European Union Action Research Articles

Brussels‐Based Think Tanks in Times of Crisis: Examining Think Tank Climate Publication and Networking Activities During Brexit

AbstractThe European Union (EU) relies on the input of scientific knowledge and external policy advice to develop and justify its climate policy. This link between the EU and external policy actors, including Brussels‐based think tanks, has emboldened amid multiple crises faced by the EU. Using crisis, Brussels‐based think tanks may alter their activities by acting strategically in attempts to influence EU policy‐making and enhance their prominence by promoting ideas, knowledge and policy recommendations. This research note sets out to examine the climate policy link between the EU and Brussels‐based think tanks and the changing activities of Brussels‐based think tanks during the Brexit crisis, given Brexit has raised questions around the EU's ability to continually develop ambitious climate policy and sustain its climate leadership. Drawing on a dataset of over 800 think tank documents and applying a time‐series regression and descriptive social network analysis, changes in the climate‐related publication productivity and co‐authorship networking activities of three Brussels‐based think tanks – Bruegel, CEPS and EPC – are examined before and after the Brexit referendum. The results show that Brussels‐based think tanks' climate‐related publication productivity and their co‐authorship networking activities change before and after the Brexit referendum, but in different ways, highlighting the need to consider the characteristics of individual think tanks vis‐à‐vis their role in EU policy‐making.

Same, same but different? A Discourse Network Analysis of the EU’s framings of refugee arrivals in 2015 and 2022

ABSTRACT The European Union (EU) experienced two major instances of refugee influx: in 2015, refugees, mainly from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq fled civil war, persecution, and dire conditions in neighbouring countries and in 2022, Ukrainians fled from Russia’s full-scale invasion. Fusing theoretical insights on framing and crisification of migration, we ask: How do EU actors frame situations of refugee mass influx? Employing a Discourse Network Analysis, we examine EU representatives’ framing of both instances with respect to three analytical foci: (1) who or what they considered to be in crisis, (2) their framing of refugees; and (3) who they saw to be responsible for solving the crisis. We show how, in 2015, EU representatives framed mass displacement predominantly as a crisis at and of Europe’s borders, and refugees as threats to Member States’ public, economic and cultural security. In contrast, in 2022, crisis framings are almost absent or pertain to Ukraine’s – and by extension the EU’s – security. Ukrainian protection seekers are framed as ethnically and culturally similar and their protection as a humanitarian imperative. Our analysis empirically substantiates debates about double standards in refugee governance and draws attention to actor constellations and the factors that shape crisification of mobility.

Not anxious enough: The discursive articulation of ontological security in the European Parliament

Abstract This paper makes the case for a discursive understanding of ontological security and demonstrates the utility of such an approach in an analysis of European Parliament (EP) debates between 1990 and 2020. We argue that articulations of ontological (in)security operate through the (re)inscription of a set of metanarratives in what we call ‘discursive nodal points’. Building on an extensive analysis of EP debates over 30 years, we demonstrate that in contrast to the prevailing view of the European Union (EU) as an ‘anxious community’, at least on the political level, EU actors remain surprisingly confident in the European project. While they do invoke challenges to the EU, they see these as incentives to strengthen the integration project and often consider operating in crisis mode as an essential EU characteristic. In doing so, they draw on modernist metanarratives of progress, control, and power to construct an ontologically secure EU. We argue that the future ontological security of the EU will partly depend on allowing for more ambiguity in this modernist narrative without accepting a nationalist counter-narrative that undermines the idea of European integration.

English as a lingua franca discourse in European Union higher education and research policy

The use of English as lingua franca in mainland Europe’s higher education and research sectors has rapidly expanded over the past several decades. Despite these expansions, critics claim that there is a conspicuous absence of European Union (EU) language policy concerned with the use of English as a “contact” language in education and research contexts. This study attempts to assess these claims by conducting a comparative analysis of English as a lingua franca discourse in the policy declarations and communications of two EU actors with remits for higher education and research – the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and the European Research Area (ERA). Using methods that draw on critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics, I compiled specialised corpora consisting of the policy documents published by the EHEA and the ERA over the past twenty years. I then used the corpus analysis tool Sketch Engine and a reference corpus of general EU discourse to assess how often and in what ways language policy was considered. The analysis reveals intra-institutional conflicts in how language is conceptualised between policy actors and across policy portfolios in the EU. The findings also confirm the absence of explicit discourse on the use of English in academic and research contexts over the institutional lifetimes of two actors with remits for these sectors. The study highlights the persistence of a “top-down/bottom-up” conceptual gap at the heart of EU language policymaking regarding English as a lingua franca in European higher education and research.

