Knud Erik Jørgensen

Reflective approaches to European governance

Preface - Notes on the Contributors - Introduction: Approaching European Governance Knud Erik Jorgensen - PART I: CRITIQUE - Rediscovering Institutions: A Reflectivist Critique of Rational Institutionalism Marlene Wind - PART II: DIMENSIONS OF EUROPEAN GOVERNANCE - Conceptualizing European Markus Jachtenfuchs - Reconstructing European Space: From Territorial Politics to Multilevel Governance Thomas Christiansen - The Temporality of European Governance Magnus Ekengren -The Creation of European Supranational Institutions Richard T.Griffiths - PART III: DOMESTIC-EUROPEAN LINKAGES - British Discourses on Europe: Sovereignty of Parliament, Instrumentality and the Non-Mythical Europe Henrik Larsen - The French Garden Is No Longer What It Used To Ulla Holm - Nordic Ideas and Realities. Dynamics and Images Nordic Cooperation Johnny Laursen - PART IV: EXTERNAL RELATIONS OF THE EUROPEAN UNION - PoCo: The Diplomatic Republic of Europe Knud Erik Jorgensen - The Impact of Political Cooperation Ben Tonra - PART V: EPILOGUE - Epilogue: New Bottles for New Wine Janne Haaland Matlary - Bibliography - Index

Continental IR Theory: The Best Kept Secret

This article reviews the exotic theoretical landscape of Continental IR Theory (CIRT). While often neglected, or claimed to be uninteresting, or being a franchise business producing copies of theor...This article reviews the exotic theoretical landscape of Continental IR Theory (CIRT). While often neglected, or claimed to be uninteresting, or being a franchise business producing copies of theorizing done elsewhere, the article attempts to demonstrate that the discipline of International Relations can benefit significantly from an increased awareness of theorizing on the European continent. Far from being a franchise establishment, CIRT delivers original thought-provoking theorizing and challenging perspectives. An increased awareness of CIRT would probably destroy some of the dearest foundational myths of the discipline but in this case that is the price one must pay if one wants to be internationally minded, not only concerning the subject matter of our activities but also concerning intellectual curiosity.

Introduction: Assessing the EU’s Performance in International Institutions – Conceptual Framework and Core Findings

Abstract This article introduces the analytical framework of the collection on the performance of the EU in international institutions and summarizes its main findings. We focus on the role of the EU in the decision-making within international organizations and regimes as a major locus of global governance. We suggest unpacking the concept of EU performance into four core elements: effectiveness (goal achievement); relevance (of the EU for its priority stakeholders); efficiency (ratio between outputs accomplished and costs incurred); and financial/resource viability (the ability of the performing organization to raise the funds required). Based on the case studies of the collection, the findings presented in the second part of the article relate to the identified core elements of performance with a particular emphasis on the dimensions of ‘effectiveness’ and ‘relevance’. Most notably, the EU appears, on balance and over the past two decades, to have become much more relevant for its member states when acting within international institutions. Moreover, the findings highlight four particular factors explaining EU performance in international institutions: the legal framework conditions (including the relevant changes that the Lisbon Treaty has brought about), domestic EU politics, the status of relevant EU legislation and policies, and the international context.

PoCo: The Diplomatic Republic of Europe

Interpretations of the European Union’s foreign policy tend to emphasize its intergovernmental character.1 Features used as evidence include the distribution of institutional power, politically binding rules, decision-making procedures, limited enforcement arrangements, and the Treaty on European Union’s (TEU) pillar structure. In short, Member States seem to control events, and at the formal level of reasoning it seems difficult to question CFSP’s inherent intergovernmentalism.

Negotiating Treaty Reform in the European Union: The Role of the European Commission

In this article we seek to show that treaty reform is best seen as a process, and that we are witnessing a process of constitutionalization. We challenge the distinction between day-to-day politics and the high politics of treaty reform, demonstrating that high politics approaches are unable to take the significant role of non-governmental actors into consideration. While the European Commissions impact on the Maastricht Treaty was fairly limited, particularly concerning Political Union issues, we conclude that the Commissions impact on the Amstrerdam Treaty has been considerable. In fact, such an impact is not surprising given the Commissions technical expertise and its close cooperation with both the Council Secretariat and the Presidency of the Council. It is only if the impact of non-governmental actors, such as the Commission (and the Council Secretariat), is assumed to be negligible and therefore left unexamined that our findings are surprising. In this way, the article contributes to criticism of intergovernmental approaches to European integration.

