Asia Europe Journal

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 253–264 | Cite as

Normative versus market power Europe? The EU-India trade agreement

Original Paper

Abstract

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.

References

  1. Aggestam L (2008) Introduction: ethical power Europe? Int Aff 84(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bailey D, Bossuyt F (2013) The European Union as a conveniently-conflicted counter-hegemon through trade. J Contemp Eur Res 9(4):560–577Google Scholar
  3. Björkdahl A, Chaban N, Leslie J, Masselot A (eds) (2015) Importing EU norms? conceptual framework and empirical findings. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  4. Börzel T, Risse T (2012) From Europeanisation to diffusion: introduction. West Eur Polit 35(1):1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bossuyt F (2009) The social dimension of the new generation of EU free trade agreements with Asia and Latin America: ambitious continuation for the sake of policy coherence. Eur Foreign Aff Rev 14(5):703–742Google Scholar
  6. Business Standard (2012) FTA with EU to benefit textile exports, 11 July. http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/ftaeu-soon-to-benefit-textile-exports/480043/. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  7. Chandler D (2003) Rhetoric without responsibility: The attraction of ‘ethical’ foreign policy. Brit J Polit Int Rel 5(3):295–316Google Scholar
  8. Campling L, Harrison J, Richardson B, Smith A (2014) Working beyond the border? a new research agenda for the evaluation of labour standards in EU trade agreements. A new research agenda for the Evaluation of labour standards in EU trade agreements (April 4, 2014). Warwick School of Law Research Paper, (2014/03)Google Scholar
  9. Cox R (1981) Social forces, states and world order: beyond international relations theory. J Int Stud 10(2):126–155Google Scholar
  10. Damro C (2012) Market power Europe. J Eur Publ Pol 19(5):682–699CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diez T (2005) Constructing the self and changing others: reconsidering ‘normative power Europe’. Millennium: J Int Stud 33(3):613–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Diez T (2013) Normative power as hegemony. Coop Confl 48(2):194–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duchêne F (1973) The European community and the uncertainties of interdependence. In: Kohnstamm M, Hager W (eds) A nation writ large?foreign-policy problems before the european community. Macmillan, London, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  14. European Parliament (2009) An EU-India FTA, Report no.: 2008/2135/INI (Brussels March 26). http://www.indianet.nl/pdf/ep090312.pdf. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  15. European Parliament (2011) Report on the EU as a global actor: its role in multilateral organisations, Committee on Foreign Affairs (rapporteur: María Muñiz de Urquiza), Report no: 2010/2298 (INI), Brussels, 29 April, paragraph 4Google Scholar
  16. European Commission (2006) Global Europe: Competing in the World. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2006/october/tradoc_130376.pdf. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  17. European Commission (2008) EU-India FTA Negotiations: EC Key Messages, January-FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  18. European Commission (2010) Report on progress achieved on the Global Europe strategy, 2006-2010, Commission Staff Working document, SEC(2010) 1268/2 (Brussels). http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2010/november/tradoc_146941.pdf. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  19. Gupwell D, Gupta N (2009) EU FTA negotiations with India, ASEAN and Korea: the question of fair labour standards. Asia Eur J 7(1):79–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jörgensen KE (ed) (1997) Reflective approaches to European Governance. Houndmills, PalgraveGoogle Scholar
  21. Karat P (2012) A treaty for the rich. Morning Star. 25 MayGoogle Scholar
  22. Khorana S, Asthana A (2014) EU FTA negotiations with India: the question of liberalization of public procurement. Asia Eur J. doi:10.1007/s10308-014-0369-7 Google Scholar
  23. Khorana S, Garcia M (2013) European Union-India FTA: one step forward, one back? J Common Mark Stud 51(4):684–700CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Khorana S, Garcia M (2014) Procurement liberalization diffusion in EU agreements: signalling stewardship? J World Trade 48(3):481–500Google Scholar
  25. Khorana S, Perdikis N (2010) EU-India free trade agreement: deal or No deal? South Asia Econ J 11(2):181–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Khorana S, Subramanian S (2012) Potential accession to the WTO government procurement agreement: a case study on India. J Int Econ Law 15(1):287–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Khorana S, Perdikis N, Kerr WA, Yueng M (2011) The Era of bilateral agreements: the EU and India in search of a partnership. Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, pp 1–225Google Scholar
