Grasping the everyday and extraordinary in EU–NATO relations: the added value of practice approaches

References

• Abbot, A., 1988. The system of professions: an essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Adler, E., 2008. The spread of security communities: communities of practice, self-restaraint, and NATO’s post-Cold War transformation. European journal of international relations, 14 (2), 195–230. doi: 10.1177/1354066108089241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler, E. and Pouliot, V., eds., 2011a. International practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Adler, E. and Pouliot, V., 2011b. International practices. International theory, 3 (1), 1–36. doi: 10.1017/S175297191000031X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler-Nissen, R., 2008. The diplomacy of opting out: a Bsourdieudian approach to national integration strategies. Journal of common market studies, 46 (3), 663–684. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2008.00799.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler-Nissen, R., 2015. Towards a practice turn in EU studies. The everyday of European integration. Journal of common marked studies, 54 (1), 87–103. doi: 10.1111/jcms.12329
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adler-Nissen, R. and Pouliot, V., 2014. Power in practice: negotiating the international intervention in Libya. European journal of international relations, 20 (4), 889–911. doi: 10.1177/1354066113512702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, M. and Neumann, I.B., 2012. Practices as models: a methodology with an illustration concerning wampum diplomacy. Millennium: journal of international studies, 40 (3), 457–481. doi: 10.1177/0305829812441848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen, M., Neumann, I.B., and Sending, O.J., 2016. Why theorizing practice? Unpublished workshop paper.
   Google Scholar
• Bicchi, F., 2011. The EU as a community of practice: foreign policy communications in the COREU network. Journal of European public policy, 18 (8), 1115–1132. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2011.615200
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bicchi, F., 2016. Europe under occupation: the European diplomatic community of practice in the Jerusalem area. European security, 25 (4), 461–477 ( Special issue on European diplomatic practices: contemporary challenges and innovative approaches). doi: 10.1080/09662839.2016.1237942
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biermann, R., 2008. Towards a theory of inter-organizational networking: the Euro-Atlantic security institutions interacting. The review of international organizations, 3 (2): 151–177. doi: 10.1007/s11558-007-9027-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biermann, R. and Koops, J.A., eds., 2017. Palgrave handbook of inter-organizational relations in world politics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Bigo, D., 2002. Security and immigration. Toward a critique of the governmentality of unease. Alternatives, 27 (1), 63–92. doi: 10.1177/03043754020270S105
   Google Scholar
• Bremberg, N., 2015. The European Union as security community-building institution: venues, networks and co-operative security practices. Journal of common market studies, 53 (3), 674–692. doi: 10.1111/jcms.12219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueger, C., 2013a. Counter-piracy, communities of practice and new security alignments. Journal of regional security, 8 (3), 49–62. doi: 10.11643/issn.2217-995X131SPB27
   Google Scholar
• Bueger, C., 2013b. Communities of security practice at work? The emerging African maritime security regime. African security, 6 (3–4): 297–316. doi: 10.1080/19392206.2013.853579
   Google Scholar
• Bueger, C., 2015. Making things known: epistemic practices, the united nations, and the translation of piracy. International political sociology, 9 (1), 1–18. doi: 10.1111/ips.12073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueger, C., 2016. Doing Europe: agency and the European Union in the field of counter-piracy practice. European security, 25 (4), 407–422 ( Special issue on European diplomatic practices: contemporary challenges and innovative approaches). doi: 10.1080/09662839.2016.1236020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bueger, C. and Gadinger, F., eds., 2014. International practice theory. New perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan (Palgrave Pivot).
   Google Scholar
• Buzan, B., Wæver, O., and de Wilde, J., 1998. Security. A new framework for analysis. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
   Google Scholar
• de Coning, C. and Friis, K., 2011. Coherence and coordination. The limits of the comprehensive approach. Journal of international Peacekeeping, 15, 243–272. doi: 10.1163/187541110X540553
   Google Scholar
• Cornish, P., 1996. European security: the end of architecture and the new NATO. International affairs, 72 (4), 751–769. doi: 10.2307/2624120
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cornish, P., 2006. EU and NATO: cooperation or competition? Briefing paper, security and defence. Brussels, European Parliament, DG for External Policies of the Union. October 27.
