Implementation without Coordination: The Impact of EU Conditionality on Ukraine under the European Neighbourhood Policy

Wolczuk, Kataryna

doi:10.1080/09668130802630839

Cited by 65 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Functional spill-over of EU policies into the neighbouring countries, ranging from migration and internal security (Lavenex & Wichmann 2009) to energy (Hofer 2008) and environment (Stulberg & Lavenex 2007;Buzogány & Costa 2009), has created the need for regulatory coordination. Even if the effectiveness of such networks often suffers from cultural and technical differences or from the lack of political support (Wolczuk 2009), they can provide EU officials with means of controlling the domestic implementation of European requirements.…”

Section: Preferential Fit Policy Conditionality and Capacity Buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective Adoption of EU Environmental Norms in Ukraine. Convergenceá la Carte

Buzogány¹

2013

Europe-Asia Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Preferential Fit Policy Conditionality and Capacity Buildingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Selective Adoption of EU Environmental Norms in Ukraine. Convergenceá la Carte

Buzogány¹

2013

Europe-Asia Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…3 The strategy of maximizing Ukraine's commitments to convergence in order to expand political ties with the EU was amply demonstrated during the negotiations of the key instrument of the ENP, the Action Plan. Even though drafted in consultation with the neighbours, the Action Plans served first and foremost as a vehicle for the EU to project a corpus of norms and practices considered to be appropriate for political and economic reform in neighbouring countries (Wolczuk 2009). That the EU promoted extensive rule selection is evidenced by the sheer scope of the first draft Action Plan.…”

Section: Maximalist Rule Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First, membership aspirations of some neighbouring countries have been widely recognized as a factor increasing the likelihood of convergence with EU rules (Gawrich et al 2010;Sasse 2008;Wolczuk 2009). Our analysis takes this argument a step further by investigating in what ways, if any, membership aspirations impact the domestic dimensions of convergence.…”

Section: The Impact Of the Eu 'Beyond Enlargement': Identifying The Rmentioning

confidence: 99%

Convergence without membership? The impact of the European Union in the neighbourhood: evidence from Ukraine

Langbein¹,

Wolczuk²

2012

Journal of European Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How does the European Union (EU) affect change in neighbouring countries? The article explores this question, using Ukraine as a case study. So far Ukraine has attracted contradictory assessments of the impact of the EU on the country's domestic transformation. To explain this puzzle, the process of Ukraine's convergence with EU rules is analysed in terms of rule selection, adoption and application. The article focuses on the mechanisms which the EU uses to shape domestic actors' incentives and capacities for taking on EU rules in each of the three dimensions. In the case of technical regulation, EU mechanisms affect domestic actors differently in the three dimensions, resulting in comprehensive rule selection but only selective rule adoption and application. The process of convergence occurs, but in a non-synchronized and highly idiosyncratic way, thereby indicating the patchy impact of the EU on its neighbours, even in the core economic field.

show abstract

“…The consolidation of these Russian images of the EU's intentions was helped by an inherent tension in Brussels policies towards Eastern Europe that had developed after its ENP programme and its Russia policy got decoupled (Wolczuk, 2009). The ENP/EaP continued to be characterised by structural diplomacy, based on conditionality and aiming at long-term structural reforms along the EU 'model' and privileged relations.…”

Section: Understanding the Dynamicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From logic of competition to conflict: understanding the dynamics of EU–Russia relations

Casier

2016

Contemporary Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand the gradual worsening of EU-Russia relations in the decade preceding the Ukraine crisis, it is essential to understand the dynamics of their interaction. This article divides EU-Russia relations into three stages on the basis of changing intergroup dynamics: asymmetrical cooperation (1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003), pragmatic but increasing competition (2004-2013) and conflict (2013-present). It draws on the concept of 'attributional bias' to explain the escalating logic of competition during the second stage. The EU and Russia started to attribute each other negative geopolitical intentions up to the point where these images became so dominant that they interpreted each other's behaviour almost exclusively in terms of these images, rather than on the basis of their actual behaviour. With the Ukraine crisis, EU-Russia relations changed from competition over institutional arrangements in the neighbourhood and over normative hegemony to conflict over direct control. KEYWORDSRussia; EU; perception; process; attributional bias When the EU and Russia entered into a Strategic Partnership and agreed on cooperation in four Common Spaces in 2003, they did so with fairly good intentions and strong ambitions on both sides. A good decade later, EU-Russia relations are in the deepest crisis since the end of the Cold War. This did not happen abruptly. The Ukraine conflict is the 'culmination of a long-term crisis of EU-Russia relations' (Haukkala, 2015,p .2 5 ) .M o s ta n a l y s t sh a v ee x p l a i n e dt h e'gradual deterioration' (Sakwa, 2014, p. 31) of relations as the result of exogenous factors: shifts in international power relations, elite changes, security concerns, disagreement about the post-Cold War order, domestic power concentration, etc. All of these explanations have contributed significantly to our understanding of the conflict. But there is more to it. To understand how we evolved from cooperation to competition and ultimately to conflict, we additionally need to understand the endogenous dynamics of EU-Russia interaction. In other words, to understand how relations derailed, we also need to understand how the interaction evolved, how mutual negative images developed, how distrust came to dominate the relationship. The word also is important in this sentence. The analysis

show abstract

Implementation without Coordination: The Impact of EU Conditionality on Ukraine under the European Neighbourhood Policy

Cited by 65 publications

References 13 publications

Selective Adoption of EU Environmental Norms in Ukraine. Convergenceá la Carte

Selective Adoption of EU Environmental Norms in Ukraine. Convergenceá la Carte

Convergence without membership? The impact of the European Union in the neighbourhood: evidence from Ukraine

From logic of competition to conflict: understanding the dynamics of EU–Russia relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About