Finally coming of age? EU foreign and security policy after Ukraine

ABSTRACT The war on Ukraine is the most severe security crisis that Europe, and the European Union (EU), has faced since World War II. Contrary to what many expected, the EU responded quickly and comprehensively to the Russian invasion. How, if in any way, does the EU’s response to the war on Ukraine suggest that the EU is coming of age in the foreign and security domain? By exploring EU policies and actions across three key maturation processes, our analysis finds that the EU has become a more mature foreign policy actor, in a process that started well before the Russian full scale invasion but has escalated since then. With its broad response to the war on Ukraine, the EU has shown an increased ability to take quick decisions, provide resources and combine various instruments in response to a crisis (increased decision-making ability); it is taking on a clearer foreign policy role/identity as a principled pragmatist and crisis manager (more stable identity status); and this plays out in its relations with the US, in NATO and bilaterally (more salient and defined relations).

The European Union’s securitisation of global health: was COVID-19 a Zeitenwende?

ABSTRACT Almost 30 years since the Maastricht Treaty provided an explicit legal basis in the health realm, the European Union (EU) declared global health an “essential pillar” of its external action. Yet, it is still seeking to “come of age” as a global health actor. This might be facilitated by the securitisation of health, which was evident during the COVID-19 crisis, often framed as a war against a common enemy. However, the literature is yet to establish whether these analogies were systematically embraced by EU institutions, signalling a Zeitenwende – or “epochal tectonic shift” – in the EU’s health-related discourse. Through an analysis of key strategic documents and public statements, this article determines the extent to which COVID-19 drove the attempted securitisation of global health in the EU. Relatedly, it discusses whether this framing might be conducive to an enhanced EU actorness on the world stage. The article concludes that, after COVID-19 struck, some EU institutions did intensify their “health security” rhetoric in pursuit of an expanded, more “mature” role. While this shift was neither widespread nor enduring enough to be characterised as “epochal”, it does denote the EU’s turn towards a less altruistic conception of its global health action.

EU resilience in investment protection: a case for revisiting and reinforcing the loyalty principle in EU external relations

Abstract This article explores the concept of European Union (EU) resilience in the area of investment protection and Investor–State dispute settlement. The article adopts a functional approach to investment protection and suggests that reforming dispute settlement procedures in line with current Commission initiatives is key to promoting open strategic autonomy for the EU. Support for those initiatives is however weak, also among EU Member States. It is argued that EU resilience requires new tools for more unity and coherence in external EU action, both generally and for the reform of Investor–State dispute settlement in particular. The tool devised here is an increased loyalty standard coupled with a justification test, based on both a modernized comprehensive reading of loyalty obligations in primary law and the effectiveness principle and rationale as applied in case law. The novel approach promises significantly better results in terms of commanding coherence in external action while fully respecting the principle of conferred powers. It challenges traditional power dynamics, but incorporates a bold vision for external EU action that is truly autonomous and assertive.

Who is to blame? Stories of European Union migration governance in Italian, Maltese, and Spanish newspapers

AbstractWhile scholars have investigated how media frame human mobility and securitize irregular border crossings, little research has been dedicated to how European Union (EU) actors are portrayed in media coverage of migration across the Mediterranean. By integrating framing into narrative analysis through the Narrative Policy Framework, our article fills this gap. Specifically, we provide a content analysis of Italian, Maltese, and Spanish newspapers and identify the key narratives underlying the portrayal of specific EU actors. We show that, overall, lack of EU solidarity is the prevalent issue in Italian, Maltese, and Spanish newspapers alike, followed by the alleged inefficiency of EU actors. Accordingly, the EU and its key actors are regularly narrated as either villains, responsible for the crisis and deserting member states in need of solidarity, or as weaklings unable to take effective action. These narratives appear remarkably consistent across countries, over time, and newspapers with different ideological orientation.

