1

FIRST DRAFT!

The EU’s Leadership in the Global Governance:

Perceptions from the Others

Sonia Lucarelli

Abstract

Leadership is a fundamental requirement for the EU to be able not only to achieve its

aims but also to have an impact on the global governance. However actual leadership

depends on the ability of an actor to transform its resources into ability to lead, and on

the attitude of other actors to be willing to be lead. Fundamental conditions for this to

happen are resources of both hard and soft power, but also the image that other relevant

international actors have of the EU. Drawing from the research project The External

Image of the European Union (GARNET - EU FP 6) and other literature in the field, the

chapter looks at the perceptions of the EU’s leadership (actual or potential) that other

actors hold.

Paper presentato al

Convegno annuale della Società Italiana di Scienza Politica 2013

Firenze, 13-14 Settembre 2013

2

Introduction

The literature on the EU’s role in world politics has speculated on the

degree of the EU’s actorness (Groenleer & van Schaik: 2007), presence

(Allen and Smith 1990), capability (Hill 1993), effectiveness, peculiar

type of power (Aggestam 2008; Damro 2012; Manners 2002; Telò 2007;

Zimmermann 2007). The 1990s have also acknowledged a growing

attention to EU’s leadership in multilateral settings, with particular

attention to the implementation of environmental regimes (Gupta & Grubb

2000; Oberthür & Kelly 2008; Wurzel & Connelly 2010), trade

negotiations (Meunier 2000; Ahnild) and some other areas in which the

EU has a special role such as the institution of the International Criminal

Court (Groenleer & van Schaik 2007) or development policy (Orbie &

Versluys 2008). Most of such a literature looks at the EU’s performance in

negotiations. However, implicit attention to EU leadership is also present

in the analyses of the EU’s role as a norm exporter, at the global (Zwolski

& Kaunert 2011), regional (Pace 2007) or local level. An important

feature of the EU leadership literature is the recognition of the fact that

frequently the EU is a leader “by example”. This has been frequently

claimed in the case of the EU’s role in environmental policy (although the

EU’s own strategy to lead by example in climate change negotiations has

been put under strain by the failure of the Copenhagen Summit - Geden

2010) and even more as far as the EU’s role as a model of regional

integration is concerned (Murray 2009). Moreover, the EU is frequently

regarded as an actor able to combine hard and soft power resources with a

certain capacity to set the international agenda (Dee 2011). What this

literature does the least, is to evaluate the extent to which the would-be-

followers perceive the EU as a leader or not. With notable exceptions,

3

particularly devoted to the analysis perceptions of EU leadership in

climate change negotiations (Gupta & van der Grijp 2000; Kilian &

Elgstrom 2010; Karlsson et al. 2011), there has been very little dialogue

between the scholarship on EU leadership and that on perceptions of the

EU abroad. Such a gap in the literature is all the more striking if we

consider the simple fact that in order to lead, an international actor needs

to be recognised by the others as powerful, credible, capable and

legitimate.

Drawing from scholarship on perceptions of the EU, this chapter assesses

the extent to which the EU is perceived as a leader in global governance.

It is clear that the question has been explicitly posed only with respect to

few issues in which there is an expectation that the EU has a leadership

role (e.g. climate change negotiations) but at a closer look one finds

interesting insights in several case-studies concerning the external image

of the EU. For this reason, although attention will be devoted particularly

to images of the EU in multilateral contexts, insights will be taken also

from images in countries and with transnational actors.

The first section of the chapter introduces to the sources used, the second

deals with the main results both in country case-studies and in multilateral

contexts; and the final one draws some conclusions.

Clarifying the concepts: perceptions of leadership

How should leadership be conceptualized and what are the conditions to

be a leader? Scholarship on leadership is wide1, ranging from leadership

1 The literature on the topic is very wide, for a review see the traditional Burns 1978 and

the more recent Northhouse 2010; Nye 2008.

4

in business (Thompson 2007) to the leadership of US Presidents (Daalder,

Destler 2009). All in all, the literature on leadership is largely devoted to

individuals more than state-actors or international organizations, however

a branch of IR literature has been devoted to leadership in global politics

at least since the 1970s, flowerishing in the 1990s, particularly with

reference to regime formation and multilateral negotiations (Kindleberger

XXX; Young 1991; Underdal 1994; Malnes 1995), reflections on

hegemony (Gilpin XXX; Ikenberry 1989) and on the role of the US in

world politics (Ikenberry 1996; Nye 2004). More recently, attention has

been attracted by the relationship between leaders and followers and the

implications in terms of leadership of the affirmation of the emerging

powers (Schirm 2009). However, this literature explicitly referring to

“leadership” is only a part of that devoted to the topic: relevant also the

branch of literature dealing with norms transfer (Finnemore & Sikkink

1998; Fiorini 1996), persuasion (Risse 2000; Grobe 2010), the ability to

use non-coercive resources of power (Nye 2008).

The “ability to lead” in international politics has several facets which

include the capacity to gain agreement on an agenda, the ability to propose

solutions to collective problems that others follow, the ability to propose

models that are then imitated and the ability to propose norms – global,

regional or local - that the others follow. The literature has alternatively

labelled these qualities as agenda setting power, leadership, model or

norms entrepreneurship; in reality these are all types of leadership. These

abilities can induce deep socialization through persuasion

(transformational leadership) or more moderate adaptation obtained

through reward and punishment. The instruments may range from what

Nye has labelled soft or hard power or, more frequently, a mix of the two

obtained in a “smart” way (Nye 2008). But what are the requirements to

5

be a leader? It is clear either in the more general literature on leadership

and in that specifically dedicated to international politics, that coercion

cannot be the main and sole instrument of leadership and that much more

important in todays’ world politics is a mix of qualities. I would

summarize such qualities for leadership as follows:

- resources of power (economic, military, political, ideational)

- negotiation skills

- credibility

- legitimacy

Grubb and Gupta (2000: 19) define the leadership that derive from the

use of political strength and weight as “structural leadership”; while they

label negotiation skills as “instrumental leadership”. According to the

authors, “directional leadership” refers to the ability to influence and alter

the perceptions of others towards the desired ends by active action or

being an example. I would underline that in order to be able to transform

potential “structual leadership” into actual leadership (of a non-coercive

type) an actor needs to be not only powerful and skyllfull but also

credibile and perceived to be legitimate.

Moreover, these characteristics are more important in subjective rather

than absolute terms: they are particularly important insofar as they are

acknowledged by those supposed to follow. This area of investigation

(perception of the would-be-followers) however, is under-researched in

the leadership literature in general and more in particular as far as the EU

is concerned.

