@book{
author = "Дражета, Богдан",
year = "2021",
abstract = "Предмет истраживања у овој монографији јесте етничка идентификација становника спрам симболичке границе (физички невидљиве) у Мостару и међуентитетске линије разграничења у Сарајеву. Обе линије су последица ратних дешавања 1992–1995. године, као и послератних деловања. Идентификацијски процес на етничком нивоу истражен је у односу на симболичку границу у случају Мостара, односно физичку у случају Сарајева. Истраживањем су такође обухваћени идентификацијски процеси на регионалном и локалном нивоу, док у оба града етничка идентификација садржи у себи верску. Циљ монографије био је утврђивање модалитета помоћу којих становништво (не)формално подељених градова Мостара и Сарајева врши првенствено сопствену етничку, а затим религијску, регионалну и локалну идентификацију, као и анализа ставова, размишљања и друштвених пракси (перцепција) везаних за успостављање граница у урбаном простору помоћу којих се она врши. Две студије случаја показале су како становништво ових градова посматра појам границе и како она утиче у стварању и обликовању њихове, пре свега, етничке, а потом регионалне и локалне идентификације. Истражене су и разлике унутар проучаваних етничких заједница у оба града (Бошњака, Срба, Хрвата и осталих). Оне се разликују по успостављеним унутрашњим симболичким или физичким границама у оквиру исте етничке заједнице становника једне урбане целине или једне регије., In this monograph, the subject of the research is the ethnic identification of the inhabitants towards the symbolic border
(physically invisible) in Mostar and the Inter-Entity Boundary
Line in Sarajevo. Both lines are the consequences of the 1992–
1995 war, as well as post-war activities. The identification process at the ethnic level was explored in relation to the symbolic
border in the case of Mostar, and the physical one in the case
of Sarajevo. The research also covered identification processes
at regional and local levels. In both cities, ethnic identification
include religious identification, which is first and foremost represented by those who consider themselves members of particular confessions, and then as form of specific cultural tradition
(folk religion), which include celebrations of specific holidays
and respecting certain religious prohibitions. The aim of this
monograph was to determine the modalities by which the population of (un)officially and (in)formally divided cities of Mostar
and Sarajevo perform primarily their own ethnic, thus religious,
regional and local identifications, as well as analyzing attitudes,
thoughts and social practices (perceptions) related to the establishing borders in the urban spaces by which those identifications are carried out. Two case studies have shown how the populations of these cities observe the concepts of the borders and
how they influence the creation and formation of primarily their
ethnic, and then regional and local identifications. Differences
were investigated within the studied ethnic communities in both
cities (Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats and Others). The studies show that they are distinct within their established inner symbolic or
physical boundaries within the same ethnic community, as well
as the inhabitants of one urban zone or region.
The perception of space as a basis for identification was
studied during fieldwork from 2017 to 2019. The locations
where the research was conducted were in the territories of the
City of Mostar, the City of Sarajevo and the City of East Sarajevo, in both entities (Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and
Republika Srpska) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, with the reliance
on relevant literature and media data. The ways in which specific parts of space (borders) affect interethnic communication and
interaction, whether they are formally (legally) and administratively, physically invisible (symbolically) or existing (physically),
have been explored. In addition to statistics and media reports,
most of the material related to the ethnic identification of Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats and Others was collected through fieldwork.
Both hypotheses in this study were confirmed. The first hypothesis to start with, is that the border in Mostar divides two
politically and ideologically different public spaces on a symbolic level, which is why the parts of the city where a certain ethnic
community mostly lives are more emphasized. This affects the
perception of residents in the form of their attitudes, thoughts
and practices. Inner boundaries in Mostar are built between
members of the same ethnic community or different ethnic
communities, depending on the oppositions between: city and
village; city and surrounding area on one side and the rest of
the region on the other; and one region in relation to the other.
The second hypothesis is that the physical border (Inter-Entity
Boundary Line) between Sarajevo and East Sarajevo divides two
political and ideological public spaces on a symbolic level. However, peoples’ perceptions differ, as well as their daily lives that
run smoothly in relation to the border. Inner boundaries in Sarajevo and East Sarajevo are built between members of the same
ethnic community or different ethnic communities, depending
on several oppositions. First, between different parts (quarters)
of the same city – Sarajevo or East Sarajevo. Then, between parts
of two cities (Sarajevo and East Sarajevo) located in the field of
Sarajevo (Sarajevsko polje) and parts of these cities in the surrounding area (the rest of the region). Then, between the Sarajevo-Romanija region and other regions. Lastly, between Bosnia
on one hand and Serbia and Montenegro on the other.
The methods used in this study were observation, unstructured and structured interviews, participant observation and survey on the demographic and socio-economic profiles of the interlocutors, as an indicator of their self-identification. A field diary
was also used, the content of which was mainly related to daily activities and recording important events and informal conversations
with all residents of Mostar and Sarajevo, but also people from other cities, regions and countries, whose interests, life or work were
related to listed cities. Certain statistical data from the 1991 and
2013 censuses in Mostar and Sarajevo were used to gain insight
into the ethnic structure of both cities over two time periods. 330
unstructured (informal) interviews were conducted, of which 121
in Mostar and 209 in Sarajevo (146 in Sarajevo Canton and 63 in
East Sarajevo), in three phases of research (two preliminary and
one main). The main part of the material was obtained through
119 structured (formal) interviews, through which 114 interlocutors were interviewed. Of these, 55 interviews were conducted
in Mostar, 53 in Sarajevo (36 in Sarajevo Canton and 17 in East
Sarajevo) and 11 preliminary in East Sarajevo. Thus, 55 respondents were interviewed in Mostar and 59 in Sarajevo (36 in Sarajevo
Canton and 23 in East Sarajevo), which is a total of 114. While the
first 11 interviews were conducted according to the preliminary
version of the questionnaire, the other 108 interviews were conducted according to the final (main) version of the questionaire.
The significance of this monograph is that it shows how
symbolic and physical borders and boundaries affect the processes of ethnic identification and other collective identifications, such as regional and local. This provides insight into two
case studies in a geographically and culturally close area, which
are viewed and analyzed according to the statements of members of all ethnic communities, which is so far a less researched
topic in Serbian ethnology and anthropology. These are the Bosniak, Serb and Croat ethnic communities, as well as those who
do not identify as members of one of these three communities,
but by accepting regional, local or some other identification.",
publisher = "Београд: Одељење за етнологију и антропологоију Филозофског факултета Универзитета у Београду, Досије студио",
title = "Етничка идентификација и границе у Босни и Херцеговини: примери Мостара и Сарајева, Ethnic identification and borders in Bosnia and Herzegovina : examples of Mostar and Sarajevo",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_reff_5210"
}
