public sphere.”
• Daniel Sabbagh is research director at Sciences Po (Centre de Recherches Internationales, CERI). His work focuses primarily on discrimination and affirmative action, from a comparative and interdisciplinary perspective. He has published L’Égalité par le droit : les paradoxes de la discrimination positive aux États-Unis (Paris, Économica, 2003; Prix François Furet 2004) and Chine/États-Unis : fascinations et rivalités (Paris, CERI-Autrement, 2008 [with Stéphanie Balme]). He has co-edited three collective volumes ([with Anna Mountford-Zimdars and David Post], Fair Access to Higher Education. Global Perspectives (University of Chicago Press, 2014); [with Magali Bessone], Race, racisme, discriminations. Une anthologie de textes fondamentaux (Hermann, coll. « L’avocat du diable », 2015); [with Maud Simonet], De l’autre côté du miroir. Comparaisons franco-américaines (Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2018), and several special issues published in Critique internationale (2002), Revue internationale des sciences sociales ([with Patrick Simon], 2005), French Politics, Culture, and Society (2008) and Sociétés contemporaines ([with Agnès van Zanten], 2010). At CERI, he coordinates with Gwénaële Calvès, a seminar focusing on antidiscrimination policies, a topic on which he has written reports for the European Commission, the United Nations Development Programme and the Republic of South Africa. Among his other publications are articles published in World Politics, Daedalus, Ethnic and Racial Studies, The Political Science Quarterly, Revue française de science politique, Politix and Revue de synthèse, as well as a chapter in the Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law. He teaches at Sciences Po.

Bibliography

• Acker Joan, 2006, “Inequality Regimes: Gender, Class, and Race in Organizations”, Gender and Society, vol. 20, no 4, p. 441-464.
• Anderson Elizabeth, 2015, “Ségrégation, stigmatisation raciale et discrimination”, in Bessone and Sabbagh (ed.), Race, racisme, discriminations. Une anthologie de textes fondamentaux, Paris: Hermann, coll. « L’avocat du diable », p. 235-276.
• Arrow Kenneth, 1973, “The Theory of Discrimination”, in Orley Ashenfelter and Albert Rees (eds.), Discrimination in Labor Markets, Princeton: Princeton University Press, p. 3-33.
• Baron James N. and Bielby William T., 1980, “Bringing the Firm Back In: Stratification, Segmentation, and the Organization of Work”, American Sociological Review, vol. 45, n° 5, p. 737-765.
• Bereni Laure, 2018, Aux frontières de la raison des affaires. Le management de la diversité à New York et à Paris, Mémoire pour l’obtention d’une Habilitation à Diriger des Recherches, Université Paris Nanterre.
• Bereni Laure and Chappe Vincent-Arnaud, 2011, « La discrimination, de la qualification juridique à l’outil sociologique », Politix, vol. 94, n° 2, p. 7-34.
• Bereni Laure and Jacquemart, Alban 2018, « Diriger comme un homme moderne. Les élites masculines de l’administration face à la norme d’égalité des sexes », Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, n° 223, p. 72-87.
• Bessone Magali and Sabbagh Daniel, 2015, Race, racisme, discriminations. Une anthologie de textes fondamentaux, Paris: Hermann, coll. « L’avocat du diable ».
• Bonelli Laurent and Carrié Fabien, 2018, La Fabrique de la radicalité, Paris: Seuil.
• Bonnet, François, 2014, “How to Perform Non-racism? Colorblind Speech Norms and Race- Conscious Policies among French Security Personnel”, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, vol. 40, n° 8, p. 1275-1294.
• Brouard Sylvain and Tiberj Vincent, 2007, « L’incorporation politique ‘à la Française’ : modèles explicatifs des alignements politiques des Français d’origine maghrébine, africaine et turque », Migrations et Société, vol. 19, n° 111, p. 127-148.
• Brubaker Rogers, 2015, Grounds for Difference, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
• Calvès Gwénaële, 2016, La discrimination positive, Paris: PUF, coll. « Que Sais-Je ? ».
• Carrel Marion, Kaya Sümbül, Purenne Anaïk, 2017, « L’expérience des discriminations, frein ou support d’engagement dans les quartiers populaires ? Une perspective comparée France-Québec », Congrès de l’Association française de science politique, juillet 2017, Montpellier, France.
• Castel Robert, 2007, La discrimination négative. Citoyens ou indigènes ?, Paris: Seuil.
• Cerrato Debenedetti Marie-Christine, 2018, La lutte contre les discriminations ethno-raciales en France. De l’annonce à l’esquive (1988-2016), Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes.