This chapter is dedicated to the analysis of the extent to which the EU is

perceived to have these qualities among the potential followers.

6

Sources

This chapter draws mainly from the research project The ‘External Image

of the European Union’, undertaken in the context of the Network of

Excellence of ‘Global Governance, Regionalisation and Regulation: The

Role of the EU – GARNET (2005-2010).2 This two-phase project, based

at the Forum on the Problems of Peace and War in Florence, directed by

Sonia Lucarelli and Lorenzo Fioramonti, involved 26 researchers based in

16 countries. The focus was on the perception of the EU within sixteen

extra-European countries (Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Egypt, India,

Iran, Israel, Japan, Lebanon, Mexico, Russia, Palestine, South Africa,

United States and Venezuela), six international and transnational actors

(the UN General Assembly, the World Bank - WB , the African Union -

AU, the African Caribbean and Pacific – ACP - countries negotiating with

the EU for the European Partnership Agreements -EPA, Al Jazeera, and

non-governmental organisations taking part in world gatherings), and an

analysis of the perceptions of the EU Commission’s senior servants in

delegations abroad and of non-European diplomats posted in Brussels.

In the country reports, attention was focused on political elites, public

opinion, the press and organised civic society, while in international and

transnational organizations it depended on the type of organization

including non-European states’ representatives (EPA and UN case

2 EU Sixth Framework Programme 2005–10, http://www2.war-

wick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/. For a brief description of the project:

http://www.onlineforum. it/onlineforumricerche.asp. The full reports (Lucarelli 2007a;

Lucarelli and Fioramonti 2009) are available online:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf);

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdf). Among the

most relevant publications: Lucarelli 2007b; Lucarelli and Fioramonti 2010 and a series

of articles and book chapters (e.g. Fioramonti and Poletti 2008; Fioramonti and Lucarelli

2008).

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/http://www.onlineforum.it/onlineforum-ricerche.asphttp://www.onlineforum.it/onlineforum-ricerche.asphttp://www.onlineforum.it/onlineforum-ricerche.asphttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf);http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf);http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdf

7

studies), directors and vice-presidents (WB), technical and political staff

(WB, UN, AU), general participants to international social fora. Research

relied on open sources (regional and local opinion polls, official

documents, websites of the relevant constituencies; secondary literature),

the analysis of the press and elite interviews and questionnaires. Being

open sources unevenly available (and this applies particularly to opinion

polls), the time span covered by the reports varied according to the

availability of source, but was always pluriannual. Particular attention was

devoted to the specific historically shaped peculiarities of the

country/organization and of its relationship with Europe/the EU.

This paper will draw largely on this research, but reflection will be

complemented with other available studies on EU external images. As a

matter of fact, as the other contributions in this volume demonstrate,

although recent3, this branch of studies has already produced very

interesting results4. In particular, fundamental sources of information are

the research project The EU through the Eyes of Asia coordinated by

Martin Holland and Natalia Chaban at the National Centre for Research

on Europe (NCRE) at the University of Canterbury (NZ)5; Ole Elgström’s

research programme on the analysis of perceptions of the EU in

multilateral negotiations6; and two recent research projects on China:

3 The first pioneer studies on the external images appeared only in the early 2000nd

(Ortega 2004, Lisbonne-de Vergeron 2006, 2007; Tsuruoka 2006).

4 For a detailed overview of the state-of-the on the external images of the EU see

Lucarelli 2014.

5 The largest research project on the topic deal mainly with the Asia-Pacific area,

although it has been now broadened to include also Russia dn India

(http://www.euperceptions.canterbury.ac.nz/). A selection of the publications

publications includes: Holland et al. 2005; Chaban, Holland and Ryan 2009; Chaban and

Holland 2008, 2011; Holland and Chaban 2010a, 2010b; Chaban, Smith and Holland

2010; Brovelli et al. 2010.

6 Elgström has worked on perceptions of participants the United Nations Forum on

Forestry, the Conference on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna

http://www.euperceptions.canterbury.ac.nz/http://www.euperceptions.canterbury.ac.nz/

8

‘Disaggregating Chinese Perceptions of the EU and Implications for the

EU’s China Policy’ (2009–11) and ‘EuroBroadMap’ (2009–11).7 Next to

these wider projects there have been a series of ad hoc case studies,

particularly concerning countries8, and only rarely multilateral settings

9.

Perceptions of Leadership

In order to understand if the EU is perceived to be a leader in world

politics, it is useful to distinguish between perceptions regarding the

resources of leadership and actual leadership skills.

Resources of leadership are of several type and correspond to the above

conditions to be a leader (material resources of power; economic, military,

political; credibility; negotiation skills; legitimacy). The ability to actually

lead requests the presence of the above conditions and the ability to make

them effective.

and Flora (CITES), the World Trade Organization (WTO) the EPAs, the climate change

negotiations. See Elgström 2006, 2007, 2010; Chaban, Elgström, and Holland 2006;

Kilian and Elgström 2010.

7 See, respectively, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cpi/research/funded-projects/chinese-

eu/consortium. aspx and http://www.eurobroadmap.eu/. A further project, Eumagine

(2011–12), focuses attention on the impact of the perceptions of human rights and

democracy on migrants’ aspirations and decisions to migrate to Europe

(http://www.eumagine.org/default.aspx).

8 Specific attention has been devoted to perceptions of the EU in China (Geeraerts 2007;

Shambaugh 2008; Liqun 2008) and Russia (Secrieru 2010), but there is research also on

Australia (Murray 2003), Canada (Retzlaff and Ga¨nzle 2008; Retzlaff 2010) and - in

comparative terms - China and India (Lisbonne de Vergeron 2012).

9 As for multilateral settings more attention has been devoted to perceptions of the EU in

the UNFCCC (Gupta and van der Grijp 2000; Karlsson et al. 2011).

http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cpi/research/funded-projects/chinese-eu/consortium.aspxhttp://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cpi/research/funded-projects/chinese-eu/consortium.aspxhttp://www.nottingham.ac.uk/cpi/research/funded-projects/chinese-eu/consortium.aspxhttp://www.eurobroadmap.eu/http://www.eumagine.org/default.aspxhttp://www.eumagine.org/default.aspx

9

Resources of power

The analysis of perceptions, at all levels (large public, political and

economic elites, media, civil society organizations) reveals an

unchallenged recognition that the EU is an economic power. The results

of the Garnet survey might be influenced by the fact that most data were

collected before the economic crisis started in 2008, however, studies

conducted more recently seem to confirm this perception, although with

less faith in the EU’s ability to profit of its structural strengths.