Less-advanced regions in EU innovation networks: Could nanotechnology represent a possible trigger for path upgrading?

This paper examines whether nanotechnology projects funded under the European Union (EU) Framework Programmes (FPs) are a possible trigger for path upgrading (i.e., infusion of new technologies in existing traditional sectors) in less-advanced regions. First, the adoption of cluster analysis and a set of key indicators (i.e., technological intensity, scientific excellence, human capital, and research and development expenditure) allowed us to distinguish between 79 more-advanced and 127 less-advanced EU regions. Subsequently, through social network analysis and nonparametric testing we were able to demonstrate how the less-advanced EU regions (average degree centrality: 40.5) play a marginal role compared with the more-advanced ones (average degree centrality: 98.5) in the nanotechnology network created within Horizon 2020-i.e., the EU programming cycle implemented in the 2014-2020 period. Despite this, we observed that a few less-advanced regions (33 out of 127) were able to score higher than the EU median in terms of participation in the targeted nanotechnology network, thus benefiting from relevant knowledge flows potentially leading to re-industrialization processes. The adoption of qualitative comparative analysis allowed us to determine which combinations of key innovation, scientific and socioeconomic factors could facilitate such beneficial interregional interactions and related knowledge exchange in these types of regions (i.e., primarily what we defined as "relative innovativeness," excellence in nanotechnology research and a comparatively high level of gross domestic product per capita). Our empirical results provided some clear policy implications. For instance, the necessity to I) remove the barriers impeding a more balanced participation to promote a widespread renewal of traditional industries in less-advanced regions and II) implement coordinated EU and domestic actions designed to encourage the involvement of the great majority of the less-advanced regions, which remain marginal in the periodically launched FPs.

Equal in East and West? Regional anti-gender discourses and heterogeneity of the European Commission’s discursive protection of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans* and intersex rights

Recent research shows that lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans* and intersex (LGBTI) rights have become a core value of the European Union. Concurrently, hostility towards LGBTI rights is increasing across the European Union, including through anti-gender mobilisations, which reject ‘gender ideology’. This study employs sequential discourse analyses to discover: (1) the regional specificities in anti-gender discourse; and (2) whether the European Commission is discursively responsive to these differences. We find that the European Commission adapts its LGBTI discourse to actual and expected regional specificities, both in the issues discussed and in the frames employed. These conclusions are relevant because they show that European Union discourse on LGBTI rights is not homogeneous and may be strategically adapted to regional contexts, which has implications for the purported universal protection of LGBTI rights in the European Union. Additionally, these findings shed light on the important but neglected role that social mobilisations play in sensitising European Union actors to regional variation in political attitudes and values.

Prednosti i nedostaci integracije u Evropsku uniju - istraživanje među studentima prve godine medicine u Srbiji

Aim: The study aimed to identify factors associated with pro-integration attitudes to the European Union (EU) among Serbian medical freshmen to promote integration. Methods: In the period from 2010 to 2021, within the scope of the distance learning module "Medicine & Society", a total of 1333 freshmen of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Belgrade (1333/1940, i.e., response rate 68.7%) has responded to the semi-structured questionnaire inquiring their perception of the EU integration advantages and disadvantages. The association of the pro-EU attitude (vs cons-EU / undecided) with perceived advantages and disadvantages was presented using the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: A total of 48.5% of respondents were pro-EU integration, 42.7% were undecided and 8.9% were cons-EU (i.e., 585, 525, and 107, respectively) integration of Serbia. The pro-EU attitude was 55% more likely among male respondents (OR: 1.55, 95% CI:1.14-2.10), among respondents who were able to identify advantages of EU integration such as easier mobility (OR: 2.87, 95% CI: 1.80-4.57), variety of job opportunities (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.45-2.93), and among those for whom competition at the EU healthcare market is not a disadvantage of the EU-integration (OR: 8.56, 95% CI: 1.79-40.92). The pro-EU attitude was less likely among respondents who identified high emigration of medical doctors as a disadvantage of the EU integration, by 45% (OR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.36-0.84). Conclusion: During the last decade, the share of Serbian medical freshmen with pro-EU and undecided attitudes suggests the need for a stronger international initiative of EU and national actors. Advantages such as easier mobility, competition in the EU healthcare market, and a variety of employment opportunities promote an integrationist attitude, in contrast to the large emigration of medical doctors.

