Abstract
The EU–India relationship is a playground for policy analysts—numerous policy recommendations are addressed to both India and the EU. Policy analysis influences the European and Indian political practitioners and also the public with their constructions of possible future relations. Because the scientists’ impact carries such weight, it is necessary to engage with the fundamental research principles that underlie the production of policy analysis. The assumption of this contribution is that an examination of supposedly abstract theoretical debates using the disciplines of International Relations (IR) and policy research helps to critically reflect on the role of policy analysts. On the basis of the critical hints identified in the theoretical discussions, a possible way forward will be proposed to advance research on the relationship between the two largest democracies in the world. By adapting the so-called Global IR paradigm, a practical proposal will be developed to put the scientific cooperation of the EU–India relations in general and the cooperation in policy-oriented research in particular on a broader basis: The idea of parapublic underpinnings (Krotz 2007) can help to substantially improve relations between India and the EU to establish the basis for research on an equal footing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
This question was raised in panels at ISA 2012 and BISA 2012. A special issue in the European Journal of International Relations on this topic summarises the different positions taken in this debate, see Dunne et al. (2013).
- 2.
Exceptions among others are Malhotra (2015) exploring the EU–India with a soft power approach.
- 3.
A very well-used and profound exception inspired by poststructuralism is Moraes y Blanco (2015).
- 4.
There is a sequence of debates commonly used within IR: The so-called First Debate of IR emerged in the 1930s and 1940s and was described as the controversy between realists and idealists. The Second Debate was the academic discussion between traditionalists and behaviouralists in the 1950s and 1960s. However, there is also criticism of this sequence of debates (cf. Navon 2001).
- 5.
Based on Global Go To Think Tank Index Report of the year 2019, see McGann (2020: 59).
- 6.
Regarding the perception of the EU, see the contribution by Kugiel in this volume.
References
Acharya, Amitav. 2011. Dialogue and discovery: In search of international relations theories beyond the west. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39 (3): 619–637. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829811406574.
Acharya, Amitav. 2014. Global international relations (IR) and regional worlds. International Studies Quarterly 58 (4): 647–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12171.
Acharya, Amitav. 2016. Developing global international relations: What, who, and how? https://trafo.hypotheses.org/4873. Accessed 25 June 2018.
Aliberti, Marco. 2018. India in space: Between utility and geopolitics. Cham: Springer.
Basile, Elisabetta, and Philippe Régnier. 2012. Review of the S&T cooperation agreement between the European Union and the government of the Republic of India 2007–2011. A report by independent experts: Elisabetta Basile and Philippe Régnier. EUR 25505 EN. Brussels.
Benaglia, Stefania, and Alessandro R. Ungaro. 2016. EU-India defence cooperation: A European perspective. IAI Working Papers 16. Rom. https://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaiwp1635.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2020.
Biersteker, Thomas J. 1989. Critical reflections on post-positivism in international relations. International Studies Quarterly 33 (3): 263–267.
Büger, Christian, and Frank Gadinger. 2007. Reassembling and dissecting: International relations practice from a science studies perspective. International Studies Perspectives 8 (1): 90–110.
Buzan, Barry, and George Lawson. 2016. Theory, history, and the global transformation. International Theory 8 (3): 502–522.
Cameron, Fraser. 2017. “It’s Asia, stupid”: Time for the EU to Deepen relations with Asia. GIGA Focus—Asia 6. Hamburg. https://www.giga-hamburg.de/de/system/files/publications/gf_asien_1706_en.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2020.
CEPS. 2019. EU-India: A renewed strategic partnership or business as usual? https://www.ceps.eu/eu-india-a-renewed-strategic-partnership-or-business-as-usual/. Accessed 19 May 2020.
Chacko, Priya. 2012. Indian foreign policy: The politics of postcolonial identity from, 1947 to 2004. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Chakrabarty, Dipesh. 2009. Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial thought and historical difference, New Edition. Princeton Studies in Culture/Power/History. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Delegation EU to India. 2020. EU India think tanks twinning initiative. https://euindiathinktanks.com. Accessed 19 June 2020.
Dunne, Tim, Lene Hansen, and Colin Wight. 2013. The end of international relations theory? European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 405–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066113495485.
Engelkamp, Stephan, Katharina Glaab, and Judith Renner. 2012. In der Sprechstunde: Wie (kritische) Normenforschung ihre Stimme wiederfinden kann. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 19 (2): 101–128. https://doi.org/10.5771/0946-7165-2012-2-101.
Epstein, Charlotte. 2012. Stop telling us how to behave: Socialization or infantilization? International Studies Perspectives 13 (2): 135–145. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00458.x.
Eriksson, Johan, and Giampiero Giacomello. 2006. The information revolution, security, and international relations: (IR)relevant theory? International Political Science Review 27 (3): 221–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512106064462.
EU-India. 2000. EU-India summit—Joint declaration. Lisbon, 28 June. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/pres_00_229/PRES_00_229_EN.pdf. Accessed 19 June 2020.