The image of the EU as an economic giant is present both in countries and

international institutions as well as among different types of

constituencies. As far as the wide public is concerned, the overall

assessment of the EU is biased by the large number of respondents that do

not know the EU and its institutions. As a matter of fact, although

knowledge of the EU varies (mainly according to education), it remains

rather low outside of Europe10

. Having said this, in most cases the general

public perceives the EU as an economic power more than anything else.

Much more telling is the perception of elites, that share the view of the EU

as prevalently an economic power. The EU is mainly referred to in

relation to its economic might. An example of this is James Sperling’s

analysis of the US Senate and House documents, hearings and prints

between 1990 and 2007. Although in these documents the EU “is only

marginally more important than the major EU member states individually

considered” (Sperling 2010: 15), it is accorded a high profile in the area

of trade: over 70 per cent of the documents and hearings with the EU in

10

For instance, in 2001 the self-assessment of knowledge of the EU was 23 per cent in

China, 45 per cent in South Africa and 43 per cent in Brazil. In some cases, such as

China, knowledge has grown rapidly over time, however, on the whole, it is rather

lacking. In general knowledge of “Europe” is much higher than that of the “EU”

(Lucarelli 2007b: 260).

10

the title referred to trade. Despite the fact that this attention is prevalently

negative (focussing on the trade distorting effects of the common

agricultural policy or EU energy dependence on Russia), the EU is mainly

identified as an economic actor. Among the US attentive foreign policy

elite, the EU is considered to be a relevant actor in macroeconomic

stability and mitigation of environmental threats (Sperling 2010: 18).

Analogously, of the few mentions of the EU in the press (the EU is

underrepresented in the international press), most are made with reference

to economic issue. In the US the New York Times (1990-2007) quotes the

EU with reference the economy 46% of the time; the Wall Street Journal

(1996-2007) 87% of the time (Sperling 2010: 25). It is interesting to note,

however, that in some countries the EU is also frequently quoted with

reference to security issues (traditional security, migration, violation of

human rights, …). For instance, on the New York Times (1990-2007),

54% of the articles in which the EU was quoted it was with reference to

security issues.

Analogous images appear in other countries. For instance, for the Indian,

Chinese, South African and Brazilian elites, the EU is a strategic

opportunity for development and economic growth and is mainly

described as a trade partner and the biggest market in the world. Economic

linkages between these countries and the EU are by a long way the most

common issues presented by the media. In Brazil, the analysis of a wide

array of official documents, speeches, and policy papers in the period

1995-2007 aimed at identifying the perception of the elites (government

representatives and agencies, political parties and business and labour

organisations) reveal the great relevance, in the eyes of the Brazilian

political elite, of the EU as a trade and financial partner. In 51% of

quotations in official documents, the EU’s image is portrayed as a global

11

trade and financial player (Poletti 2007a: 16-17).

Also Chinese elites regard the EU as a vast economic opportunity both as

a source of foreign direct investments and as a partner for technological

cooperation (Peruzzi et al 2007). In official documents, ‘complementarity’

is the word that is most often used to define relations between Chinese and

European economies. Chinese representatives are keen to recognize that

China and the EU have strong economic complementarities and would

both benefit from expanded cooperation (Peruzzi et al 2007; Morini et al

2010).

The perception of the EU as an economic power is shared also in

multilateral organizations. In his analysis of the perception of the EU at

the WTO, Ole Elgström (2007: 956) states that non-European participants

‘are unanimous in their description of the EU as a great power in trade”.

This strength is also perceived to have an impact on the negotiations as

interviewees say that the EU is a “key player”, a “crucial and pivotal” and

and even a “superpower”, adding that nothing happens in the WTO if the

EU and the US are not on board. A similar recognition of the EU as an

economic power is shared by directors and vice-presidents of the World

Bank: according to Eugenia Baroncelli (2010: 153) 78 per cent of the

interviewees regard the EU as an international power (Baroncelli 2010,

153).

Besides its economic might, the EU is also perceived as a ‘model of

regional integration’. In this respect, the EU has a resource of leadership

for what it is and not only for what it does. This is particularly the case of

elite perceptions, as the political speeches and official documents analysed

by the Garnet project reveal (e.g. in India, Brazil and South Africa). In the

case of Egypt, the experience of European integration is often presented in

the press as an exemplary experience of integration and as a realistic

12

alternative to the pan-Arab projects (Bayoumi 2007). In the case of Japan

the analysis of the press (The Daily Yomiuri, The ASAHI Shimbun and The

Nikkei Weekly, years 2004–2006), revealed that the largest number of

news articles regarding the EU dealt with European internal affairs (145

out of 371 articles reviewed) and most of them highlighted the EU’s

enlargement as a positive example of the peaceful benefits of regional

cooperation and a possible model for Asia (Chaban & Kauffmann 2007:

372-3). However, two things should be noticed: in the first place the

recognition of this quality does not come without criticism, as it will be

seen below; in the second place, this is the image of the EU that is more

likely to have been negatively affected by the economic crisis, the

difficulties of the Euro-zone and the deficiencies of internal solidarity

during the first phase of the crisis.

A further recognition of strength which is widely shared has to do with

EU’s values. Reference to EU values, even with an attempt to underline

similarities (see case-studies of emerging powers, particularly China and

Brazil), is rather frequent. Similar statements are also present in the

documents produced by multilateral organizations such as the World Bank

or the UNGA (Baroncelli 2010 and Brantner 2010). Specific areas in

which EU values are recognised to be conducive to a distinctive foreign

policy that might lead other countries are human rights, development and

multilateral cooperation: the EU is regarded as a promoter of all three due

to its own values. In all these cases the elites, the press as well as the

organized civil society recognise that the EU plays an important role.

Useful observatories in this respect are, respectively, the WB and the

UNGA. In the first case the EU is regarded as a “Standard-bearer of the

promotion of ‘good’ socio-economic values (poverty reduction, non-

discrimination, social inclusion, environmental

13

awareness), as well as guarantor of key individual rights” (Baroncelli

2010: 159); in the second case, “the EU is considered an

important actor across issue areas (Brantner 2010: 171). However, none of

these claims come without criticism, as we shall see below.

Specific cases in which the EU has been recognised to be at the forefront

of global multilateral campaigns are the fight against climate change.

Interviews at the UNGA with non European delegates demonstrate that

“the EU as a whole is viewed as the leader of the International Criminal

Court although it was criticized for its lack of interest in economic and

social Rights” (Brantner 2010: ).