Die Europäische Union im Spannungsfeld von Daten- und Geopolitik – eine Analyse ihrer strategischen Ausrichtung anhand des Konzepts der Grenzarbeit

Data is increasingly recognized as central in addressing social, political, and economic challenges. This article utilizes the concept of boundary work to illustrate how the European Union (EU) advances its strategic interests through data and market control. Specifically, the EU aims to enhance the competitiveness of European companies and address social issues while upholding European values. Through the analysis of three case studies – recent data legislation, the promotion of common European data spaces, and the IPCEI-CIS on cloud edge computing – the article evaluates the effectiveness of EU actions in this complex arena. Consequently, it contributes to the growing literature examining the EU’s evolving role as a geopolitical actor, framing these endeavors as a new form of industrial policy in the data economy.

Unmasking the Term 'Dual Use' in EU Spyware Export Control

Abstract Spyware has been heralded as an essential tool for law enforcement and intelligence operations. However, examples abound of states that use it in a manner that violates human rights as well as undermines democracy and the rule of law. Against this backdrop, the European Union (EU) Dual-use Regulation was recast in 2021. It now makes an effort to control the export of cyber surveillance technologies, including spyware, which it defines as dual use. What narrative is created by framing spyware as ‘dual use’? This article illustrates how the term 'dual use' roots in a distinction between ‘peaceful’ and ‘non-peaceful’, or ‘civil’ and ‘military’ uses, and has gradually become associated with a broader dichotomy between ‘legitimate’ and ‘illegitimate’ purposes. Historically, this duality served not only to articulate the risks posed by certain technologies and indicate the rationale for their export control but also to justify their trade. Yet recourse by EU actors to dual use tilts the EU discourse on spyware export control towards state-centric security considerations and commercial interests over human rights. Unmasking how the term transposes a conceptually flawed, deceptive and empty duality to the spyware context, this article shows that the very concept of dual use may undermine human rights safeguards in spyware export control.

Ready to Manage a Global Pandemic? Explaining the Involvement of the EU in the 2013–2016 Ebola Outbreak

Abstract A virulent outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease killed thousands of individuals between December 2013 and June 2016. The risk of contagion among European Union (EU) citizens increased its salience to unprecedented levels for an outbreak that primarily affected sub-Saharan Africa. Considering the need for analyzing recent external transboundary outbreak responses in the post-COVID-19 era, this paper explains the involvement of the EU in the Ebola outbreak. By combining descriptive social network analysis with fourteen semi-structured interviews, it provides original insights into European politics and crisis management scholarship. The findings partially support theoretical expectations regarding the relevance of postcolonial ties and institutional frameworks in the reaction. It also suggests that neorealist literature fails to capture its full complexity. Hence, institutional deficiencies explain the low centrality and flawed coordination among EU actors in the response. Additionally, postcolonial ties with the affected countries facilitated the involvement of Western governments in the reaction. However, not all former colonial powers were equally involved in the response. Finally, countries that registered infections did not necessarily play central roles in this effort. These findings have broader implications for the involvement of the EU in future external outbreaks, including the need for establishing clearer and explicit allocations of competences.

The EU's CBAM and Its ‘Significant Others’: Three Perspectives on the Political Fallout from Europe's Unilateral Climate Policy Initiative

AbstractAs part of the European Green Deal, the European Commission has launched a tool to protect the fulfilment of Europe's climate policy targets – the carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM). It is thought that the CBAM will spark stiff resistance from Europe's external trade partners, potentially undermining the initiative. How this plays out will depend in part on who the opponents and potential allies are – and how the European Union (EU) engages with them. But which non‐EU countries have a stake in the CBAM? The criteria for selecting third countries that are relevant for the CBAM are often implicit, which can lead to contradictory policy analyses and confused climate diplomacy. This research note compares three different perspectives that result in different lists of non‐EU countries that are important for the success of the CBAM. Awareness of these three perspectives amongst EU actors can help the CBAM succeed.