• Chappe Vincent-Arnaud, 2013, « Dénoncer en justice les discriminations syndicales : contribution à une sociologie des appuis conventionnels de l’action judiciaire », Sociologie du travail, vol. 55, n° 3, p. 302-321.
• Chappe Vincent-Arnaud, Eberhard Mireille and Guillaume Cécile, 2016, « La fabrique des discriminations », Terrains & travaux, n° 29, p. 5-236.
• Chappe Vincent-Arnaud and Keyhani Narguesse, 2018, « La fabrique d’un collectif judiciaire. La mobilisation des cheminots marocains contre les discriminations à la SNCF », Revue française de science politique, vol. 68, n° 1, p. 7-29.
• Crenshaw Kimberlé, 1988, “Race, Reform and Retrenchment: Transformation and Legitimation in Antidiscrimination Law”, Harvard Law Review, vol. 101, n° 7, p. 1331- 1387.
• Doytcheva Milena, 2015, Politiques de la diversité, Bruxelles: Peter Lang.
• Dubet François, Cousin Olivier, Macé Éric and Rui Sandrine, 2013, Pourquoi moi ?
• L’expérience des discriminations, Paris: Seuil.
• Eberhard Mirelle and Simon Patrick, 2016, Expérience et perception des discriminations en Île-de-France, Observatoire régional des discriminations (ORDIS).
• Eidelson Benjamin, 2015, Discrimination and Disrespect, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Fassin Didier, 2002, « L’Invention française de la discrimination », Revue française de science politique, vol. 52, n° 4, p. 403-423.
• Fillion Emmanuelle and Torny Didier, 2015, « De la réparation individuelle à l’élaboration d’une cause collective », Revue française de science politique, vol. 65, n° 4, p. 583-607.
• Flamant Anouk, 2017, « L’incomplète construction des politiques municipales de lutte contre les discriminations raciales : enquête dans les villes de Lyon, Nantes et Strasbourg », Revue internationale de politique comparée, vol. 24, n° 3, p. 257-292.
• Galonnier Juliette, à paraître, « Discrimination religieuse ou discrimination raciale ?
• L’islamophobie en France et aux États-Unis », Hommes et Migrations.
• Guiraudon Virginie, 2004, « Construire une politique européenne de lutte contre les discriminations : l’histoire de la directive ‘race’ », Sociétés contemporaines, n° 53, p. 11- 32.
• Hamilton Krieger, 2008, Un problème de catégories. Stéréotypes et lutte contre les discriminations, Paris: Sciences Po ; New York: French American Foundation: https://www.inegalites.fr/IMG/pdf/FAF_report.pdf
• Hellman Deborah, 2008, When is Discrimination Wrong?, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press.
• Hsu Hua, 2018, “The Rise and Fall of Affirmative Action”, The New Yorker, October 15.
• Israël Liora, 2012, « Qu’est-ce qu’avoir le droit ? Des mobilisations du droit en perspective sociologique », Le sujet dans la cité, n° 3, p. 34-47.
• Jacobs Lawrence R. and Skocpol Theda (ed.), 2007, Inequality and American Democracy: What We Know and What We Need to Learn, New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
• Jacquot Sophie, 2014, L’Égalité au nom du marché. Émergence et démantèlement de la politique européenne d’égalité entre les hommes et les femmes, Bruxelles: Peter Lang.
• Jaunait, Alexandre and Chauvin, Sébastien, 2012, « Représenter l’intersection. Les théories de l’intersectionnalité à l’épreuve des sciences sociales », Revue française de science politique, vol. 62, n° 1, p. 5-20.
• Lagrange Hugues, 2008, « Émeutes, ségrégation urbaine et aliénation politique », Revue française de science politique, vol. 58, n° 3, p. 377-401.
• Lamont Michèle, Moraes Silva Graziella et al., 2016, Getting Respect: Responding to Stigma and Discrimination in the United States, Brazil and Israel, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
• Laplanche-Servigne Soline, 2014, « Quand les victimes de racisme se mobilisent. Usage d’identifications ethno-raciales dans l’espace de la cause antiraciste en France et en Allemagne », Politix, n° 108, p. 143-166.
• Le Texier Emmanuelle, 2006, Quand les exclus font de la politique. Le barrio mexicain de San Diego - Californie, Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.
• Lefranc Sandrine and Mathieu Lilian (ed.), 2009, Mobilisations de victimes, Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes.
• Lejeune Aude and Yazdanpanah Héléna, 2017, « Face au handicap : action syndicale et cadrages juridiques », Politix, vol. 30, n° 118, p. 55-76.