   Google Scholar
• Costa, O. and Jørgensen, K.E., eds., 2012. The influence of international institutions on the EU: when multilateralism hit Brussels. Palgrave Studies in European Union Politics. Basingstoke: Palgrave/Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Cross, M.K.D., 2011. Security integration in Europe. How knowledge-based networks are transforming the European Union. Ann Arbour: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Deighton, A., 1996. Western European Union 1954–1997: defence, security, integration. Oxford: St. Anthony’ s College/The WEU Institute for Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Drent, M., 2014. From “effective” to “selective multilateralism”: the European Union’s relations with NATO. In: E. Drieskens and L.G. van Schaik, eds., The EU and effective multilateralism. London: Routledge
   Google Scholar
• Drieskens, D. and van Schaik, L.G., eds., 2014. The EU and effective multilateralism. Internal and external reform practices. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dufort, P. 2014. Experiences and knowledges of war. Cria, 24 (4), 611–614.
   Google Scholar
• Duke, S., 2008. The future of EU-NATO relations a case of mutual irrelevance through competition? Journal of European integration, 30 (1), 27–43. doi: 10.1080/07036330801959457
   Google Scholar
• Dursun-Ozkanca, O. and Crossley-Frolick, K., 2012. Security sector reform in Kososo: the complex division of labour between the EU and other multilateral institutions in building Kosovo’s police force. European security, 21 (2), 236–256. doi: 10.1080/09662839.2012.665886
   Google Scholar
• EEAS, 2016. EU and NATO increase information sharing on cyber incidents. Press releases, 10 February, Brussels. Available from: https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en/5254/EU%20and%20NATO.
   Google Scholar
• EU and NATO, 2002. “European Union – NATO Declaration on ESDP”, 16 December, Brussels. Available from: http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2002/p02-142e.htm [Accessed 17 December 2016].
   Google Scholar
• European Commission, 2016. Joint statement by High Representative Federica Mogherini and Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos on the modalities of the cooperation between Frontex and NATO in the Aegean Sea. Brussels, 6 March. Available from: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-16-601_en.htm [Accessed 3 April 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Gebhard, C. and Smith, S.J., 2014. The two faces of EU-NATO cooperation. Counter-piracy operations off the Somali coast. Cooperation and Conflict, 23 (3), 1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Græger, N., 2014. Security. EU-NATO relations: informal cooperation as a common lifestyle. In: A. Orsini, ed. The long-term political action of the EU with(in) international organizations. London: Ashgate, 157–180.
   Google Scholar
• Græger, N., 2016. European security as practice: EU-NATO communities of practice in the making?, European security, 25 (4): 478–502 ( Special issue on European diplomatic practices: contemporary challenges and innovative approaches). doi: 10.1080/09662839.2016.1236021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Græger, N. and Haugevik, K.M. 2011. The EU’s performance with and within NATO: assessing objectives, outcomes and organisational practices. European journal of integration, 33 (6), 743–757. doi: 10.1080/07036337.2011.606698
   Google Scholar
• Granovetter, M., 1973. The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology, 78, 1360–1380. doi: 10.1086/225469
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guillaume, X, 2011. Resistance and the international: The challenge of the everyday. International political sociology, 4 (5), 446–459. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-5687.2011.00145_1.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas, P.M., 1992. Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International organization, 46 (1), 1–35. doi: 10.1017/S0020818300001442
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen, L., 2011. Performing practices: a poststructuralist analysis of the Muhammad cartoon crisis. In: E. Adler and V. Pouliot, eds. International practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 280–309.
