Normative versus market power Europe? The EU-India trade agreement
Normative versus market power Europe? The EU-India trade agreement
复制标题
欧洲规范与市场力量？
DOI：
10.1007/s10308-015-0427-9
复制
发表时间：
2015
影响因子：
1.6
通讯作者：
Orbie J
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Orbie J
规范性权力欧洲的概念极大地丰富了关于欧盟是什么（应该是什么）、它做什么（应该做什么）和它有什么影响（应该有）的学术辩论。然而，各种理论、方法和经验问题仍然没有得到充分解决。本文将讨论两个被忽视的问题：规范接受者的视角（与本期特刊一致）和欧盟的市场规范。第一部分详细阐述了这两个问题，依靠文献的最新进展，特别是Damro （J Eur Publ Pol 19(5): 682-699, 2012）和Rosamond（英国J Polit Int Relat 16(1):133 - 148,2013）的贡献。在此背景下，第二部分考察了有争议的欧盟与印度的贸易谈判。具体来说，这一实证部分侧重于市场自由主义规范（政府采购）和世界主义规范（人权）是如何被促进和接受的。我们得出的结论是，在欧盟看来，贸易协定可以成为减轻伙伴反对的一种手段，并最终成为其伙伴国家成功接受国际社会标准和多边采购自由化法规的垫脚石。但是，伙伴国可能不一定支持欧盟以利益为导向的动机，也不一定支持欧盟通过贸易协定推行多边规范的愿望。欧盟-印度贸易谈判的案例研究说明了这一点，突出了欧盟和印度观点之间的分歧，并表明印度缺乏采用欧盟首选的自由化模式的热情。
The normative power Europe concept has greatly enriched the academic debate on what the EU is (should be), what it does (should do) and what impact it has (should have). However, various theoretical, methodological and empirical issues remain insufficiently addressed. This article will address two issues that have mostly been neglected: the perspective of the norm takers (in line with this special issue) and the market norms of the EU. The first section elaborates on these two issues, relying on recent advances in the literature and specifically the contributions by Damro (J Eur Publ Pol 19(5):682–699, 2012) and Rosamond (Brit J Polit Int Relat 16(1):133–148, 2013). Against this background, the second section examines the controversial EU trade negotiations with India. Specifically, this empirical part section focuses on how market liberal norms (government procurement) and cosmopolitan norms (human rights) are being promoted and received. We conclude that in the eyes of the EU, trade agreements could be a means to mitigate partners’ opposition and an eventual stepping stone for successful off-take of international social standards and multilateral procurement liberalization regulations by its partner countries. But, partner countries might not necessarily espouse the EU’s interest-led motivation and lend support to the EU’s desire to effuse multilateral norms through trading agreements. The case study on EU-India trade talks illustrates this, highlighting the divergence between the EU and Indian perspectives and demonstrates India’s lack of enthusiasm to adopt the EU’s preferred model for liberalization.
登录
查看更多内容
欧盟与印度、东盟和韩国的自由贸易协定谈判：公平劳工标准问题
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
D. Gupwell;Natalie Gupta
通讯作者：
Natalie Gupta
欧洲的全球角色
影响因子：
1.6
作者：
Goh Chok Tong
通讯作者：
Goh Chok Tong
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
P. Lamy
通讯作者：
P. Lamy
欧洲规范权力与非洲-欧盟关系的道德经济：“规范权力”概念的重新定位
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
M. Langan
通讯作者：
M. Langan
双边和区域贸易协定：优惠贸易协定的经济学
影响因子：
4.2
作者：
P. Krishna
通讯作者：
P. Krishna