Differentiation, dominance and democratic congruence : a relational view

Posted: 5 Jan 2022This EU3D Research Paper tentatively explores ways of applying the differentiation lens from the EU to the global level of inter-state cooperation. Given the wide scope of this research agenda, its only ambition is to offer a few building blocks for further research on the basis of a relational view of differentiated cooperation, which starts with characterising the relations between actors rather than the actors themselves. The research paper is divided in four sections. (1) Whether differentiation is desirable and for whom if we seek to maximise democratic congruence, including vertical and horizontal non domination. (2) What types of differentiated relations constitute the landscape of forms of differentiation, presenting a relational typology consisting of selection, recognition, distinction and discretion. (3) Why delves into the many categories of causes or factors explaining why states engage in differentiation at the EU and the global level – reading functional and political drivers as indicators of patterns of relations, distinguishing in particular between states that are un-able, unwilling or unamenable when considering joining integration schemes. And finally the last section (4) How offers a few preliminary thoughts on how or under what conditions, DI/DC can pass the democratic congruence test

Diversity or Cacophony? The Continuing Debate Over New Sources of International Law

We have reached a point when lawyers\u27 commissions are summoned to discuss the consequences of legal proliferation as an ill threatening the standing of international law through incompatibility or irrelevance. Should this trend towards fragmentation be reversed? Should we devise a legal non-proliferation treaty? Or should we, conversely, welcome the current diversification in the sources of law as reflecting the realities of today\u27s world, as a reflection of the flexibility and adaptability of law when the norm of sovereignty on which it is based is itself undergoing considerable recalibration? In short: how should we deal theoretically as well as practically with the diversification of sources of law

Diversity or Cacophony? The Continuing Debate Over New Sources of International Law

We have reached a point when lawyers\u27 commissions are summoned to discuss the consequences of legal proliferation as an ill threatening the standing of international law through incompatibility or irrelevance. Should this trend towards fragmentation be reversed? Should we devise a legal non-proliferation treaty? Or should we, conversely, welcome the current diversification in the sources of law as reflecting the realities of today\u27s world, as a reflection of the flexibility and adaptability of law when the norm of sovereignty on which it is based is itself undergoing considerable recalibration? In short: how should we deal theoretically as well as practically with the diversification of sources of law

Reversing the gaze : can the EU import democracy from others?

Published online: 22 March 2023For over two decades, the EU has used a wide range of policy instruments to support democratic reform in third countries under the assumption that the rest of the world must learn from Europeans. This one-way democracy policy is out of tune with the times as political malaise spreads within the EU and as global geopolitics calls for genuine decolonial mindsets. In this contribution, we ask what it would take for the EU to reverse the democratic gaze. We argue that the EU could do more to open itself to the democratic innovations unfolding around the world where reformers have long been grappling with anti-democratic playbooks. We distinguish between three relevant realms, namely, that of power-sharing arrangements, democratic backsliding and regional mechanisms. We hope to offer a significant tweak to decolonization analysis and a political, normative supplement to this Special Issue's concern with outside influences on the EU.This article was published Open Access with the support from the EUI Library through the CRUI - Wiley Transformative Agreement (2020-2023

EU-topia? : a critique of the European Union as a model

The paper critically appraises the idea, both descriptively and normatively, that the European Union (EU) system can and should serve as a model for governance beyond its own borders. Engaging the postcolonial literature, it proposes a critical analysis of the idea, discourse and practice of Europe-as-a-model. We argue for a problematization of the label “model” without denying the value added by EU governance for the rest of the world. We start by developing an analytical heuristic that builds on three semantic meanings of the term model and outline the challenges of interpretation and translation that are associated with each. We then discuss these challenges along the Hegelian three-step of the model idea (thesis), its postcolonial antithesis and our constructive critique that seeks to steer a middle ground. We advocate greater reflexivity on the part of Europeans, that is, to systematically question assumptions behind their discourse and practice. If the cosmopolitan promise is to be retrieved from the radical critique of Eurocentricism, Europeans need to infuse the EU’s message and practice with an ethos of mutual recognition as a crucial feature of a post-colonial agenda for the EU’s role in the world

Global PeaceTech : unlocking the better angels of our techne

The double-edged nature of technology pervades human history. Today, the potential for peace offered by the internet, social networks, mobile devices, digital identities, AI, blockchain, big data, geospatial information, is matched by the risks of disinformation, polarisation, online violence, surveillance, data privacy, cyber-attacks, and power concentration. Faced with this knife-edge between the bright and dark sides of disruptive technologies, how do we conjure up the better angels of our nature? Many agents for change around the world have sought to employ and regulate new technologies to foster peaceful processes under the aegis of “PeaceTech” initiatives. This paper introduces “Global PeaceTech” as a new field of social inquiry in the context of International Relations and Global Affairs, with the aim of analysing the global context in which these initiatives are embedded and interconnected, in order to draw prescriptive lessons. The deployment of technology for peace entails legal, political, economic, and ethical dilemmas that transcend national borders and require new models of transnational governance. By bringing together the world of “tech-for-good” and the field of international studies broadly defined as the study of patterns of global change, “Global PeaceTech” fills a gap at the intersection between peace studies and global governance and promotes policy innovation at the transnational level. The paper offers an overview of this agenda in four parts: Part I starts from the IR literature and explores the relationship between technology, peace and war. Part II defines the main differences between PeaceTech and Global PeaceTech. Part III sets out a new research agenda in Global PeaceTech, introducing core analytical concepts and research methods, and discussing its potential political and societal impact. In Part IV, we conclude by presenting a series of example of relevant research areas as a reference for further research in Global PeaceTech