   Google Scholar
• Hofmann, S.C., 2009. Overlapping institutions in the realm of international security: the case of NATO and ESDP. Perspectives on politics, 7 (1), 45–52. doi: 10.1017/S1537592709090070
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopf, T., 2010. The logic of habit in international relations. European journal of international relations, 16 (4), 539–561. doi: 10.1177/1354066110363502
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howorth, J., 2000. European integration and defence: the ultimate challenge? Chaillot Paper 43. Paris: The WEU Institute for Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Howorth, J., 2003. ESDP and NATO: wedlock or deadlock? Cooperation and conflict: journal of the Nordic International Studies Association, 38 (3), 235–254. doi: 10.1177/00108367030383003
   Google Scholar
• Howorth, J., 2010. The EU as a global actor: grand strategy for a global grand bargain? Journal of common market studies, 48 (3), 455–474. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02060.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howorth, J., 2013. The Lisbon treaty, CSDP and the EU as a security actor. In: M. Telò and F. Ponjaert, eds., The EU’s foreign policy. What kind of power and diplomatic action? Surrey: Ashgate, 65–78.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, A.I., 2001. Treating international institutions as social environments. International studies quarterly, 45 (4), 487–515. doi: 10.1111/0020-8833.00212
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, K.E., ed., 2009. The European Union and Internatinal Organizations. Routledge/GARNET series: Europe in the World. London, Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, K.E. and Laatikainen, K.V., eds., 2012. Routledge handbook on the European Union and international institutions. performance, policy, power. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, K.E., Oberthür, S., and Shahin, J., 2011. The performance of the EU in international institutions. Journal of european integration, 33 (6), 599–757.
   Google Scholar
• Jørgensen, K.E., et al., eds., 2015. The Sage handbook of european foreign policy. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Juncos, A.E. and Pomorska, K., 2011. Invisible and unaccountable? national representatives and council officials in EU foreign policy. Journal of european public policy, 18 (8), 1096–1114. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2011.615197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Katzenstein, P.J., 2010. A world of plural and pluralist civilisations: multiple actors, traditions, and practices. In: P.J. Katzenstein, ed. Civilizations in world politics: plural and pluralist perspectives. New York: Routledge, 1–40.
   Google Scholar
• Knorr, K.C., 1999. Epistemic cultures. How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koops, J., 2017. Theorising inter-organisational relations: the ‘EU-NATO relationship’ as a catalystic case study. European security, 26 (3), 315–339.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kustermans, J., 2015. Parsing the practice turn: practice, practical knowledge, practices. Millennium – journal of international studies, 44 (2), 175–196. doi: 10.1177/0305829815613045
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachmann, N., 2010. The EU-CSDP-NATO relationship: asymmetric cooperation and the search for momentum. Studia diplomatica, 63 (3–4), 185–202.
   Google Scholar
• Lenzi, G., 1998. Weu’s future: from subcontractor to conveyor belt? WEU at fifty. G. Lenzi. Paris: The WEU Institute for Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Lequesne, C., 2015. EU foreign policy through the lens of practice theory: a different approach to the European external action service. Cooperation and conflict, 50 (3), 351–367. doi: 10.1177/0010836715578742
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lusthaus, C., et al.,eds., 2002. Organizational assessment: a framework for improving performance. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank/International Development Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, M., 2015. Beyond the band of brothers: the US military and the myth that women can’t fight. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Manners, I. and Whitman, R.G., eds., 2000. The foreign policies of European Union member states. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mérand, F., 2008. European defence policy. Beyond the nation state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Missiroli, A., 2002. Bigger EU, wider CFSP, stronger ESDP? The view from Central Europe. Occasional papers 34. Paris: European Union Institute for Security Studies.
   Google Scholar
• Mogherini, F., 2014. Remarks. 5 Nov. Available from: http://www.eeas.europa.eu/stateents-eeas/2014/141105_03_en.htm [Accessed 12 May 2017].
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2016a. Joint declaration by the President of the European Council, the President of the European Commission, and the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Press Release (2016 119, 8 July. Available from: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/officialtexts_133163.htm.
   Google Scholar
• NATO, 2016b. NATO and the EU deepen ties as ministerial meeting wraps up, 7 December. Available from: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_139112.htm?selectedLocale=en.