EU-India. 2002. Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation between the European Community and the Government of the Republic of India. https://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/pdf/policy/india_agreement.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none. Accessed 19 June 2020.
EU-India. 2012. Joint declaration for enhanced cooperation on energy Joint declaration on research and innovation cooperation Memorandum of Understanding on statistical cooperation: 12th EU—India summit, New Delhi, 10 February 2012. https://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/pdf/policy/joint-declaration.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none. Accessed 19 June 2020.
EU-India. 2020. EU-India strategic partnership: A roadmap to 2025. https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/45026/eu-india-roadmap-2025.pdf. Accessed 6 October 2020.
European Commission. 2018a. Erasmus + for higher education in India (Country factsheet: India). https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/erasmus-plus/factsheets/asia-central/erasmusplus_india_2017.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2020.
European Commission. 2018b. Roadmap for EU—India S&T cooperation. https://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/pdf/policy/in_roadmap_2018.pdf#view=fit&pagemode=none. Accessed 19 June 2020.
European Commission. 2020. International cooperation—India. https://ec.europa.eu/research/iscp/index.cfm?pg=india. Accessed 19 June 2020.
Fierke, Karin M. 2002. Links across the Abyss: Language and logic in international relations. International Studies Quarterly 46 (3): 331–354.
Fischer, Frank, and John Forester. 1993a. Editors’ introduction. In The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning, ed. Frank Fischer and John Forester, 1–20. London: UCL.
Fischer, Frank, and John Forester (eds.). 1993b. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. London: UCL.
Fischer, Frank, and Herbert Gottweis. 2012. The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice. Durham: Duke University Press.
Fluck, Matthew. 2017. The concept of truth in international relations theory. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Frontini, Andreas, and Susanna Mocker. 2016. Cutting the Gordian knot?—Assessing the outcomes of the March EU-India Summit. http://www.epc.eu/en/Publications/Cutting-the-Gordian-knot–As~1d24f0. Accessed 11 May 2020.
Frost, Mervyn. 1986. Towards a normative theory of international relations: A critical analysis of the philosophical and methodological assumptions in the discipline with proposals towards a substantive normative theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Godement, François. 2015. Introduction: Europe and India. In What does India think?, ed. François Godement, 11–22. London.
Green, Jessica F., and Thomas Hale. 2020. The study and practice of global environmental politics: Policy influence through participation. In Bridging the theory-practice divide in international relations, ed. Daniel Maliniak, Susan Peterson, Ryan Powers, and Michael J. Tierney, 55–74. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Grovogui, Siba N. 2006. Beyond Eurocentrism and anarchy: Memories of international order and institutions. Culture and Religion in International Relations. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Gruffydd Jones, Branwen (ed.). 2010. Decolonizing International Relations. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Hamati-Ataya, Inanna. 2013. Reflectivity, reflexivity, reflexivism: IR’s ‘reflexive turn’—And beyond. European Journal of International Relations 19 (4): 669–694. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066112437770.
Hofius, Maren, Jan Wilkens, Hannes Hansen-Magnusson, and Sassan Gholiagha. 2014. Den Schleier lichten? Kritische Normenforschung, Freiheit und Gleichberechtigung im Kontext des » Arabischen Frühlings « : Eine Replik auf Engelkamp/Glaab/Renner, Ulbert und Deitelhoff/ Zimmermann. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 21 (2): 85–105. https://doi.org/10.5771/0946-7165-2014-2-85.
Inoue, Cristina, and Arlene B. Tickner. 2016. Many worlds, many theories? Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional 59 (2). http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201600201.
Jabri, Vivienne. 2017. Colonial rationalities, postcolonial subjectivities, and the international. In Against international relations norms: Postcolonial perspectives, vol. 13, ed. Charlotte Epstein, 38–57. Worlding beyond the West. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
Jain, Rajendra K. 2015. India’s relations with the European Union. In Handbook of India’s international relations, ed. David Scott, 223–232. London: Routledge.
Jones, Lee. 2009. International relations scholarship and the Tyranny of policy relevance. Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies 1: 125–131.
Krotz, Ulrich. 2007. Parapublic underpinnings of international relations: The Franco-German construction of Europeanization of a particular kind. European Journal of International Relations 13 (3): 385–417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066107080129.
Krotz, Ulrich. 2011. Flying Tiger: International relations theory and the politics of advanced weapons. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kugiel, Patryk. 2019. A challenge for EU public diplomacy in India: Why the Union needs a Europe House. Policy Paper No. 4 (174). Warsaw. https://www.pism.pl/publikacje/A_Challenge_for_EU_Public_Diplomacy_in_India__Why_the_Union_Needs_a_Europe_House_. Accessed 4 June 2020.
Lake, David A. 2013. Theory is dead, long live theory: The end of the great debates and the rise of eclecticism in international relations. European Journal of International Relations 19 (3): 567–587. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354066113494330.