Finally the EU is recognised to be an important actor in the adoption of

international agreements based on the rule of law. However, this

multilateral nature is interpreted quite differently in the various countries.

For instance, the public discourse of Chinese political elites uses

multilateralism to define what would be better described as a multipolar

world, characterised by the leadership of a few powers and firmly

anchored to the prerogatives of national sovereignty. Quite similar are the

views of governmental elites in India and Russia.

Negotiation skills and interactive modes

The EU’s negotiating style is ambivalently appreciated to be distinctively

“soft” and at the same time criticised for being too weak or too

patronizing.

For instance, as far as for democracy promotion is concerned, the EU

approach is frequently characterised as being a mix of soft power,

incentives and political dialogue, which make it different with respect to

the typical US’s aggressive way of ‘exporting democracy’ (Baroncelli

14

2010). However, the EU’s policy in this area as well as in the sphere of

human rights is criticised for its weakness to respond to human rights and

democracy violations in certain countries (and not others). Such a

criticism is shared by World Bank or UN interviewees, representatives of

civil society worldwide, several constituencies in the countries of the

sample.

The EU is also accused of a patronizing attitude.11

It is the case of the

democratic conditionality, inspired by Eurocentric values. All in all,

particularly in countries with a colonial past, the EU’s patronising style,

coupled with its use of protectionist barriers, contributes to reinforcing the

perception of it as a neo-colonial power (Brantner 2010: 172). Such a

perception is coupled with the idea that such an attitude has distorting

effects on local processes: it is the case of the evaluation of negative

impact of the EU on local regional integration processes (Sicurelli 2010).

The EU’s credibility and hence its ability to ‘lead by model and example’

is further challenged by what external elites accuse of being a patronising

negotiating style. For instance, ACP delegates negotiating with the EU are

reported to consider the Commission negotiators as patronizing and

showing little understanding and sympathy towards ACP needs (Elgström

2010: 143; see also Sheahan et al. 2010, 348).

Credibility and Legitimacy

The analysis of external perceptions of the EU reveal that there are a

number of criticised weaknesses which negatively affect EU’s credibility

and legitimacy. These criticism can be thus summarised:

11

This is one of the features which appears frequently in research on external images of

the EU, beyond the Garnet project (see Chaban and Holland 2011: 297).

15

- Double standards

- Inconsistency

- Remissive attitude with respect to the US

Double standards refer to the EU’s different attitude in similar

circumstances. For instance, the image of the EU as a democracy and

human rights promoter weakened (among the elites, media and the larger

public) by the observation of the EU’s double standards. In the Middle

East the EU is criticised for its soft response to Israel’s violations of

human rights as well as the EU’s failure to recognise Hizbullah as an

interlocutor in Lebanon. At the same time, the EU is accused of being

eager to punish weaker countries in sub-Saharan Africa, where its

economic leverage is higher, while glossing over abuse in powerful

countries such as China or in the Middle East. Double standards are

underlined also as fare as the internal EU democractic deficit is concerned

(Carta 2010).

Inconsistency refers to the incoherence of different EU policies. A typical

example is the relationship between EU’s development cooperation and

the common agricultural policy. Criticism in this direction are widely

spread in the world and over constituencies. Even the World Bank

interviewees claim that the EU “bear[s] the responsibility for a less than

development-friendly stance in its agricultural policies,

and, increasingly, in its trade policies” (Baroncelli 2010: 159).

Inconsistency among the EU’s different external policies of CAP,

environment, trade and human rights policies is reported by Ole Elgstrom

to be a very important element in the leadership gap perceived in

multilateral settings. In his analysis of perceptions of leadership at the

16

CITES, UNFF and WTO, Elgström (2006) finds a common element in the

fact that the other participants regard the EU as a potential leader, which,

however, does not lead. The reasons are reported to be internal division,

conflict among the different roles of the EU, but mostly inconsistency

among the EU’s different external policies. Analogously, at the AU,

although ‘representatives depict the EU as a model for integration and a

key partner for economic development’, they firmly criticise ‘the lack of

coherence between EU trade and development policies’ and ‘the way in

which the EU imposes its model of integration and its conditions for

development aid’ (Sicurelli 2010a, 190).

Finally, mainly as far as diplomatic negotiations are concerned, the EU is

frequently perceived to have a subordinate position with respect to the US.

According to Simona Santoro and Rami Nasrallah (2010), Palestinian

elites believe that in the Middle East peace process the EU has assumed a

‘subordinate position’ vis-a`-vis the US. Along the same lines, in Iran,

political elites and civil society see the EU ‘as passively receiving and

accepting negative biases on Iran from other foreign policy actors’,

especially the US (Santini, Mauriello and Trombetta 2010: 219).

A leader?

What is interesting to analyse is the extent to which the image of the EU

as an important world actor is associated with an image of leadership: is

the EU actually able to lead international politics in the perception of non-

Europeans? Here, some interesting results point to a gap between

resources of power (or potential leadership) and the ability to transform

them into actual leadership. Such a gap between potential and actual

leadership is perceived across the board, by both the elites and the general

17

public. Even in countries in which the public perceives economic

advantages generated by the EU (for instance China and Russia) there is

little or no clear confidence in the EU’s ability to take a role as a leading

international actor. Even where the EU’s power is appreciated, such as in

Asia, the public does not attach leadership capacity to the EU.12

Such a

leading role is not recognised to be present today and even less in the

future. This data, already present in 200613

, has been further reinforced by

the effects of the economic crisis. As a matter of fact, recent opinion polls

show evidence that the 2008ff economic crisis impacted negatively on the

perception of the EU’s influence in the world: a GlobeScan/PIPA and

BBC World Service opinion poll showed that positive views of the EU

dropped eight points between 2011 and 2012 (with negative views rising

by the same amount), losing a further point in 2013. Chris Coulter,

GlobeScan’s president commented the 2012 results saying that: “The fact

that views of the EU itself had a sharper downturn than specific EU

countries suggests doubts about how the EU is dealing with its collective

problems.” 14

A gap between leadership potential and effective behaviour is also

frequent in the political realm, particularly as far as conflict resolution is

concerned. For instance, the EU’s internal division and its inability to take

12

This finding is shared also by other researche projects, more focused on Asia, see

Holland and Chaban 2010a, 5; Chaban 2011, 18.

13 See World Powers in the 21st Century (2006) by the Bertelsmann Stiftung (available

at: http://www.bertelsmann-

stiftung.de/bst/en/media/xcms_bst_dms_19189_19190_2.pdf).