  28. Krishna P (2009) In: Lester S, Mercurio B (eds) The economics of PTAs in bilateral and regional trade agreements- commentary and analysis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lamy P (2002) Stepping stones or stumbling blocks? The EU’s approach towards the problem of multilateralism vs regionalism in trade policy. World Econ 25(10):1399–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Langan M (2012) Normative power Europe and the moral economy of Africa–EU ties. New Polit Econ 7(3):243–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Manners I (2000) Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms? Copenhagen Peace Research Institute, Working paper 38/2000Google Scholar
  32. Manners I (2002) Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms? J Common Mark Stud 40(2):235–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Manners I (2006) The European Union as a normative power: a response to Thomas Diez. Millennium J Int Stud 35(1):167–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Manners I (2008) The normative ethics of the European Union. Int Aff 84(1):45–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Manners I (2011) The European Union’s normative power: critical perspectives and perspectives on the critical. In: Whitman R (ed) Normative power Europe: empirical and theoretical perspectives. Basingstoke, Palgrave, pp 226–247Google Scholar
  36. Manners I, Whitman RG (2003) The ‘difference engine’: constructing and representing the international identity of the European Union. J Eur Publ Pol 10(3):380–404Google Scholar
  37. Maull HW (1990) Germany and Japan: the New civilian powers. For Aff 69(5):91–106Google Scholar
  38. Meincke B (2013) The EU-India-FTA: Development and Growth for Each and Everybody?Macroeconomics and Gender. Report for Heinrich Boll Stiftung, New Delhi. http://in.boell.org/2013/12/10/eu-india-fta-development-and-growth-each-and-everybody-macroeconomics-gender. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  39. Meunier S, Nicolaidis K (2006) The European Union as a conflicted trade power. J Eur Pub Pol 13(6):906–925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morlino L (2003) Democrazie e Democratizzazioni. Bologna, Italy Mulino, pp 18–31Google Scholar
  41. Nicolaïdis K, Whitman R (eds) (2013) Special Issue on Normative Power Europe. Cooperation and Conflict 48(2)Google Scholar
  42. Orbie J (2008) A civilian power in the world? instruments and objectives in EU external policies. In: Orbie J (ed) Europe’s global role. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 1–34Google Scholar
  43. Orbie J (2011) Promoting labour standards through trade: normative power or regulatory state Europe? In: Whitman R (ed) Normative power Europe: empirical and theoretical perspectives. Palgrave, Basingstoke, pp 161–187Google Scholar
  44. Rosamond B (2013) Three ways of speaking Europe to the world: markets, peace, cosmopolitan duty and the EU’s normative power. Brit J Polit Int Relat 16(1):133–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sen A (2013) EU won’t get further access to government business. The Economic Times. http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-04-02/news/31275525_1_government-procurement-karel-de-gucht-meeting-with-eu-trade. Accessed on 02 Sept 2014
  46. Siles-Brügge G (2014) EU trade and development policy beyond the ACP: subordinating developmental to commercial imperatives in the reform of GSP. Contemp Polit 20(1):49–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sjursen H (ed) (2006) Civilian or military power? the European Union at a crossroads. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  48. Storey A (2006) Normative power Europe? economic partnership agreements and Africa. J Contemp Afr Stud 24(3):331–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Whitman RG (2013) The neo-normative turn in theorising the EU’s international presence. Cooperation and conflict 48(2):171–193Google Scholar
  50. Witchterich C, Menon-Sen K (2009) Trade liberalisation, gender equality: The case of the contested EU-India FTA. WIDE Paper HB Stiftung, Brussels, Policy Space. http://www.in.boell.org/downloads/Trade_Liberalisation__Gender_Equality_Policy_Space_the_case_of_the_contested_EU_India_FTA_.pdf Accessed 5 June 2014
  51. Young AR, Peterson J (2006) The EU and the new trade politics. J Eur Publ Pol 13(6):795–814CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zahrnt V (2005) How regionalisation can be a pillar of a more effective world trade organization. J World Trade 39(4):671–699Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Bournemouth UniversityBournemouthUK

Personalised recommendations