Agency of the EU in the Mirror of Organizational Theory

The European Union plays a salient role in the global arena. Yet to conceptualize its global role is a tough proposition if we remain within the scope of traditional international relations theory characterized by state­centrism. Indeed, the EU is commonly believed to be a sui generis entity, something between a state and an international organization. In the 2000s its position in international relations was commonly defined through the concept of “normative power”. However, this framework seems insufficient to explain diversity of the roles the EU assumes in international politics. Organization theory provides a partial solution to this puzzle, especially the meta­organization concept developed on its basis. They allow to treat both the EU and its member­states as organizations (although each of a different kind), which interact in the sphere of global governance, de facto competing with each other for authority. When compared to individuals, the smaller organizations composing meta­organizations emerge as less manageable. Thus, it is more problematic for a meta­organization, than for an organization per se, which includes individuals, to function as the global actor that it definitely is. In the international arena a meta­organization faces limitations that states never have. That notwithstanding, the establishment and maintenance of norms that states are expected to follow is, without doubt, of primary importance for meta­organizations. In this article EU efforts in regional and global coordination of financial transaction taxes, as well as EU participation in the global climate governance regime are presented as two examples which substantiate the specifics of its functioning in the global environment in the capacity of a meta­organization.

1. (2007). Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Consolidated version of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - Protocols - Annexes - Declarations annexed to the Final Act of the Intergovernmental Conference which adopted the Treaty of Lisbon, signed on 13 December 2007 - Tables of equivalences. Official Journal C 326. 26/10/2012. P. 0001 – 0390. URL: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/ ?uri=CELEX:12012E/TXT&from=EN

2. Ahrne G., Brunsson N. (2000). How much do meta-organizations affect their members? Paper presented at SGIR 7th Pan-European International Relations Conference. 9–11 September. Stockholm. URL: http://www.eisa-net.org/be-bruga/eisa/files/events/stockholm/Meta-organizations.pdf

3. Ahrne G., Brunsson N. (2008). Meta-organizations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. 200 p.

4. Ahrne G., Brunsson N. Organizations and Meta-Organizations. Scandinavian Journal of Management. Vol. 21. № 4. P. 429–449. URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/09565221/21

5. Arellano-Gault D., Demortain D., Rouillard C., Thoenig J.-C. (2013). Bringing public organization and organizing back in. Organization Studies. Vol. 34. № 2. P. 145–167.

6. Baranovsky V.G., Ivanova N.I. (eds) (2015). Global'noeupravlenie: vozmozhnostiiriski [Global governance: opportunities and risks]. M.: IMEMO RAN. 315 p. URL: http://www.imemo.ru/files/File/ru/publ/2015/2015_009_full.pdf

7. Biermann F., Pattberg P., van Asselt H., Zelli F. (2009). The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis. Global Environmental Politics. Vol. 9. № 4. P. 14–40. URL: http://www.glogov.org/images/doc/9.4.biermann

8. Brummer K. (2009). Imposing Sanctions: The Not So ‘Normative Power Europe. European Foreign Affairs Review. Vol. 14. № 2. P.191–207.

9. De Bardeleben J. (2012). Applying Constructivism to Understanding EU–Russia Relations. International Politics. № 49. P 418–433. DOI: 10.1057/ip.2012.8

10. Del Biondo K. (2012). Norms, self-interest and effectiveness: explaining double standards in EU reactions to violations of democratic principles in Sub-Saharan Africa. Afrika Focus. Vol. 25. № 2. P. 109-120. URL: http://www.gap.ugent.be/africafocus/pdf/2012Vol25_2_AF_DelBiondo.pdf

11. Fligstein N. (2001). Organizations: Theoretical debates and the scope of organizational theory. 42 р. URL: http://sociology.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/faculty/fligstein/inter.handbook.paper.pdf

12. Garelli S. (2012). The European Union’s Promotion of Regional Economic Integration in Southeast Asia: Norms, Markets or Both? Bruges Political Research Papers / Cahiers de recherchepolitique de Bruges. № 25. 37 p.

13. Rosenau J., Czempiel E.-O. (eds) (1992). Governance without Government: Order and Change in World Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992. 311 p.

14. Grauls S., Stahl A. (2010). European development policy towards sub-Saharan Africa: Challenges of the grow ing Chinese presence. mulations. № 7. URL:http://www.revue-emulations.net/archives/n7/grauls Hill C., Smith M. (2011). International Relations and the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2nd edition. 557 р.

15. Hyde-Price A. (2006). ‘Normative’ power Europe: a realist critique. Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 13. № 2. P.217–234. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501760500451634

16. Jupille J., Caporaso, J.A., Checkel J.T. Integrating institutions: Rationalism, constructivism, and the study of the European Union. Comparative Political Studies. Vol. 36. №1–2. P. 7–40.

