在多个方面建立一致性:欧盟-印度自由贸易协定谈判期间印度精英对欧盟规则在印度推广的看法(2007-2013)

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Marie Sophie Peffenköver
{"title":"在多个方面建立一致性:欧盟-印度自由贸易协定谈判期间印度精英对欧盟规则在印度推广的看法(2007-2013)","authors":"Marie Sophie Peffenköver","doi":"10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>How does the European Union export its rules and regulations to its partners during free trade negotiations? While the research fields on EU foreign policy promotion abroad and external perceptions seem to have settled on the notion that the success of EU rule export increases with the internalization of the negotiation partner’s wants, this article challenges this academic consensus. Scrutinizing the EU-India free trade negotiations (2007–2013) where the perception of EU norms turned from positive to inherently negative, the article shows that the Commission successfully constructed the notion of congruence between European and Indian standards on multiple (international, bilateral, regional) fronts during an initial “honeymoon phase” (2007–2011). Yet, once the negotiations’ focus shifted to hard bargaining over core interests, the notion of congruence gave way to tensions and discrepancies, so that perceptions turned negative over the “cooldown” (2011–2013). Analysing claims made by EU and Indian policy officials in four Indian English-speaking quality newspapers—<i>Times of India</i>, <i>Hindustan Times</i>, <i>Hindu Business Line</i> and the <i>Business Standard</i>—the article suggests that the discursive construction of congruence with the local context, however successful, cannot prevail against battles over core interests. Hence, this article provides starting points for new academic junctures in that it introduces a more nuanced understanding of the EU’s approach to rule promotion abroad.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45680,"journal":{"name":"Asia Europe Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Congruence-building on multiple fronts: Indian elite perceptions of EU rule promotion in India during the EU-India FTA negotiations (2007–2013)\",\"authors\":\"Marie Sophie Peffenköver\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>How does the European Union export its rules and regulations to its partners during free trade negotiations? While the research fields on EU foreign policy promotion abroad and external perceptions seem to have settled on the notion that the success of EU rule export increases with the internalization of the negotiation partner’s wants, this article challenges this academic consensus. Scrutinizing the EU-India free trade negotiations (2007–2013) where the perception of EU norms turned from positive to inherently negative, the article shows that the Commission successfully constructed the notion of congruence between European and Indian standards on multiple (international, bilateral, regional) fronts during an initial “honeymoon phase” (2007–2011). Yet, once the negotiations’ focus shifted to hard bargaining over core interests, the notion of congruence gave way to tensions and discrepancies, so that perceptions turned negative over the “cooldown” (2011–2013). Analysing claims made by EU and Indian policy officials in four Indian English-speaking quality newspapers—<i>Times of India</i>, <i>Hindustan Times</i>, <i>Hindu Business Line</i> and the <i>Business Standard</i>—the article suggests that the discursive construction of congruence with the local context, however successful, cannot prevail against battles over core interests. Hence, this article provides starting points for new academic junctures in that it introduces a more nuanced understanding of the EU’s approach to rule promotion abroad.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia Europe Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia Europe Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia Europe Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10308-020-00591-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在自由贸易谈判中,欧盟如何向其合作伙伴输出其规则和条例?虽然欧盟对外政策推广研究领域和外部认知似乎已经达成共识,即欧盟规则输出的成功程度随着谈判伙伴需求的内部化而增加,但本文对这一学术共识提出了挑战。仔细审视欧盟-印度自由贸易谈判(2007-2013),其中对欧盟规范的看法从积极转变为固有的消极,文章表明,在最初的“蜜月阶段”(2007-2011),委员会成功地构建了欧洲和印度标准在多个(国际、双边、地区)方面的一致性概念。然而,一旦谈判的焦点转移到核心利益的艰难谈判上,一致性的概念就会让位于紧张和差异,因此在“冷却期”(2011-2013)期间,人们的看法就会变得消极。文章分析了欧盟和印度政策官员在四份印度英语高质量报纸——《印度时报》、《印度斯坦时报》、《印度商业线》和《商业标准》上发表的言论,指出与当地语境相一致的话语构建无论多么成功,都无法战胜围绕核心利益的斗争。因此,本文为新的学术转折点提供了起点,因为它对欧盟在国外推广规则的方法进行了更细致的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Congruence-building on multiple fronts: Indian elite perceptions of EU rule promotion in India during the EU-India FTA negotiations (2007–2013)

How does the European Union export its rules and regulations to its partners during free trade negotiations? While the research fields on EU foreign policy promotion abroad and external perceptions seem to have settled on the notion that the success of EU rule export increases with the internalization of the negotiation partner’s wants, this article challenges this academic consensus. Scrutinizing the EU-India free trade negotiations (2007–2013) where the perception of EU norms turned from positive to inherently negative, the article shows that the Commission successfully constructed the notion of congruence between European and Indian standards on multiple (international, bilateral, regional) fronts during an initial “honeymoon phase” (2007–2011). Yet, once the negotiations’ focus shifted to hard bargaining over core interests, the notion of congruence gave way to tensions and discrepancies, so that perceptions turned negative over the “cooldown” (2011–2013). Analysing claims made by EU and Indian policy officials in four Indian English-speaking quality newspapers—Times of India, Hindustan Times, Hindu Business Line and the Business Standard—the article suggests that the discursive construction of congruence with the local context, however successful, cannot prevail against battles over core interests. Hence, this article provides starting points for new academic junctures in that it introduces a more nuanced understanding of the EU’s approach to rule promotion abroad.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Asia Europe Journal
Asia Europe Journal INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
6.20%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: The Asia-Europe Journal is a quarterly journal dedicated to publishing quality academic papers and policy discussions on common challenges facing Asia and Europe that help to shape narratives on the common futures - including both risks and opportunities - of Asia and Europe. The Journal welcomes academically and intellectually rigorous research papers as well as topical policy briefs and thought pieces on issues of bi-regional interest, including management and political economy, innovation, security studies, regional and global governance, as well as on relevant socio-cultural developments and historical events. Officially cited as: Asia Eur J
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信