The EU is currently mobilising its market power through a range of new policy tools. Examples include the Climate Border Adjustment Mechanisms (CBAM), the International Procurement Instrument and the Anti-Coercion Instrument. The general aim, as explained in the EU’s trade policy review and the recent industrial strategy, is to make the EU stronger, more assertive and more geopolitically relevant.
In March 2020 EU governments unilaterally began closing state borders in an ad hoc reaction to the rapid spreading of SARS-CoV-2. Within a few days, one after the other announced that border crossings would be suspended until further notice. These executive decisions gave us pause: democratic governments are required to communicate and justify their decisions to maintain legitimacy.
In our recent JCMS article, we try to understand the EU’s pivot away from multilateralism and market-making towards OSA. Our starting point is the changing nature of Europe’s global context, and how this created an opening to challenge Europe’s embedded neoliberal compromise.
How can we explain the very uneven economic outcomes in EU member countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially considering that the shock was largely symmetric?
With the rise of right-wing populism in Europe, scholars of EU foreign policy have become increasingly interested in the relationship between populism and foreign policy. Yet, we still know little about what happens to foreign policy institutions when populist parties join governments.
Recent PostsThe Mobilisation of EU Market Power: Drivers, Limits and Future Prospects | Why We Need to Understand How EU Governments Communicate About Borders | As Open as Possible, as Autonomous as Necessary - Understanding the Rise of Open Strategic Autonomy | High-quality Institutions Insulated EU Economies during the Pandemic | The Populist Capture of Hungarian Foreign Policy Institutions: On the Way to De-Europeanisation? |
Related PostsThe Case for a Post-Imperial EU Foreign Policy in a Post-Western World | National Parties in the EU — Identifying Four Ideal Types | Regional Technological Capabilities & Access to H2020 Funds | Talking or Punishing? The European Commission’s Approach to Democratic Backsliding | In Networked EU Health Cooperation, Some Members Are More Equal than Others |
UACES, IACES and Ideas on Europe do not take responsibility for opinions expressed in articles on blogs hosted on Ideas on Europe. All opinions are those of the contributing authors. The content is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The map in the Ideas on Europe logo is an abstract map. It does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UACES, IACES and Ideas on Europe concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
© UACES 2023