Search results

This article argues that the European External Action Service (EEAS) could be conceptualized as an interstitial organization -- that is, an organization emerging in interstices between various organizational fields and recombining physical, informational, financial, legal and legitimacy resources stemming from organizations belonging to these different organizational fields. This interstitial status creates a situation in which there are different and sometimes conflicting organizational principles and practices introduced within the organization of the EEAS and different and sometimes conflicting sets of expectations in relation to the Service from actors within the organization as well as from outside. Based on empirical data collected in interviews with EEAS officials and study of official documents in 2011 and 2012, the article documents the interstitial nature of the EEAS. In broader terms, the emergence of the EEAS hence provides a fertile ground for studying patterns of institutional innovation in organizational fields via the establishment of interstitial organizations. Adapted from the source document.

Adapted from the source document.

Adapted from the source document.

The European Defence Agency (EDA) works in a policy area traditionally characterised by high diversity among actors regarding basic notions of what level of integration and which principles of interaction in the defence sector are appropriate for the EU, which countries should participate in defence cooperation, and what coordination mechanisms and instruments should be used. In all these dimensions, the EDA has been a flashpoint of institutional logics representing different visions of how various aspects of defence integration in the EU should be organised. There are tensions between the logic of supranational regulation and the logic of intergovernmental networking; between the logic of defence sovereignty and the logic of pooled defence resources; between the Europeanist and the Euro-Atlanticist logic; and finally between the logics of liberalisation and Europeanisation of the defence market. Studying the ways in which the collisions of institutional logics are being accommodated by the EDA can contribute to greater understanding of the emerging political order of European defence. Adapted from the source document.

Public diplomacy represents an opportunity for small and medium-sized states to gain influence and shape international agenda in ways that go beyond their limited hard power resources (related to size, military and economic strength). The literature on public diplomacy has been dominated by accounts of major powers, and the character of public diplomacy performed by small and medium-sized states has hardly been explored so far. Based on an elaboration of the concept of soft power as being based on image and value assets of societal actors, this paper suggests a definition of public diplomacy as including activities by the state abroad and at home with the aim of increasing its attractiveness. Three areas in which the public diplomacy strategies of small and medium-sized states differ from the corresponding activities of major powers are then suggested. Finally, the development of public diplomacy strategies and their coordination by the foreign ministries of Canada and Norway - two countries with widely similar foreign policy agendas but different domestic constituencies - are then described and compared. The paper concludes by suggesting that successful public diplomacy by small and medium-sized states is well served by positioning the state not only in locally attractive image and value platforms, but also in their global equivalents. Adapted from the source document.

Describes the foreign policy practice of "eDiscussions," ie, online public consultations, hosted by Foreign Affairs Canada & considers the degree to which this indicates the emergence of a "responsive foreign policy making." Responsiveness as a structural component of political & diplomatic representation is discussed, outlining four modes of responsiveness, before elaborating on the eDiscussion process, including the extent of public involvement. Institutional & organizational challenges created by eDiscussions are considered, contending that this process hinges on the foreign ministry's ability to frame public debates & absorb public inputs effectively. Whether eDiscussions represent improved responsiveness or amount to only a new public diplomacy tool is contemplated. D. Edelman

Diplomacy as a framework of principles, rules & organized patterns of behaviour regulating interstate relations in the Westphalian system of states is challenged by the process of European integration. This article conceptualizes diplomacy & its change using two new institutionalist perspectives that provide us with complementary insights into the nature of diplomacy as an institution. These are then applied to the study of diplomacy in the EU. The process of European integration is shown as challenging the institution of diplomacy at three levels: (a) the intra-European bilateral relations; (b) the multilateral setting of the Council; & (c) the emerging capacity of the EU to conduct external diplomatic relations with third states. The article assesses change in & of diplomacy at these levels. 57 References. Adapted from the source document.

Besides challenging basic principles of interstate relations in Europe, the process of European integration also has profound impact on the organization & conduct of diplomacy, & at a more general level also on diplomacy as an institution encompassing a set of norms, rules & procedures regulating relations between states. The article first outlines ways how diplomacy is changing in the context of European integration. Secondly, the emerging role of national foreign ministries is described in terms of three emerging arenas for national diplomacy within the framework of the EU. Finally, ways in which the Slovak MFA has related to this set of developments are addressed. 37 References. Adapted from the source document.

What is special about small states? How do they adapt their policies and patterns of governance to meet turbulent times such as a new security environment and the international financial crisis? Answers to these and further questions are provided by experts.

What are the constraints on and opportunities of governance of small states in an interdependent and increasingly turbulent global setting? How do small states deal with radical changes in the international environment? What is the role of political institutions in facilitating and constraining policy responses to a rapidly changing international environment? How can political leadership contribute to stability in times of change? This book seeks to answer these questions by taking a comparative perspective on the processes of change and adaptation in the governance of Norway and Slovakia. These two small European states with highly open economies have been exposed to the same set of global turbulences related to post Cold War changes in the security environment and the global financial crisis; they are also facing internal challenges that spring from rapidly rising expectations while demographic shifts put pressure on their welfare systems. Their governance structures and processes are informed by their different political-administrative cultures, different history and levels of stability of democratic governance structures and, indeed, by their different modes of attachment to the European Union and other regional integration frameworks. These differences and a comparative approach in exploring the questions raised above can shed light not only on the specific forms of adaptation of governance structures in two small European states, but also generate insights into the role of integration structures in facilitating and constraining change.

This study demonstrates how the core-periphery model proposed by Holsti is insufficient on its own in approaching the IR discipline in Slovakia. The authors argue for adding another dimension to this model -- one that involves intertwining academic spaces on the national, regional and global level. First, they conceptualize Slovak IR as a "barbaricum" (lying inside and outside IR civilization). They then present their empirical findings and present examples of IR publications anchored in other academic disciplines such as political science and cultural studies. Adapted from the source document.