Lapid, Yosef. 1989. The third debate: On the prospects of international theory in a post-positivist era. International Studies Quarterly 33 (3): 235–254.
Lätt, Jeanne, Thomas Fues, and Siddharth Mallavarapu. 2010. We will have to learn to be better listeners. Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte (APUZ)(34–35): 7–14.
Lepgold, Joseph. 1998. Is anyone listening? International relations theory and the problem of policy relevance. Political Science Quarterly 113 (1): 43–62.
Malhotra, Shairee. 2015. EU-India relations: A soft power approach. Brussels: EU-Asia at Glance.
Maliniak, Daniel, Amy Okes, Susan Peterson, and Michael J. Tierney. 2011. International relations in the US academy. International Studies Quarterly 55 (2): 437–464.
Maliniak, Daniel, Susan Peterson, Ryan Powers, and Michael J. Tierney. 2020. Explaining the theory-practice divide in international relations: Uncertainty and access. In Bridging the theory-practice divide in international relations, ed. Daniel Maliniak, Susan Peterson, Ryan Powers, and Michael J. Tierney, 1–26. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
McGann, James G. 2020. 2019 global go to think tank index report. Index Reports 17. Pennsylvania. https://repository.upenn.edu/think_tanks/17. Accessed 11 June 2020.
Moraes y Blanco, Luis Fernando de. 2015. On the uses and functions of ‘strategic partnership’ in international politics: Implications for agency, policy and theory. Bielefeld.
Muenchow-Pohl, Bernd von. 2012. India and Europe in a multipolar world. The Carnegie Papers—South Asia, MA.
Navon, Emmanuel. 2001. The ‘third debate’ revisited. Review of International Relations 27 (4): 611–625.
Nayak, Meghana, and Eric Selbin. 2013. Decentering international relations. London: Zed Books.
Nkiwane, Tandeka C. 2001. Africa and international relations: Regional lessons for a global discourse. International Political Science Review 22 (3): 279–290. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192512101223005.
Nye, Joseph S. 2009. Scholars on the Sidelines. Washington Post, April 13. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/12/AR2009041202260.html?hpid=opinionsbox1. Accessed 15 May 2020.
Olivier, Gerrit, and Lorenzo Fioramonti. 2010. The emerging ‘global south’: The EU in the eyes of India, Brazil and South Africa. In External perceptions of the European Union as a global actor, ed. Sonia Lucarelli and Lorenzo Fioramonti, 105–119. London, New York: Routledge.
Pawlak, Patryk. 2016. EU-India cooperation on cyber issues: Towards pragmatic idealism? IAI Working Papers 16. Rom. https://www.gatewayhouse.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/iaiwp1636.pdf. Accessed 11 May 2020.
Risse, Thomas, and Wiebke Wemheuer-Vogelaar. 2016. IB in Deutschland: Jung, internationalisiert und eklektisch. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen 23 (2): 144–172. https://doi.org/10.5771/0946-7165-2016-2-144.
Sabaratnam, Meera. 2011. IR in dialogue … but can we change the subjects? A typology of decolonising strategies for the study of world politics. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 39 (3): 781–803. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829811404270.
Sachdeva, Gulshan. 2015. Evaluation of the EU-India strategic partnership and the potential for its revitalisation. Brussels. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/fb346263-12d0-4764-92ee-79b628739bc9/language-en. Accessed 11 May 2020.
Saretzki, Thomas. 2014. Aufklärung, Beteiligung und Kritik: Die „argumentative Wende“ in der Policy-Analyse. In Lehrbuch der Politikfeldanalyse, ed. Klaus Schubert and Nils C. Bandelow, 493–522, 3rd edn. Lehr- und Handbücher der Politikwissenschaft. München: De Gruyter Oldenbourg.
Seth, Sanjay. 2011. Postcolonial theory and the critique of international relations. Millennium: Journal of International Studies 40 (1): 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0305829811412325.
Seth, Sanjay. 2013. Introduction. In Postcolonial theory and international relations: A critical introduction, ed. Sanjay Seth, 1–12. London and New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis.
Söderbaum, Fredrik. 2013. What’s wrong with regional integration? The problem of Eurocentrism. http://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/27784/RSCAS_2013_64.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. Accessed 30 June 2020.
Stuenkel, Oliver. 2016. The BRICS: Seeking privileges by constructing and running multilateral institutions. Global Summitry 2 (1): 38–53.
Wiessala, Georg. 2011. Enhancing Asia-Europe co-operation through educational exchange. New York: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lowinger, T. (2021). “The EU Should…!”; “India Needs…!”: Parapublic Underpinnings to Realise Global IR in Policy Analysis of EU–India Relations. In: Gieg, P., Lowinger, T., Pietzko, M., Zürn, A., Bava, U.S., Müller-Brandeck-Bocquet, G. (eds) EU-India Relations. Contributions to International Relations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65044-5_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65044-5_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-65043-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-65044-5
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)