All hands on deck: levels of dependence between the EU and other international organizations in peacebuilding

Petrov, Petar; Dijkstra, Hylke; Đokić, Katarina; Zartsdahl, Peter Horne; Mahr, Ewa

doi:10.1080/07036337.2019.1622542

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their key research questions thus tend to focus on how or to what extent environmental constraints or incentives affect organisations (Finnemore, 1996). Specifically, resource dependency theorists within this school underscore competitive environment which compels institutions dependent on external resources for their survival to accommodate external pressures (Petrov et al, 2019). Other variants of sociological institutionalism, including the World Polity approach (or the Stanford School's sociological institutionalism), would argue for the importance of societal norms and relational structures for organisations to obtain, from external players, the legitimacy necessary to mobilise resources (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983; Meyer and Rowan, 1977; Meyer and Scott, 1983; Weaver, 2008: 26–27).…”

Section: Organisational Sociology and The Presence Of Word–deed Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enduring Hypocrisy as ASEAN's Organisational Problem?

Bae

2023

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper complements the limited scholarly interest in the case of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)'s consistent practice of word–deed gaps, or “hypocrisy” according to some scholars, by employing the insights of organisational sociology. Specifically, it introduces a claim that the gap between ASEAN's words and deeds can be understood as an organisational response to its material and political vulnerability in relation to its major external stakeholders, aiming to ensure its survival and adaptability. Accommodating multiple, or sometimes even conflicting, demands from various external actors, ASEAN may be able to secure its material and diplomatic engagement in developmental and political regionalism within Southeast Asia. However, ASEAN also wants to protect its local identity and practices; or it may want to avoid forced internal reforms at an undesirable scale and pace. In this context, organised hypocrisy would likely become a vital consideration for the complex institution. For ASEAN, this paper notes, these word–deed gaps reflect the way it wants to manage conflicting external demands as an international social agency.

show abstract

Section: Organisational Sociology and The Presence Of Word–deed Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enduring Hypocrisy as ASEAN's Organisational Problem?

Bae

2023

Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on existing academic literature and on the objectives put forward in the Lisbon Treaty and by the EU’s Global Strategy (2016) we identify the following as key elements of strategic communication in CSDP: European values: human rights, rule of law, equality, democracy, freedom, human dignity (European Commission, 2021); Partnership with other international organizations (Petrov et al , 2019); Civil–military synergies in EU crisis response and peacebuilding (Zartsdahl, 2018); and Legitimacy of EU Civilian and Military Operations (Wolff, 2017). …”

Section: Strategic Communication and Common Security And Defence Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic communication of EU CSDP missions – measuring the EU's external legitimacy

Molnár

Takács

Urbanovics

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The European Union’s (EU’s) Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) has gained increasing attention as the EU faces new threats and challenges from its surroundings. As part of its CSDP, the EU currently runs six military operations and 11 civilian missions. This paper aims to analyze the EU’s social media use of four CSDP missions and operations running in two regions: in the Mediterranean and in the Western Balkans. Design/methodology/approach The paper has a mixed-methods research design. A computer-assisted content analysis was conducted to extract data on the Twitter communication of the chosen missions, followed by a quantitative analysis on which elements of the EU’s strategic communication can be identified. The timeframe for investigation was set up between 1 January 2019 and 31 August 2020. Findings Patterns of communication cannot be recognized either based on regional or on the civilian-military division. The strong connectivity with the accounts of other European actors and/or institutions is striking. This study finds that the concept of local ownership can be observed only at European level, local populations of the host countries are usually not targeted. Even though several elements of the EU’s strategic communication are recurrent on the missions’ official Twitter account, Twitter communication seems to be an intra-European communication tool. Originality/value The research revealed the main features of the Twitter communication of four CSDP missions. Due to the software-assisted methodology, measuring influence score was made possible, a feature that was still missing from academic literature regarding this specific area, the EU’s CSDP.

show abstract

“…After 2008 KFOR and EULEX depended on each other to provide security in Kosovo (Petrov et al 2019). This cooperation included, firstly, the above-mentioned system of respondents to security risks (with the Kosovo Police as the first respondent).…”

Section: Un Kfor and Eulexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in the local perception of EULEX and KFOR in their security-related tasks

Mahr

2020

European Security

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article compares the local perceptions of the EU Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX) with those of NATO's mission Kosovo Force (KFOR) and investigates the reasons for observed differences. It focuses on an oft-overlooked aspect of EULEX: its broadly defined security-related tasks. Until recently, EULEX could be seen as a prominent security actor, thanks to its robust police component and its function as a second respondent. EULEX coexists in Kosovo with KFOR; while the former is civilian and the latter military, both play complementary roles in the security realm and some of their tasks are similar. However, the local perceptions of EULEX and KFOR regarding their execution of security-related tasks have differed, with only KFOR enjoying local acceptance. This article argues that such differences are caused by the missions' differently perceived powers over local actors, as manifested through their ability to exert compliance and cooperation from local actors through coercion, the ability to offer rewards and legitimacy. By going beyond the well-researched initial gratitude of Kosovo Albanians to NATO/US for intervening in 1999, this article offers a more fine-grained analysis of Kosovo Albanian and Kosovo Serbian perceptions of EULEX and KFOR.

show abstract

All hands on deck: levels of dependence between the EU and other international organizations in peacebuilding

Cited by 10 publications

References 40 publications

Enduring Hypocrisy as ASEAN's Organisational Problem?

Enduring Hypocrisy as ASEAN's Organisational Problem?

Strategic communication of EU CSDP missions – measuring the EU's external legitimacy

Differences in the local perception of EULEX and KFOR in their security-related tasks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About