Mai’a K. Davis Cross

Rethinking epistemic communities twenty years later

The concept of epistemic communities – professional networks with authoritative and policy-relevant expertise – is well-known thanks to a 1992 special issue of International Organization . Over the past twenty years, the idea has gained some traction in International Relations scholarship, but has not evolved much beyond its original conceptualisation. Much of the research on epistemic communities has been limited to single case studies in articles, rather than broader comparative works, and has focused narrowly on groups of scientists. As a result, it is often assumed, erroneously, that epistemic communities are only comprised of scientists, and that the utility of the concept for understanding International Relations is quite narrow. Consequently, an otherwise promising approach to transnational networks has become somewhat marginalised over the years. This article revisits the concept of epistemic communities twenty years later and proposes specific innovations to the framework. In an increasingly globalising world, transnational actors are becoming progressively more numerous and influential. Epistemic communities are certainly at the forefront of these trends, and a better understanding of how they form and operate can give us a clear demonstration of how knowledge translates into power.

The Military Dimension of European Security: An Epistemic Community Approach

This article advances the argument that security integration is occurring in the European Union (EU) as a result of the influence of certain knowledge-based networks or epistemic communities. Given that EU member-states consistently resist integration in areas that are central to traditional state sovereignty, security integration presents a puzzle. The case of the EU Military Committee (EUMC) will serve as an example of how and why epistemic communities matter in security decision-making. Although the EUMC and the Common Security and Defence Policy are relatively new, the power of shared expertise among high-level military officers has already begun to dismantle sovereign barriers to security integration. In considering the puzzle of security integration, this article suggests that the epistemic community framework provides a better explanation for the emergence of a European security space than alternative arguments, such as principal-agent theory, intergovernmental bargaining, and regime theory. The case of a military epistemic community also serves to broaden the epistemic community literature, which tends to focus somewhat narrowly on cases of environmental and economics experts.

The EU Global Strategy and diplomacy

ABSTRACT The new EU Global Strategy has significant implications for EU diplomacy, in terms of both goals and means. This article first analyses the timing of the strategy as an exercise in diplomacy in its own right. Second, it argues that the strategy outlines a more expansive and noticeably more smart power-oriented approach to diplomacy in practical terms. Finally, it notes that the strategy has a new meta-narrative for EU diplomacy, which seeks to project a blend of both realistic assessment and idealistic aspiration.

What Type of Power has the EU Exercised in the Ukraine–Russia Crisis? A Framework of Analysis

What impact has the Russia–Ukraine crisis had on the EU as a foreign policy actor? Most studies examine how the EU has evolved as an actor over time of its own initiative, but tend to discount the role that the external context or structure of the international system might play in constraining or enabling the EUs exercise of power. This Special Issue seeks to understand the EUs influence in the world through recognizing its embeddedness in an unpredictable and uncertain international system. Specifically, we ask whether and to what extent the Russia–Ukraine crisis serves as a critical juncture and catalyst for shaping the EUs power.

A Media Perspective on European Crises

At numerous junctures since its inception in 1957, the European Union (EU) (or European Economic Community/European Communities (EC) in its previous incarnations) has been portrayed as being in severe crisis. Whether these crises are internal in origin, such as the 2005 Constitutional crisis, or external in origin, such as the 2003 Iraq crisis, they are typically portrayed in the media with a heavy, negative slant, inspiring predictions about the disintegration of the European project. Of course, the EU continues to exist today, and it is arguably stronger and more integrated than ever. It is often recognized in hindsight that European actors seem to use crises as opportunities to further shape European order, enhance legitimacy and increase integration, beyond what can be achieved incrementally. Doomsday predictions continually prove to be overblown.

Counter-terrorism in the EU’s external relations

Abstract The renewed emphasis on national political boundaries across Europe would seem to go hand-in-hand with a weaker external personality for the EU. However, there are several prominent examples of EU leadership that challenge this notion, from the December 2015 UN climate change agreement to common sanctions again Russia to a new Global Strategy. This paper examines a policy area that lies at the intersection of populist outrage and external engagement: counter-terrorism. In the wake of the 2015 and 2016 Paris and Brussels terrorist attacks, the EU has made significant strides in enhancing the external dimension of its counter-terrorism policies, particularly in terms of intelligence sharing, formal and informal diplomacy, and the internal–external nexus of security. The article argues that major terrorist attacks in 2015–2016 have served as critical junctures of crisis, driving counter-terrorism policies forward and emphasising the notion of European boundaries beyond any functionalist or securitization explanation.

Sustainable Diplomacy in the European Union

Compared to the world’s major countries, the European Union (EU) has consistently ranked among the most attractive to foreign audiences. A poll conducted in 2009 for the BBC World Survey found that of the people in the 21 countries surveyed, all but Turkey had mainly positive views of the EU. By contrast, for example, twice as many countries had mainly negative views of the US. The EU’s relative success in this regard increasingly depends on its ability to speak with one voice in a variety of policy areas, and to deliver on its commitments. Euro-sceptics have long argued that this level of integration is impossible. But it is in the very nature of the EU – with over 50 years of economic, social, and political integration following two devastating world wars – to project an image of being a champion of multilateralism, transnationalism, democracy, and cooperation. The EU is a strong example of diplomacy that has not only sustained international cooperation, but has advanced it beyond most expectations.

Secrecy and the making of CFSP

Abstract How can we understand the role of secrecy in the making of the European Union’s Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)? This article analyses the nature of secrecy and questions some of the main assumptions surrounding the concept. In this respect, it argues that secrecy may be of functional necessity for policy-makers and actually compatible with good governance. Moreover, we must not put too much stock in transparency alone in that the relationship between secrecy and transparency is not zero-sum ‒ historically, transparency has sometimes been an instrument of control and domination. The article considers the case of the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) to shed light on what kind of secrecy exists in the foreign policy area, and argues that this is mainly a combination of functional and compound secrecy.

Environmental and Climate Diplomacy: Building Coalitions Through Persuasion

This chapter explores the contribution diplomacy has made to the EU’s external environmental and climate policies. By studying the EU’s activities in the area of environmental diplomacy, we can elaborate upon the factors that influence the effectiveness or otherwise of the EU’s external environmental policies. The chapter traces the development of the EU’s key institutional mechanism for coordinating environmental diplomacy, the Green Diplomacy Network. It also uses the case of the EU’s involvement in the COP21 climate conference to illustrate how diplomacy matters for effectiveness of EU external environmental relations. Climate change is a special case of environmental diplomacy because it has attracted very high global attention compared with other environmental issues.

Partners at Paris? climate negotiations and transatlantic relations

ABSTRACT There is arguably no security crisis so great as the one that stems from climate change. For some time, the EU, rather than the US, has led the way in terms of far-ranging policies to reduce carbon emissions. But despite the fact that the EU has been able to bind itself to strong environmental norms internally, it has – up until COP21 – been a relatively weak norm entrepreneur externally when seeking to convince others, especially the US, to adopt stronger environmental policies. Why was the EU finally able to increase its influence in the lead up and at the 2015 UN summit in Paris? This article argues that while the EU’s climate diplomacy has underperformed in the past, it has been quick to adapt since the 2009 Copenhagen summit through effectively broadening its epistemic community of climate diplomats, and engaging in a process of political learning.