|
|
|
Sort Order |
|
|
|
Items / Page
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
180559
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
While there is increasing evidence in the literature of politicisation in the area of European foreign policy, we know less about how this has affected the dynamics of cooperation among EU member states and, specifically, the procedural norms that govern this policy. This article is concerned with how politicisation and contestation manifest at the micro-level and how they might shape everyday EU foreign policy negotiations. It seeks to establish to what extent politicisation – resulting from the emergence of a new political cleavage centred around issues of identity and supranational integration – has driven normative contestation within EU foreign policy negotiations and whether this has led to the erosion of long-standing procedural norms in European foreign policy. Our findings suggest that despite CFSP Council committees being an institutional arena, characterised by intergovernmental, relatively insulated, and technical decision-making, current processes of politicisation linked to the rise of populism and the increasing transfer of authority to the EEAS have increased contestation of norms within this setting. However, procedural norms have remained relatively resilient to these challenges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
163657
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
“Unintended consequences” is an umbrella concept. It comprises phenomena that differ in crucial respects and consequently, without refinement, it remains a rather blunt instrument for policy analysis. The contributions in this volume, however, show that disentangling unintended consequences by making clear distinctions between various types, makes the concept much more useful for policy analysis. Assessing the impact of EU foreign policies as studied in this volume, we show that “bonuses”, “windfalls”, “accidents”, and “trade-offs” – all unintended – are very different when it comes to the explanation of policy outcomes, or to allocating responsibility for them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
128991
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2014.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article seeks to examine and assess the role of Poland in the early stages of the making of the Eastern Partnership of the European Union. First, it briefly reviews Poland's aims and ambitions with regard to the European Union's policy towards its eastern neighbours, both before and since it joined the European Union in 2004. Second, it describes and analyses the Eastern Partnership, including its added value for the European Neighbourhood Policy. Third, it draws on a range of interviews carried out by the authors in Brussels and Warsaw on Poland's role in the initial formation of the Eastern Partnership, as seen by its partners in the other member states and European institutions. In addition, it seeks to unpack some of the early stage lessons learnt by the Polish government about how best to achieve its ambitions in the European Union, and notes the remaining weaknesses of the Polish administration, particularly in the area of administrative capacity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|