14 Globescan for the BBC World Service, Views of Europe Slide Sharply in Global Poll,

While Views of China Improve, 10 May 2012, http://www.globescan.com/84-press-

releases-2012/186-views-of-europe-slide-sharply-in-global-poll-while-views-of-china-

improve.html. The 2013 report is available at: http://www.globescan.com/commentary-

and-analysis/press-releases/press-releases-2013/277-views-of-china-and-india-slide-

while-uks-ratings-climb.html

http://www.globescan.com/84-press-releases-2012/186-views-of-europe-slide-sharply-in-global-poll-while-views-of-china-improve.htmlhttp://www.globescan.com/84-press-releases-2012/186-views-of-europe-slide-sharply-in-global-poll-while-views-of-china-improve.htmlhttp://www.globescan.com/84-press-releases-2012/186-views-of-europe-slide-sharply-in-global-poll-while-views-of-china-improve.html

18

on an independent role with respect to the US is frequently considered to

be the reason for its failure to play a leading role in the Middle East peace

process.

A high degree of influence - which, however, does not necessarily

transform into leadership - is recognised by participants as applying to the

EU in climate change negotiations (Kilian and Elgström 2010; Karlsson et

al. 2011). However, upon making a comparison with other potential

leaders, Karlsson et al. (2011) demonstrated that the EU is regarded as one

leader among others, and not the only one.

Conclusions

To sum up the results of this survey, we can notice that the most striking

feature is probably the gap between the recognition of a high potential for

leadership (including a capacity for an innovative stance in international

politics) and actual leadership. In other words the EU is perceived to be

unable to transform its potential into actual leadership and this seems to be

a result of a series of weaknesses which are by no means limited to the

EU’s internal division15

and point to weaknesses as far as three important

features of leadership are concerned: credibility, perception of legitimacy

and a negotiation style conducive to “followship” (i.e. inclusive and non

patronizing).

15

Interesting to notice that in multilateral negotiations Elgstrom’s analysis reveal the

appreciation of the EU as a single actor -

19

References

(to be revised)

Aggestam, L. (2008) ‘Introduction: ethical power Europe’, International

Affairs 84(1): 1–11.

Ahnild, A. (2005) ‘Setting the global trade agenda: the European Union and

the launch of the Doha Round’ in Elgström, Ole & Jonssön, Christer (eds)

European Union Negotiations: Processes, Networks and Institutions,

Routledge: Oxon. pp. 130-147.

Allen, D. & Smith, M (1990) ‘Western Europe’s Presence in the

Contemporary International Arena’ Review of International Studies 16,

19-37 .

Allen, D. & Smith, M (1998) ‘The European Union’s Security Presence:

Barrier, Facilitator or Manager?’ in Rhodes, C. (ed.) The European Union

in the World Community (Lynne Reiner Publishers Ltd) pp. 19-44

Andretta, M., and N. Doerr. 2007. Imagining Europe: internal and external

non-state actors at the European crossroads. European Foreign Affairs

Review 12, no. 3: 385–400.

Baroncelli, E. 2010. Aid, trade and development: World Bank views on the

EU’s role in the global political economy. In External perceptions of the

European Union as a global actor, eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti.

Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp. 150–164.

Bayoumi S. 2007, Egyptian Views of the EU: Pragmatic, Paternalistic and

Partnership Concerns, European Foreign Affairs Review, 12, 3: 331–347.

Benediek, A. 2008. The ENP. Visibility and perceptions in the partner

countries. Working Paper FG2. Berlin: Stiftung Wissenshaft und Politik,

2008/01.

Bersick, S. et al. (eds). 2012. Asia in the eyes of Europe: images of a rising

giant: Baden Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft.

20

Brantner, F. 2010. The EU through the eyes of the United Nations: the quest

for unity. In External perceptions of the European Union as a global actor,

pp. 165–179. eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti. Abingdon and New

York: Routledge.

Bretherton, C., and J. Vogler. 2006. The European Union as a global actor.

2nd edn Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Brovelli, A., N. Chaban, S.-Y. Lai, and M. Holland. 2010. Invisible forum?

The public outreach of the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM). Journal of

Contemporary European Research 6, no. 4: 353–69.

Burns, J MacGregor. Leadership. New York: Harper & Row, 1978.

Carta, C. 2010. Close enough? The EU’s global role described by non-

European diplomats in Brussels In External perceptions of the European

Union as a global actor, eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti. Abingdon

and New York: Routledge, pp. 207–217.

Cederman, L.-E., ed. 2001. Constructing Europe’s identity: the external

dimension. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.

Chaban, N. 2011. The EU’s imagery as a social, developmental and

environmental actor in Asia. EU External Affairs Review, 5–23 July,

http://www.eu-review.com/editor/image/stranky3_soubory/

chaban_eu_review_july_2011.pdf (accessed 10 november 2012).

Chaban, N., O. Elgström, and M. Holland. 2006. The EU as others see it.

European Foreign Affairs Review 11, no. 2: 245–62.

Chaban, N., and M. Holland, eds. 2008. The European Union and the Asia-

Pacific: media, public and elite perceptions of the EU. Abingdon and New

York: Routledge.

Chaban, N., and M. Holland. 2011. The EU as an agent for democracy:

images of the EU in the Pacific media ‘mirror’. Journal of European

Integration 33, no. 3: 285–302.

http://www.eu-review.com/editor/image/stranky3_soubory/chaban_eu_review_july_2011.pdfhttp://www.eu-review.com/editor/image/stranky3_soubory/chaban_eu_review_july_2011.pdfhttp://www.eu-review.com/editor/image/stranky3_soubory/chaban_eu_review_july_2011.pdfhttp://www.eu-review.com/editor/image/stranky3_soubory/chaban_eu_review_july_2011.pdf

21

Chaban, N., M. Holland, and P. Ryan, eds. 2009. The EU through the eyes of

Asia: new cases, new findings. Singapore and London: World Scientific.

Chaban, N., and M. Kauffmann. 2007a. Country report: Japan. In Research

report: the external image of the European Union, ed. S. Lucarelli, Garnet

Working Paper, 17/7 (e-book), http://www2.war-

wick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf (accessed 10 november

2012)

Chaban, N., and M. Kauffmann. 2007. ‘East is east, and west is west’?

Survey of EU images in Japan’s public discourses. European Foreign

Affairs Review 12, no. 3: 363–84.

Chaban, N., N. Smith, and M. Holland. 2010. The potential of return

migration as a resource for EU public diplomacy efforts: a case-study of

New Zealand return migrants from the EU. European Journal of Cross-

Cultural Competence and Management 1, no. 4: 378–98.