Mind the gap! Organized hypocrisy in EU cooperation with Southern neighbor countries on international protection

Abstract The European Union (EU) has reacted to the migration crises of the last decade with growing externalization of migration management to neighbor countries often accused of not respecting human rights and individual liberties. Focusing on EU cooperation with the Southern neighborhood, as defined within the European Neighborhood Policy (ENP) framework, this paper investigates the recent developments in the EU's external migration policies, demonstrating that there is a gap between EU discourses and policy instruments identified by the EU as strategic tools of the European migration and asylum policy (MAP). Five Southern neighbor countries (SNCs) have been selected, Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Jordan, and Lebanon, to assess the extent to which the EU, when cooperating on migration and asylum issues, places international protection at risk instead of playing the role of humanitarian actor in accordance with the ideals and principles it defends. The research critically analyzes the EU's cooperation with SNCs concerning migration, as developed via international agreements, action plans, and mobility partnerships under the umbrella of the ENP. In particular, it explores the incompatibility between the European MAP instruments and international protection. MAP, the qualitative analysis shows, represents a clear mismatch between EU talk and action, outlining another case of organized hypocrisy.

Towards a rights-based approach: victims of violent crime, state-funded compensation and the European Union

This article examines the legal provision of state compensation for victims of violent crime in the European Union (EU). In examining the provisions of Directive 2004/80/EC relating to compensation to crime victims, this article analyses the historical development of EU competencies in the fields of criminal justice and victims’ rights. Additionally, the legislative history of Directive 2004/80/EC is considered, as is the interpretation given to the provisions of this Directive by the Court of Justice of the EU. It is demonstrated that the scope of protection, offered to victims of violent crime through Directive 2004/80/EC, has been limited and uncertain as a result of this complicated legislative history and inconsistent CJEU interpretation. Furthermore, this article examines developments in the context of EU action in the field of state-funded compensation in light of the adoption of both the Lisbon Treaty in 2009 and the Victims’ Rights Directive in 2012. With the recent development of a genuine rights-based approach to victim support in EU law and policy, this article highlights priorities for legal reform at the EU level in the context of state-funded compensation.

(De‐)politicization Discourse Strategies: The Case of Trade

AbstractExamining (de‐)politicization as an actor‐driven phenomenon, this study asks: How and to what extent do actors in the public sphere attempt to (de‐)politicize European Union (EU) policies? (De‐)politicization is understood not only as a process but also as the deliberate framing of debates over EU issues at a domestic level. This paper conceptualizes (de‐)politicization acts in the public sphere and shows how these can be detected empirically through a claim‐level (de‐)politicization index. This approach is applied to a database of evaluations (claims) on EU trade, by EU actors, national executive actors and societal actors, surrounding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement, in the media of six Member States (Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Poland, and Denmark). Whilst all kinds of actors may engage in (de‐)politicization, the analysis of the index allows us to determine if a certain category of actors does so to a greater or lesser extent compared with others.

Military artificial intelligence as power: consideration for European Union actorness

Military artificial intelligence as power: consideration for European Union actorness

Same-sex families’ rights and the European Union: incompatible or promising relationship?

Abstract This article deals with the role of the European Union (EU) in enhancing rights of same-sex couples and their children (‘rainbow families’). It describes EU actions in this area and examines what influence they can have within the Member States, using the Czech Republic as a case study. The article argues that, despite the EU’s general lack of competence in family law matters, the relationship between the EU and rainbow families’ rights, in theory, no longer appears incompatible, but rather promising, as the EU bodies have found ways to address these issues. In practical terms. However, the question raised in this article’s title cannot be definitively answered without data from the Member States. Here, the findings from the Czech Republic demonstrate that the EU law’s potential has not been fulfilled in practice yet. Therefore, it would be too soon to celebrate the EU as a significant player in the rainbow families’ rights arena. As the Czech example suggests, if the EU wants to truly enhance rainbow families’ rights, it will probably need to be more explicit about that because the Member States, particularly their national courts, may not find or pave the way to utilize EU law themselves.