17. Kerwer D. (2013). International organizations as meta-organizations: The case of the European Union. Journal of International Organizations Studies. №4. P. 40–53. URL: http://journal-iostudies.org/sites/journal-iostudies.org/files/JIOS2013-special-issue_Kerwer.pdf

18. Kreppel A. (2012). The normalization of the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 19. №5. P. 635–645. URL: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/LLp/events/2013/documents/jm_cluster/the_ normalization_of_the_eu_amie_kreppel-s_article.pdf

19. Krohn F. (2009). What Kind of Power? The EU as an International Actor. Atlantic-Community.org. October 9. URL:http://www.atlantic-community.org/app/webroot/files/articlepdf/Fabian%20Krohn.pdf

20. Manners I. (2015). Sociology of Knowledge and Production of Normative Power in the European Union’s External Actions. Journal of European Integration. Vol. 37. № 2. P. 299-318. DOI: 10.1080/07036337.2014.990141

21. Manners I. (2013). Assessing the Decennial, Reassessing the Global: Understanding European Union Normative Power in Global Politics. Cooperation and Conflict / Special Issue on Normative Power Europe, ed. by K. Nicolaїdis and R. Whitman. Vol. 48. № 2. P. 304–329. DOI: 10.1177/0010836713485389 URL: http://curis.ku.dk/ws/files/130802025/Ian_Manners_Assessing_the_decennial_reassessing_ the_global_Understanding_EU_normative_power_in_global_politics_C_C_2013.pdf

22. Manners I. (2002). Normative Power Europe: a Contradiction in Terms. JSMC. Volume 40. №2. P. 235–58. URL: http://polsci.colorado.edu/sites/default/files/5B_Manners.pdf

23. March J.G., Olsen J.P. (1984). The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life //The American Political Science Review. Vol. 78. № 3. P. 734-749.

24. Mil'ner B. (1999). Teoriya organizacii. Uchebnik [Theory of Organization. Coursebook]. Izdanie vtoroe, pererabotannoe i dopolnennoe. M.: INFRA-M. 477 p.

25. Murdoch Z. (2015). Organization Theory and the Study of European Union Institutions: Lessons and Opportunities. Organization Studies. Vol. 36. №12. P. 1675 – 1692. DOI: 10.1177/0170840615585342. URL: http://oss.sagepub.com/content/36/12/1675.full.pdf+html

26. Newman A.L., Posner E. (2015). Putting the EU in its place: policy strategies and the global regulatory context. Journal of European Public Policy. Vol. 22. № 9. P. 1316–1335. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1046901

27. North D. (1993). Institutions and Credible Commitment. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics. Vol. 149.№ 1. P. 11–23.

28. Pavlova E., Romanova T. (2014). Idejnoesopernichestvoili «tresh-diskurs»? [Idea-driven competition or a trash-discourse?]. Rossiya v global'nojpolitike. № 3. URL: http://www.globalaffairs.ru/number/ Ideinoe-sopernichestvo-ili-tresh-diskurs-16767

29. Pisany-Ferry J. (2009). The Accidental Player: The European Union and the Global Economy. The European Union and International Organizations. ed. by K. E. Jorgensen. London: Routledge. P. 21–36.

30. Prohorenko I. (2015). Global'nayarol' Evrosoyuza: chtoikakob"yasnyaetorganizacionnayateoriya [Global role of the European Union: what and how does the organization theory explain?]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Seriya: Politologiya. № 2. P. 5–17.

31. Romanova T. (2011). Evrosoyuz kak normativnaya sila i problemy ee vospriyatiya v Rossii kak bar'er naputi politiko-pravovogo sblizheniya [The European Union as a normative power and the problems of its perception in Russia as a barrier on the way to the political and legal alignment]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 6. №1. P. 52-66.

32. Savorskaya E. (2015). Evropejskij soyuz kak uchastnik mezhdunarodnogo klimaticheskogo rezhima: organizacionnyjanaliz [The European Union as a participant of the international climate regime: the organizational analysis]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 25. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya i mirovaya politika. № 2. P. 96-125.

33. Smith K.E. (2013). Can the European Union be a Pole in a Multipolar World? The International Spectator. Vol. 48. № 2. P. 114–126. DOI: 10.1080/03932729.2013.788378

34. Smith K.E. (2008). European Union Foreign Policy in a Changing World. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2nd edition. 331 p.

35. Smith M. (2013). Beyond the Comfort Zone: Internal Crisis and External Challenge in the European Union’s Response to Rising Powers. International Affairs. Vol. 89. № 3. P. 653–671. DOI: 10.1111/14682346.12038

36. Strezhneva M. (2014). Territorial'nyj i funkcional'nyj tipy organizacii politicheskih prostranstv (v razvitie integracionnoj teorii) [Territorial and functional types of organizing political spaces: in elaboration of integration theory]. Politicheskaya nauka. №2. P. 24–43.

37. Strezhneva M. (2012). Vzaimodejstvie Evropejskogo soyuza s mezhdunarodnymi institutami [The European Union engagement with international institutions]. God planety: ezhegodnik. Vypusk 2012.: ehkonomika, politika, bezopasnost. M.: Ideya-Press. P. 254– 266.

38. (2014) The EU and Multilateralism: Nine Recommendations. EU-GRASP Policy Brief. 4 p. URL: http://mercury.uni-koeln.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Policy_Brief_EU_and_Multilateralism.pdf

39. Van Langenhove L. (2010.) The Transformation of Multilateralism, Mode 1.0 to Mode 2.0. Global Policy. Vol. 1. № 3. P. 263–270. DOI: 10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00042.x URL: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1758-5899.2010.00042.x/epdf

40. Wille A. (2013). The Normalization of the European Commission: Politics andBureaucracy in the EU

41. Executive. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 256 p. DOI: 10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780199665693.001.0001 Wood S. (2009). The European Union: a Normative or Normal power? European Foreign Affairs Review. Vol. 14. № 1. P. 113–128.

42. Wunderlich J.-U. (2012). The EU an Actor Sui Generis? A Comparison of EU and ASEAN Actorness. Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 50.№ 4. P. 653–669. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2011. 02237.x

43. Youngs R. (2004). Normative Dynamics and Strategic Interests in the EU’s External Identity. Journal of Common Market Studies. Vol. 42. № 2. P.415–435.