Damro, C. (2012): Market Power Europe, Journal of European Public Policy,

19:5, 682-699

Daalder, I.H.; Destler, I. M., In the Shadow of the Oval Office: Profiles of the

National Security Advisers and the Presidents They Served: from JFK to

George W. Bush. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2009.

Dee M. (2011) Evaluating European Union leadership in multilateral

negotiations: A framework for analysis, Paper presented to the European

Union Studies Association (EUSA) Biennial Conference, Regency Hyatt

Hotel, Boston 3-5 March 2011

Della Ratta, D. 2010. Non-western media and the EU: perspectives for Al

Jazeera. In External perceptions of the European Union as a global actor,

eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti. Abingdon and New York: Routledge,

pp. 195–206.

Diez, T. 2005. Constructing the self and changing Others: reconsidering

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf

22

‘Normative Power Europe’. Millennium 33, no. 3: 613–36.

Elgström, O. 2006. Leader or foot-dragger? Perceptions of the European

Union in international multi-lateral negotiations. Stockholm, Swedish

Institute for European Policy Studies, Report 1/2006. Stockholm, Swedish

Institute for European Policy Studies, Report 1/2006.

Elgström, O. 2007a. The EU as a leader in multilateral international

negotiations. International Rela-tions 21, no. 4: 445–58.

Elgström, O. 2007b. The EU in international trade negotiations. Journal of

Common Market Studies 45, no. 4: 949–67.

Elgström, O. 2008. Images of the EU in EPA negotiations: angel, demon – or

just human? European Integration Online Journal 12, no. 5,

http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/view/ 2008_005a/81

(accessed 2 april 2013).

Elgström, O. 2010. Partnership in peril? Images and strategies in EU-ACP

economic partnership agreement negotiations In External perceptions of

the European Union as a global actor, eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti.

Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp. 137–149.

Elgström, O., and M. Smith, eds. 2006. The European Union’s roles in

international politics. Concepts and analysis. Abingdon and New York:

Routledge.

EuropeAid. 2012. Evaluation of visibility of EU external action. Framework

Contract, EuropeAid/ 122888/C/SER/Multi, EVA 2007 – Lot 5,

http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evalua

tion_reports/reports/2012/1307_vol_1_en.pdf (accessed 9 October 2012).

Finnemore M., Sikkinnk K. (1998), ‘International Norms Dynamics and

Political Change’, International Organization, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 887–917

Fioramonti, L. 2009. African perceptions of the European Union: assessing

the work of the EU in the field of democracy promotion and

http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/view/2008_005a/81http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/view/2008_005a/81http://eiop.or.at/eiop/index.php/eiop/article/view/2008_005a/81http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2012/1307_vol_1_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2012/1307_vol_1_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2012/1307_vol_1_en.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/how/evaluation/evaluation_reports/reports/2012/1307_vol_1_en.pdf

23

peacekeeping. Report commissioned by the International Institute for

Democracy and Electoral Assistance. Stockholm: IDEA.

Fioramonti, L., and P. Kimunguyi. 2011. Europe vs. China in Africa: public

opinion and elite views in Kenya and South Africa. The International

Spectator 46, no. 1: 69–82

Fioramonti, L., and S. Lucarelli. 2008. How do the Others see us? European

political identity and the external image of the EU In The search for a

European identity. Values, policies and legitimacy of the European Union,

eds. F. Cerutti and S. Lucarelli. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp.

218–225.

Fioramonti, L., and A. Poletti. 2008. Facing the giant: southern perspectives

on the European Union. Third World Quarterly 28, no. 1: 167–80.

Geeraerts, G. 2007. In the eyes of the dragon. Chinese perceptions of the EU

as a global actor. Asia Paper 1, no. 4 (2

December):http://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%

20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20

the%20EU,%20Asia%

20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussel

s..pdf (accessed 30 September 2011).

Geden O. (2010), Leading by Example, Revisited: Can the Eu Still Serve As

a Model to Lead Global Climate Policy? Harvard International Review, 32

(1), pp. XXX

Grobe C. (2010), “The power of words: Argumentative persuasion in

international negotiations”, European Journal of International Relations ,

16 (1), pp. 5-29.

Groenleer, M.L.P & van Schaik, L.G. (2007) ‘United we Stand? The

European Union’s international Actorness in the Cases of the ICC and the

Kyoto Protocol’ Journal of Common Market Studies 45(5), 969-998

http://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdfhttp://www.vub.ac.be/biccs/documents/6%29,%20In%20the%20Eyes%20of%20the%20Dragon,%20Chinese%20Perceptions%20of%20the%20EU,%20Asia%20Paper%20vol%5B1%5D.%201%20%284%29,%20BICCS,%20Brussels..pdf

24

Gupta, J. & Grubb, M. (eds.) (2000) Climate Change and European

Leadership: A Sustainable Role for Europe? (Kluwer Academic

Publishers: Dordrecht)

Gupta, J., and N. van der Grijp. 2000. Perceptions of the EU’s role. In

Climate change and European leadership: a sustainable role for Europe?,

eds. J. Gupta and M. Grubb. Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 67–82.

Hill C. (1993) ‘The Capability-Expectations Gap or Conceptualising Europe’s

International Role’ Journal of Common Market Studies 31(3), 305-325

Holland, M., and N. Chaban. 2010a. Perspectives on the role of the EU: a

study of Asian stakeholders’ opinion from six countries. The International

Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance Working Paper.

Stockholm: IDEA.

Holland, M., and N. Chaban (eds). 2010b. Reflections from Asia and Europe:

how do we perceive one another? Asia Europe Journal 2, no. 8 (Special

Issue):

Holland, M., N. Chaban, J. Bain, K. Stats, and P. Sutthisripok. 2005. EU in

the views of Asia-Pacific elites: Australia, New Zeeland and Thailand.

NCRE Research Series No. 5, National Centre for Research on Europe,

University of Canterbury,

http://www.europe.canterbury.ac.nz/appp/publications/pdf/appp_elites_pu

blication.pdf (accessed 30 September 2011).

Jørgensen, K. E., M. A. Pollack, and B. Rosamond, eds. 2006. Handbook of

European Union politics. London: Sage.

Karlsson, C., C. Parker, M. Hjerpe, and B.-O. Linne´r. 2011. Looking for

leaders: perceptions of climate change leadership among climate change

negotiation participants. Global Environmental Policy 11, no. 1: 89–107.