   Google Scholar
• Neumann, I.B., 2002. Returning practice to the linguistic turn: the case of diplomacy. Millennium: journal of international studies, 31 (3), 627–651. doi: 10.1177/03058298020310031201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann, I.B., 2005. To be a diplomat. International studies perspectives, 6 (1), 72–93. doi: 10.1111/j.1528-3577.2005.00194.x
   Google Scholar
• Neumann, I.B., 2007. A speech that the entire ministry may stand for, or: why diplomats never produce anything new. International political sociology, 1 (2), 183–200. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-5687.2007.00012.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neumann, I.B., 2013. Diplomatic sites: a critical enquiry. London: Hurst.
   Google Scholar
• Nicolini, D., 2013. Practice theory, work, and organization: an introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oberthür, S., Jørgensen, K.E., and Shahin, J., 2013. The performance of the EU in international institutions. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Onuf, N., 2012. World of our making: rules and rule in social theory and international relations. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pouliot, V., 2008. The logic of practicality: a theory of practice of security communities. International organization, 62 (2), 257–288. doi: 10.1017/S0020818308080090
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pouliot, V., 2010. International security in practice: the politics of NATO-Russia diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pouliot, V., 2016. International pecking orders: the politics and practice of multilateral diplomacy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pouliot, V. and Cornut, J., 2015. Practice theory and the study of diplomacy: a research agenda. Cooperation and conflict, 50 (3), 297–315. doi: 10.1177/0010836715574913
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell, W.W. and Dimaggio, P.J., eds., 1991. The new institutionalism in organizational analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ringmar, E., 2014. The search for dialogue as a hindrance to understanding: practices as inter-paradigmatic research program. International theory, 6 (1), 1–27. doi: 10.1017/S1752971913000316
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T.R., 1996. Social practices: a Wittgensteinian approach to human activity and the social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T.R., 2001. Introduction: practice theory. In: T.R. Schatzki, K.K. Cetina, and E. von Savigny, eds. The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge, 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T.R., 2010. The timespace of human activity: on performance, society, and history as indeterminate. Teleological Events. New York, NY: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T.R., Cetina, K.K., and von Savigny, E., eds., 2001. The practice turn in contemporary theory. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sending, O.J., Pouliot, V., and Neumann, I. B., eds., 2016. Diplomacy and the making of world politics. Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shake, K. and Block-Lainé, A., 1999. Building a European defence capability. Survival, 41 (1), 20–40. doi: 10.1080/713660050
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S.J., 2011. EU-NATO cooperation: a case of institutional fatigue?. European security, 20 (2), 243–264. doi: 10.1080/09662839.2011.557771
   Google Scholar
• Smith, S.J., and Gebhard, C., 2017. EU-NATO relations: running on the fumes of informed deconfliction. European security, 26 (3), 303–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, S.J., Tomic, N., and Gebhard, C., 2017. The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost: a Grounded Theory approach to the comparative study of decision-making in the NAC and PSC. European security, 26 (3), 359–378.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stephenson, P., 2013. Twenty years of multi-level governance: ‘where does it come from? what is it? where is it going?’. Journal of european public policy, 20 (6), 817–837. doi: 10.1080/13501763.2013.781818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sylvester, C., 2013. Experiencing the end and afterlives of international relations theory. European journal of international relations, 19 (3), 609–626. doi: 10.1177/1354066113494322
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varwick, J. and Koops, J., 2009. The European Union and NATO: “screwd interogranizationalism” in the making? In: K.E. Jørgensen, ed. The European Union and international organizations. Abington, Routledge, 101–130.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E., 1998a. Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E., 1998b. Communities of practice: learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, June.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E., McDermott, R., and Snyder, W.M., 2002. A guide to making knowledge: cultivating communities of practice. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E., Trayner, B., and de Laat, M., 2011. Promoting and assessing value creation in communities and networks: a conceptual framework. Rapport 18, Open University of the Netherlands. Available from: http://wenger-trayner.com/resources/what-is-a-community-of-practice/ [Accessed 19 January 2016].
   Google Scholar
• Whitman, R.G., 2004. NATO, the EU and ESDP: An emerging division of labour? Contemporary security policy, 25 (3), 430–451. doi: 10.1080/1352326042000330592
   Google Scholar
• Yost, D., 2007. NATO and international organizations. NATO Defense College Forum Papers Series. Rome NATO Defence College.
   Google Scholar