• Lippert-Rasmussen Kasper, 2013, Born Free and Equal? A Philosophical Inquiry into the Nature of Discrimination, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Lochak Danièle, 1987, « Réflexions sur la notion de discrimination », Droit social, n° 11,     p. 778-790.
• Loury Glenn, 2015, « Les stéréotypes raciaux », dans Bessone and Sabbagh (ed.), Race, racisme, discriminations. Une anthologie de textes fondamentaux, Paris: Hermann, coll.
• « L’avocat du diable », p. 203-234.
• Marry Catherine, Bereni Laure, Jacquemart Alban, Pochic Sophie and Revillard Anne, 2017, Le plafond de verre et l’État - La construction des inégalités de genre dans la fonction publique, Paris: Armand Colin.
• Massei, Simon, 2017, « S’engager contre l’enseignement de la ‘théorie du genre’. Trajectoires sociales et carrières militantes dans les mouvements anti-‘ABCD de l’égalité’ », Genre, sexualité & société [En ligne], n°18, automne.
• Mazouz Sarah, 2017, La République et ses autres. Politiques de l’altérité dans la France des années 2000, Lyon: ENS éditions.
• Mesgarzadeh, Samina, 2018, « Un club de cadres et dirigeants de ‘culture musulmane’. Ni communauté ni communalisation », Sociétés contemporaines, n°109, p. 37-64.
• Milner Susan, Demilly Hélène and Pochic Sophie, 2018, “Bargained Equality: The Strengths and Weaknesses of Workplace Gender Equality Agreements and Plans in France”, British Journal of Industrial Relations, October.
• Noël Olivier, 2010, Sociologie politique de et dans la lutte contre les discriminations. Au cœur de l’action publique en France (1991-2006), Saarbrück: Éditions universitaires européennes.
• Peer Shanny and Sabbagh Daniel (ed.), 2008, “French Color-Blindness in Perspective: The Controversy over ‘Statistiques Ethniques’”, French  Politics,  Culture,  and  Society,  vol. 26, n° 1, p. 1-70.
• Reskin Barbara, McBrier Debra and Kmec Julie A., 1999, “The Determinants and Consequences of Workplace Sex and Race Composition”, Annual Review of Sociology, n° 25, p. 335-361.
• Roca i Escoda, Marta, 2013, « De la dénonciation du droit à la conquête des droits. Le cas des mobilisations homosexuelles », dans Bruno Frère and Marc Jacquemain (ed.), Résister au quotidien ?, Paris: Presses de Sciences Po, p. 55-86.
• Sabbagh Daniel, 2003, L’Égalité par le droit. Les paradoxes de la discrimination positive aux États-Unis, Paris: Économica, coll. « Études politiques ».
• Sabbagh Daniel, 2011, “The Rise of Indirect Affirmative Action: Converging Strategies for Promoting “Diversity” in Selective Institutions of Higher Education in the United States and France”, World Politics, vol. 63, n° 3, p. 470-508.
• Sabbagh Daniel, 2015, « Les effets de la discrimination positive dans l’accès aux établissements d’enseignement supérieur d’élite aux États-Unis : un essai de synthèse », dans Ginette Herman, Andrea Rea and Julie Ringelheim (ed.), Politiques antidiscriminatoires, Bruxelles: De Boeck, p. 157-172.
• Sala Pala Valérie, 2013, Discriminations ethniques. Les politiques du logement social en France et au Royaume-Uni, Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes.
• Simon Patrick, 2008, « Les statistiques, les sciences sociales françaises et les rapports sociaux ethniques et de ‘race’ », Revue française de sociologie, vol. 49, n°1, p. 153-162.
• Singer Peter, 1978, “Is racial discrimination arbitrary?”, Philosophia, vol.8, n° 2-3, p. 185- 203.
• Skrentny John David, 1996, The Ironies of Affirmative Action. Politics, Culture, and Justice in America, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Stryker Robin, 2001, “Disparate Impact and the Quota Debate: Law, Labor Market Sociology, and Equal Employment Policies”, The Sociological Quarterly, vol. 42, n° 1, p. 13-46.
• Talpin Julien, O'Miel Julien and Frégosi Franck (ed.), 2017, L'islam et la cité. Engagements musulmans dans les quartiers populaires, Villeneuve-d’Ascq: Presses universitaires du Septentrion.
• Thévenot Laurent, 2006, L’action au pluriel. Sociologie des régimes d’engagement, Paris: La Découverte, 2006.