Kilian, B., and O. Elgstrom. 2010. Still a green leader? The European

Union’s role in international climate negotiations. Cooperation and

http://www.europe.canterbury.ac.nz/appp/publications/pdf/appp_elites_publication.pdfhttp://www.europe.canterbury.ac.nz/appp/publications/pdf/appp_elites_publication.pdfhttp://www.europe.canterbury.ac.nz/appp/publications/pdf/appp_elites_publication.pdfhttp://www.europe.canterbury.ac.nz/appp/publications/pdf/appp_elites_publication.pdf

25

Conflict 45, no. 3: 255–73.

Ikenberry, G. John (1996) ‘The future of international leadership’ Political

Science Quarterly 111(3) pp. 385-402.

Ikenberry, G. John (1989) ‘Rethinking the Origin of American Hegemony’,

Political Science Quarterly 104(3) 375-400.

Lisbonne-de Vergeron, K. 2006. Contemporary Indian views of Europe.

London: Chatham House,

http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/108304 (accessed

30 September 2011).

Lisbonne-de Vergeron, K. 2007. Contemporary Chinese views of Europe.

London: Chatham House,

http://www.comw.org/cmp/fulltext/0711vergeron.pdf (accessed 30

September 2011).

Lisbonne de Vergeron, K. 2011. Chinese and Indian Views of Europe since

the Crisis: new perspectives form the emerging Asian giants, Konrad

Adenauer Stiftung, London; Global Policy Institute, London; Fondation

Robert Schuman, Paris. Available online:

http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_29944- 1522-2-30.pdf?120118092530

(accessed 18. 2. 2013).

Lisbonne-de Vergeron, K. 2012. L’Europe vue de Chine et d’Inde depuis la

crise : nouvelles perspec-tives des grands e´mergents asiatiques,

Fondation Robert Schuman, la Fondation Konrad Adenauer et le Global

Policy Institute.

Liqun, Z. 2007. Chinese Perceptions of the EU and the Sino-European

Relationship. In China Europe Relations: perceptions, policies and

prospects, eds. D. Shambaugh, E. Sandschneider, and H. Zhou. London:

Routledge.

Liqun, Z. 2007. Chinese Perceptions of the EU and the Sino-European

http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/108304http://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/papers/view/108304http://www.comw.org/cmp/fulltext/0711vergeron.pdfhttp://www.comw.org/cmp/fulltext/0711vergeron.pdfhttp://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_29944-1522-2-30.pdf?120118092530http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_29944-1522-2-30.pdf?120118092530http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_29944-1522-2-30.pdf?120118092530

26

Relationship. In China-Europe Relations: perceptions, policies and

prospects, eds. D. Shambaugh, E. Sandschneider, and H. Zhou, pp. 148–

173. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Lucarelli, S. (ed.). 2007a. The external image of the European Union. Garnet

Working Paper, 17/07,

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf

(accessed 30 September 2011).

Lucarelli, S. (ed.). 2007b. Beyond self perception: the Others’ view of the

European Union. European Foreign Affairs Review, 3 (Special Issue):

249–419.

Lucarelli, S. 2008. European political identity, foreign policy and the Others

image: an unexplored relationship. In The search for a European identity.

Values, policies and legitimacy of the Euro-pean Union, eds. F. Cerutti

and S. Lucarelli. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp. 23–42.

Lucarelli, S. 2014. , “Seen From the Outside: the State-of-the-Art on the

External Image of the EU”, Journal of European Integration, online

27.4.2013

(); printed vol 39, n. 1, 2014.

Lucarelli, S., and L. Fioramonti (eds). 2009. Research report: the external

image of the European Union (phase two). Garnet Working Paper, 62/09,

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/ workingpapers/6209_alt.pdf

(accessed 18 February 2013).

Lucarelli, S., and L. Fioramonti, eds. 2010. External perceptions of the

European Union as a global actor. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Lucarelli, S., and I. Manners, eds. 2006. Values and principles in European

Union foreign policy. Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Malnes, R (1995) “‘Leader’ and ‘Entrepreneur’ in International Negotiations:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttps://mail.unibo.it/owa/redir.aspx?C=UVpjmtI5iUmbJ4NXls8ZWVnlmnlEW9AIqqo6s-_ouWgRmk3koOJqdJoDt7VEPGTOBILmm2AzlsU.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.tandfonline.com%2fdoi%2fabs%2f10.1080%2f07036337.2012.761981%3fai%3d7b3t%26ui%3dely8%26af%3dHhttps://mail.unibo.it/owa/redir.aspx?C=UVpjmtI5iUmbJ4NXls8ZWVnlmnlEW9AIqqo6s-_ouWgRmk3koOJqdJoDt7VEPGTOBILmm2AzlsU.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.tandfonline.com%2fdoi%2fabs%2f10.1080%2f07036337.2012.761981%3fai%3d7b3t%26ui%3dely8%26af%3dHhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/6209_alt.pdf

27

A Conceptual Analysis” European Journal of International Relations 1(1),

87-112

Manners, I. 2002. Normative power Europe: a contradiction in terms?.

Journal of Common Market Studies 40, no. 2: 253–74.

Men, J. 2006. Chinese perceptions of the European Union: a review of

leading Chinese journals. European Law Journal 12, no. 6: 788–806.

Meunier, S. (2000) ‘What Single Voice? European Institutions and EU-U.S.

Trade Negotiations’ International Organization 54(1), 103-135

Morini et al XXX in Lucarelli, S., and L. Fioramonti, eds. 2010. External

perceptions of the European Union as a global actor. Abingdon and New

York: Routledge.

Murray P., “Model Europe? Reflections on the EU as a model of regional

integration”, in Pompeo Della Posta, Milica Uvalic and Amy Verdun

(eds), Globalization, Development and Integration . Basingstoke,

Palgrave, 2009, pp. 273-286

Murray, P. 2003. An Asia Pacific response to the European Union: Australian

elite perceptions. Asia Europe Journal 1, no. 1: 103–19.

Nye, J.S., Jr. (2004) Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics,

New York.

Nye, J.S., Jr. (2008), The Powers to Lead. New York: Oxford University

Press

Oberthür, S. & Kelly, C. R. (2008) ‘The EU Leadership in International

Climate Policy: Achievements and Challenges’ International Spectator

43(3), 35-50

Orbie, J., Versluys, H. (2008) ‘The European Union’s International

Development Policy: Leading and Benevolent?’ in Orbie, J. (ed.) (2008)

Europe's Global Role: External Policies of the European Union (Ashgate)

pp. 67-90

28

Ortega, M. (ed.). 2004. Global views on the European Union. Chaillot Paper

No. 72, http://www.iss. europa.eu/uploads/media/cp072.pdf (accessed 30

September 2011).

