The European Commission's Position in the Field of Security and Defence: An Unconventional Actor at a Meeting Point

Lavallée, Chantal

doi:10.1080/15705854.2011.622955

Cited by 18 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As a result, supranational governance has been increased in the AFSJ. Similar developments can also be observed in the CFSP/CSDP, where the European Commission has moved from a marginal to more central role in recent years (Lavallée, 2011). This transition to supranational governance in the area of security has taken place in a two-stage process.…”

Section: Supranational Governance Eu Security and The Threat Of Terrorism After 11 September 2001supporting

confidence: 64%

“…As argued by Kaunert (2010c), EU institutional actors have played a crucial role in shaping the development of the AFSJ in particular ways. Similar developments can also be observed in the CFSP/CSDP, where the European Commission has moved from a marginal to more central role in recent years (Lavallée, 2011). Member States have often been pushing towards dealing with these new security threats, which have traditionally called for national solutions.…”

Section: Supranational Governance Eu Security and The Threat Of Terrsupporting

confidence: 55%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Introduction: Supranational governance and European Union security after the Lisbon Treaty - Exogenous shocks, policy entrepreneurs and 11 September 2001

Kaunert¹,

Léonard²

2012

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The EU has been making strong inroads into the realm of security over the last few years. This is a remarkable development, since security matters used to be the preserve of states. The articles presented in this special issue all testify to the breadth of the EU security agenda, as they all try to capture some aspects of the EU’s fast-changing security policies following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty on 1 December 2009. In parallel with a broadening of the EU’s security agenda, an increase in supranational security governance in the EU can also be observed. The transition to supranational governance is reached in two ways. First, cross-border security threats generate demand for EU laws, which supranational organisations then supply. Reasons for changes in the EU polity are exogenous shocks, the fact that rule innovations are endogenous to politics, the diffusion of organisational behaviour and models of action, and policy entrepreneurship, whereby institutional entrepreneurs construct and revise ‘policy frames’, which engage other actors and define new relationships between them and chart courses of action. As the articles in this special issue demonstrate, 11 September 2001 provided such a major exogenous shock required for a change in the EU polity, which EU institutions exploited by providing increasing EU legislation, and even, as a by-product, stabilising a European legal order.

show abstract

Section: Supranational Governance Eu Security and The Threat Of Terrorism After 11 September 2001supporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Supranational Governance Eu Security and The Threat Of Terrsupporting

confidence: 55%

Introduction: Supranational governance and European Union security after the Lisbon Treaty - Exogenous shocks, policy entrepreneurs and 11 September 2001

Kaunert¹,

Léonard²

2012

Cooperation and Conflict

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Diplomatic patterns of activities are thus key forces behind the phenomenon of European integration. Interestingly, so far in the application of practice theories to diplomacy, international organizations have been particularly recurring locales, including the EU of course (Adler-Nissen, 2014;Bicchi, 2014;Cross, 2011;Forget and Rayroux, 2012;Kuus, 2014;Lachmann, 2012;Lavallée, 2011;Mérand, 2010;Zaiotti, 2012;Zwolski, 2014) but also the United Nations (Ambrosetti, 2012;Bueger, 2015aBueger, , 2015bPouliot, 2014b;Schia, 2013), NATO (Adler, 2008;Berling, 2012;Graeger and Haugevik, 2011;Pouliot, 2010) as well as the World Trade Organization (Eagleton-Pierce, 2013) and the World Bank .…”

Section: Practice Theories Of Diplomacymentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice theory and the study of diplomacy: A research agenda

Pouliot¹,

Cornut²

2015

Cooperation and Conflict

202

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This introductory article explores the multiple synergies between international practice theory and diplomatic studies. The timing for this cross-fertilizing exchange could not be better, as the study of diplomacy enters a phase of theorization while practice scholars look to confront the approach to new empirical and analytical challenges. The article first defines diplomacy as a historically and culturally contingent bundle of practices that are analytically alike in their claim to represent a given polity to the outside world. Then the key analytical wagers that practice theory makes are introduced, and debates currently raging in the discipline are briefly reviewed. Next, it is suggested what a practice theory of diplomacy may look like, discussing a variety of existing works through their common objective to explain the constitution of world politics in and through practice. Finally, a few research avenues to foster the dialogue between diplomatic studies and practice theory are outlined, centered on the nexuses of transformation and reproduction, rationality and know-how, and the technical vs. social dimensions of practices –diplomatic or otherwise.

show abstract

“…En réalité, ils font partie d'une toile complexe, composée de l'enchevêtrement de leurs relations de consultation, de coopération et de leurs échanges d'informations mutuels. Lavallée () décrit les interactions des acteurs et institutions de la sécurité européenne, sous la coordination de la Commission, dont les besoins en expertise favorisent leur accès. Au fil de leurs rencontres, ces acteurs ayant un historique professionnel commun viennent à partager une intimité telle qu'ils développent un sentiment de communauté.…”

Section: Cadre Théoriqueunclassified

Croyances et coopération : analyse du réseau des acteurs de la Politique de sécurité et de défense commune de l'UE

Barrette

2014

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Résumé Cet article aborde la Politique de sécurité et de défense commune de l'UE dans une perspective sociologique. Bien que les nationalités ont toujours une influence sur les préférences des acteurs de la défense européenne, elles ne sont, en revanche, pas liées à la coopération entre les acteurs dans un champ qui s'est trangouvernementalisé en une décennie. À l'aide de l'analyse de réseaux sociaux, nous comparons les relations de coopération d'un échantillon d'acteurs clefs oeuvrant dans ce champ politique avec leurs croyances sur certains enjeux de la PSDC, à partir d'une base de données originale. Conformément à notre cadre théorique, l'advocacy coalition framework, nous découvrons que l'intensification des relations de coopération entre les acteurs est liée à la convergence des certaines catégories de croyances sur des enjeux de la défense européenne.

show abstract

The European Commission's Position in the Field of Security and Defence: An Unconventional Actor at a Meeting Point

Cited by 18 publications

References 20 publications

Introduction: Supranational governance and European Union security after the Lisbon Treaty - Exogenous shocks, policy entrepreneurs and 11 September 2001

Introduction: Supranational governance and European Union security after the Lisbon Treaty - Exogenous shocks, policy entrepreneurs and 11 September 2001

Practice theory and the study of diplomacy: A research agenda

Croyances et coopération : analyse du réseau des acteurs de la Politique de sécurité et de défense commune de l'UE

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About