The Influence of International Institutions on the EU

The Influence of International Institutions on the EU: A Framework for Analysis O.Costa & K.E.Jorgensen Less than you Might Think: The Impact of WTO Rules on EU Policies A.Young Playing into the Hands of the Commission? The Case of EU Coordination in the ILO M.Riddervold & H.Sjursen The External Institutional Context Matters: The EU in International Negotiations T.Delreux , E.Drieskens , B.Kerremans & C.Damro The Influence of International Institutions on Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in the EU and its Member States A.Wetzel The Influence of Global Internet Governance Institutions on the EU G.Christou & S.Simpson Combating the Financing of Terrorism Together? The Influence of the United Nations on the European Unions Financial Sanctions S.Leonard & C.Kaunert Linking up Levels of Governance: The Agencies of the European Union and their Interaction with International Institutions M.L.P.Groenleer NATOs Influence on the Evolution of the European Union as a Security Actor J.Koops The Influence of the Council of Europe on the European Union: Resource Exchange and Domains Restriction as Venues for Inter-institutional Influence B.Schumacher How do International Institutions Influence the EU? X.Dai & G.Martinez The Top-down Dimension of the Relationship between the EU and International Institutions: Taking Stock R.Kissack When Multilateralism hits Brussels: Generalizations and an Agenda for Further Research K.E.Jorgensen & O.Costa

Four dialogues and the funeral of a beautiful relationship: European studies and new regionalism

This article engages in the debate on (the study of) regionalism in providing an overview of the nexus between European Studies (ES) and (New) Regionalism (NR). While the immediate purpose for doing so is to set the stage for the future debate on regional dynamics, this exploration can also be perceived as a case study into (the plurality of forms of) inter/intra-disciplinary dialogue demonstrating the necessity of engaging in ‘dialogues about dialogues’. The article starts by developing a new typology of four different ideal-typical notions of dialogue: hierarchical, reflexive, transformative and eristic models of dialogue. Each of these models is then used to examine different ways of answering questions about why a dialogue between ES/NR should be of interest or not; what ES has to offer; what the coveted impact of such a dialogue is supposed to be; and, finally, which promises and pitfalls such a conversation holds. In this fashion, the stage for future debate addressing regional integration is outlined. It is concluded that these futures look bleak, however, especially because ES and NR no longer appear as each other’s ideal partner-in-dialogue and the relationship is likely to come to an end and hence await its own funeral.

The European Union in Multilateral Diplomacy

This article examines the role of the European Union in multilateral diplomacy. By means of synthesizing and summarizing research on seven selected policy fields, the article aims to make more general claims than single policy or single case studies allow. The analysis focuses on five analytical dimensions: governance (that is, how the EU handles multilateral diplomacy in different international institutions); the role of EU domestic politics; negotiation style(s); outreach; and impact. As the seven policy fields comprise some very diverse issue-areas, it would not be wise to expect any uniform approach or general findings. However, the analysis does show that the EU is increasingly engaged in multilateral diplomacy, actually playing a leadership role in some policy fields. Findings do not correspond to traditional expectations concerning the EUs engagement in politico-economic and security issues, as the EU plays a limited role in financial and macro-economic diplomacy and a fairly significant role in non-proliferation and crisis management. The article suggests that an extension to more policy fields and more analytical dimensions would provide the comprehensive understanding of the European Unions role in multilateral diplomacy that the engagement deserves.

The Influence of International Institutions on the EU: A Framework for Analysis

The promotion of effective multilateralism is allegedly a key objective of the European Union’s foreign policy. Over the last twenty years, the relationship between the European Union and international institutions has become ‘more sustained and consistent’ (Jorgensen, 2009: 188), as it has become a popular topic for research. Scholars have studied the origin of the multilateral identity and preferences of the EU (Groom, 2007; Jorgensen, 2006a; Manners and Lucarelli, 2007), the role of the EU in promoting regionalism (Grugel, 2007; Soderbaum and Langenhove, 2006), the uneasy intersection between the EU and the state-centric multilateral organizations (Laatikainen and Smith, 2006), and the EU’s potential for shaping norms and rules of the multilateral system (Chaban, Elgstrom and Holland, 2006; Smith, 2006; Smith, 2010). Others have focused on the role of the EU in specific international regimes and negotiations (Ahnlid, 2005; Kerremans and Gystelinck, 2008; Kissack, 2008; Mortensen, 2009).

Discursively (de-)constructing European foreign policy: Theoretical and methodological challenges

This article is about European foreign policy, specifically an examination of ways in which discourse analysis and foreign policy analysis can be brought together. The first aim of this article is to explicate the explanandum in some detail. Before we know what we are looking for, it gives limited meaning to consider procedures for methodological procedures. Once the explanandum has been identified, the article examines theoretical approaches and critically discusses their promises and limitations. Priority is given to the option of applying constructivist discursive theories that might (or might not) have been developed with a view to analysing foreign policy, including European foreign policy. In doing so, the article aims at bridging several sometimes very different fields of study: discourse theory, which is sometimes utterly unaware of or uninterested in foreign affairs; and foreign policy analysis, which is frequently descriptive in orientation and at times characterized by less-than-benign neglect of discourse theory.