Pace M. (2007) Norm shifting from EMP to ENP: the EU as a norm

entrepreneur in the south? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 20

(4), pp. 659-675.

Peruzzi R., Poletti A., Zhan S. (2007) “China’s Views of Europe: A Maturing

Partnership”, in Lucarelli, S. (ed.). Beyond self perception: the Others’

view of the European Union. European Foreign Affairs Review, 3

(Special Issue): 311-330.

Poletti A. (2007a), ‘Country Report on Brazil’ in Sonia Lucarelli (ed.) The

external image of the European Union. Garnet Working Paper, 17/07,

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf

(accessed 30 September 2011).

Poletti A. (2007b) The EU for Brazil: A Partner Towards a ‘Fairer’

Globalization?, in Lucarelli, S. (ed.). Beyond self perception: the Others’

view of the European Union. European Foreign Affairs Review, 3

(Special Issue): 249–419.

Portela, C. 2010. The perception of the European Union in Southeast Asia.

Asia Europe Journal 8, no. 2: 149–60.

Retzlaff, S. 2010. The representation of the European Union in the Canadian

media during the climate change debate 2007. Critical Approaches to

Discourse Analysis across Disciplines 4, no. 1: 54–72.

Retzlaff, S., and S. Gänzle. 2008. Constructing the European Union in

Canadian news. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across

Disciplines 2, no. 2: 67–89.

Risse T. (2000) “Let's Argue!”: Communicative Action in World Politics.

International Organization, 54, pp 1-39.

http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/cp072.pdfhttp://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/cp072.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf

29

Santoro, S., and R. Nasrallah. 2010. Conflict and Hope: The EU in the Eyes

of Palestine. In External Perceptions of the European Union as a Global

Actor, eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti, 87– 104. Abingdon and New

York: Routledge.

Santini, R., R. Mauriello and L. Trombetta. 2010. ‘Taking the lead. EU

mediation role assessed by Iran and Lebanon’ in S. Lucarelli and L.

Fioramonti (eds) External Perceptions of the European Union as a Global

Actor, Abingdon and New York, Routledge, pp. 52–69.

Schirm (2009): Leaders in Need of Followers: Emerging Powers in Global

Governance, European Journal of International Relations. Vol. XX (X). p.

1-30.

Secrieru, S. 2010. Russia’s Mainstream Perceptions of the EU and its

Member States, Working Paper of the Study Programme on European

Security (SPES). Online at http://www.iep-

berlin.de/fileadmin/website/09_Publikationen/SPES_Policy_Papers/SPES

_Policy_Papers_2010_Secrieru.pdf (accessed 13 July 2012).

Shambaugh, D. 2008. China Eyes Europe’s Role in the World: real

convergence or cognitive dissonance? In China–Europe Relations:

perceptions, policies and prospects, eds. D. Shambaugh, E. Sandschneider,

and H. Zhou. London: Routledge.

Shambaugh, D., E. Sandschneider, and Z. Hong, eds. 2008. China-Europe

relations: perceptions, policies and prospects. Abingdon and New York:

Routledge.

Sheahan, L., N. Chaban, O. Elgström, and M. Holland. 2010. Benign partner

or benign master? Economic partnership agreement negotiations between

the European Union and the Pacific Islands.

Sicurelli, D. 2010. Regional partners? Perceptions and criticisms at the

African Union In External perceptions of the European Union as a global

http://www.iep-berlin.de/fileadmin/website/09_Publikationen/SPES_Policy_Papers/SPES_Policy_Papers_2010_Secrieru.pdfhttp://www.iep-berlin.de/fileadmin/website/09_Publikationen/SPES_Policy_Papers/SPES_Policy_Papers_2010_Secrieru.pdfhttp://www.iep-berlin.de/fileadmin/website/09_Publikationen/SPES_Policy_Papers/SPES_Policy_Papers_2010_Secrieru.pdfhttp://www.iep-berlin.de/fileadmin/website/09_Publikationen/SPES_Policy_Papers/SPES_Policy_Papers_2010_Secrieru.pdf

30

actor, eds. S. Lucarelli and L. Fioramonti. Abingdon and New York:

Routledge, pp. 180–194.

Sicurelli, D. 2010b. The European Union’s Africa policies: Norms, interests

and impact. Aldershot: Ashgate.

Smith, K.E. 2006. The limits of proactive cosmopolitanism: the EU and

Burma, Cuba and Zimbabwe. In The European Union’s roles in

international politics. Concepts and analysis, eds. O. Elgström and M.

Smith. Abingdon and New York: Routledge, pp. 155–171.

Stats, K. 2007. Country report: Australia. In Research report: the external

image of the European Union, ed. S. Lucarelli, GARNET Working Paper,

17/7 (e-book), http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/

soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf (accessed 2 April 2013).

Telo`, M. 2006. Europe: a civilian power? European Union, global

governance, world order. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

Thompson, L.L. Making the Team: A Guide for Managers. 2d ed. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2007.

Tsuruoka M. 2006. “How External Perspectives of the European Union Are

Shaped: Endogenous and Exogenous Sources”, Paper Prepared for the

20th World Congress of the International Political Science Association

(IPSA), Fukuoka, Japan, 9–13 July 2006, ‘EU-Asia Relations and Security

Matters’ (RC03 on European Unification).

Underdal, A. (1994) ‘Leadership Theory: Rediscovering the Arts of

Management’ in I. W. Zartman (ed) (2004) International Multilateral

Negotiation: Approaches to the Management of Complexity, Josey Bass:

San Francisco. pp. 178-197

Young, O. R. (1991) ‘Political leadership and regime formation: on the

development of institutions in international society’ International

Organization 45(3), 281-308.

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdfhttp://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/garnet/workingpapers/1707.pdf

31

Wurzel R.K.W., Connelly J. (2010) (eds) The European Union as a Leader in

International Climate Change Politics, Routledge/UACES series: Oxon.

Xuetong Y. (2011), International Leadership and Norm Evolution, The

Chinese Journal of International Politics, Vol. 4, 2011, 233–264.

Zimmermann, H. (2007) ‘Realist power Europe?’, Journal of Common

Market Studies 45(4): 813–32.

Zwolski, K and Kaunert, C. (2011), 'The EU and climate security: A case of

successful norm entrepreneurship?' , European Security, 20 (1) , pp. 21-

43.