Ever since its establishment, the European Union has consistently advocated its values of democracy and freedom. Over the course of the last ten years, however, these values have come to be challenged by democratic backsliding, which constitutes a new phenomenon within the Union. One of the countries that has been subject to the most severe democratic decline is Poland, which today no longer classifies as a consolidated democracy. Despite Poland´s repeated neglect of the EU values, the fulfillment of which is required to join, Poland is still a full-fledged member of the EU.  The aim of this paper is to examine in what ways the EU has exercised its normative power in order to prevent Poland´s continuous democratic backsliding and determine the reasons for its failure. Results find that the EU has taken multiple actions against Poland, however with a less successful outcome. The reasons for the EUs unsuccess consist of internal divisions between member states and its legal procedures often being protracted and too complicated. Although the EU has yet to fulfill its legal actions against Poland there are signs indicating a slight change providing hope for the future.

This paper aims to study how the EU has maintained social, economic, cultural and political rights during Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The material used in this essay is official EU document from the different organs of the EU. To answer the question presented in the essay, both different human rights and Normative Power Europe have been used to see how the EU promoted the different human rights based on the idea that the EU is a normative power. To study this subject a text analysis has been used. By using this method, the study has found that social, economic, cultural and political rights all have been maintained by the EU in some way. Especially social and political rights and that the theory Normative Power Europe is applicable.

This study is a qualitative case study which aims to examine how the European Union enlargement politics might affect democratic reforms in Serbia which is a candidate country to the union. To achieve this, two questions were used: 1. How has the EU used normative power to get Serbia to implement democratic reforms and therefore improve their democratic status? 2. Has the EU succeeded, or failed, in getting Serbia to improve democratic reforms? The theoretical framework the study is based on is Ian Manners theory about normative power. Manners emphasized six strategies on how norms and values that the EU maintains are spread. The study uses documents and reports from the European Unions, as well as Freedom House, V-Dem, Transparency International and The World Justice Project. The conclusions that can be drawn from the study is that the EU uses different strategies to get Serbia to implement reforms to improve their democratic status. Despite this, Serbia has completed limited reforms and therefore the conclusion is that EU use of normative power has only been partially successful.

This thesis deals with the discussions on the ‘Normative Power Europe’ thesis, EU enlargement, conditionality and compliance, and the extent to which rational and ideational forces are mutually exclusive in this context. Through a qualitative case study of Turkey, it will investigate to what extent the EU can be seen as possessing and exercising normative power through its enlargement policy. The findings, based on fieldwork conducted in Istanbul during April 2013, suggest that rather than being mutually exclusive, rational and normative processes occur simultaneously and independently, sometimes even reinforcing each other.

The purpose of this study is to present if it is the EU’s dissemination of norms or other factors that affects Kosovo’s accession as a candidate country to the EU. The purpose was answered by finding out to what extent Kosovo can meet EU standards and values in terms of the Copenhagen criteria first criterion of stable institutions. Furthermore, what forms of dissemination the EU have used in trying to spread these standards. The study has used a main theory called Normative Power Europe, by Ian Manners, which describes the EU as a normative force and its mechanism of spreading values towards third-party countries. The conclusion in this study is that the biggest factor in why Kosovo isn’t a candidate country to the EU is because of the state’s infected conflict with Serbia.The conflict with Serbia is the basis of all the factors that keeps Kosovo to fail to meet EU requirements. Although, the EU have made improvements constitutionally since its increased commitment after 2008, the constitution hasn’t been implemented in practice by the Kosovan regime. The conflict needs to be resolved before Kosovo can take the next step and adapt to the rest of Europe.

The EU has experienced several terrorist attacks by Islamic fundamentalists since 2004 on its territory. Terrorism is threatening the fundamental rights that EU is based upon and has become not only a question of security but also a question of internal and external border security. This study seeks to examine the measures taken to fight terrorism by the EU and to see how terrorism has affected the security-, foreign-, and defence policies. The study is a theory consuming qualitative case study with both a descriptive and explanatory approach. The theoretical framework that the study is based on are theories about normative power, soft power and hard power but also the discussion about the external and internal security problem. The EU have taken several measures and policies in the fight against terrorism. The measures and policies are all influenced by the three theories in some way. The result of the study shows that EU has went from using only soft instruments and normative ways in the fight against terrorism towards harder instruments even if they still are using soft instruments in a harder way.

The purpose of this study is to determine to what extent the European Union (EU) functions as a market power in the case of conflict mineral regulation. Previous research by Partzsch has shown that the EU response to conflict minerals only somewhat qualifies for the EU to be seen as a normative power. There appears to be a clash between the norms of sustainable development and economic development, which could explain why the EU does not fully qualify as a normative power. Another theoretical framework has thus been chosen to explain the EU’s function in the case of conflict minerals. This theoretical framework is Market Power Europe (MPE) by Damro, which does not look to the collective norms of the EU, but rather on the market-related policies that the Union uses to influence other actors. With the use of an ideal type analysis of EU policy and official documents, this study found that the case fills the criteria to function as a market power in the case of conflict minerals.

Submitted by Rosivalda Pereira (mrs.pereira@ufma.br) on 2017-09-04T21:31:53Z No. of bitstreams: 1 DavidLeal.pdf: 2328764 bytes, checksum: cfd5f4e1764514d2cc1ec64ea8574598 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-09-04T21:31:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 DavidLeal.pdf: 2328764 bytes, checksum: cfd5f4e1764514d2cc1ec64ea8574598 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-05-11 / The exercise of the competences established in the Brazilian Constitution by the Brazilian Regulatory Agencies, especially in view of the concentration of functions that can be classified as typical by other powers of the Republic, in a single organ, have generated questions, especially when dealing with normative competence. The present work has the objective of analyzing whether the production procedure of Normative Resolution No. 414/2010, of the National Electric Energy Agency, can be considered as an inducer of legitimacy in light of the Theory of Legitimation by the Niklas Luhmann Procedure (1980). It was observed that the procedure adopted by ANEEL in the approval of Normative Resolution 414 of September 9, 2010 was sufficiently open to the flows of contributions of the most diverse groups of stakeholders, shaping the final product of the normative procedure and, thus, contributing To reduce the questions about this product, and it can be concluded that the procedure adopted can be considered as inducing legitimacy, in the form of the Theory of Legitimation by Procedure. Thus, it is clear that other mechanisms of legitimization are necessary in addition to those related to the function carried out by the agencies, such as those used in the context of this administrative procedure, which have allowed the establishment of an effective communication between the Regulatory State and the stakeholders of the most diverse categories, through The submission of contributions by the latter and of answers justified by the Agency, which allowed the procedure to be framed to the bases of the theory in question, since the procedure required the aptitude necessary to carry out structural changes in the expectations of those involved, reducing the possibility of not Acceptance of the state decision included in the resolution. / O exercício das competências estabelecidas na Constituição brasileira pelas Agências Reguladoras brasileiras, especialmente em face da concentração de funções que possam ser enquadradas como típicas por outros poderes da República, num só órgão, têm gerado questionamentos, especialmente em se tratando da competência normativa. O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar se o procedimento de produção da Resolução Normativa nº 414/2010, da Agência Nacional de Energia Elétrica, pode ser considerado como indutor de legitimidade à luz da Teoria da Legitimação pelo Procedimento de Niklas Luhmann (1980). Observou-se que o procedimento adotado pela ANEEL na aprovação da Resolução Normativa nº 414, de 9 de setembro de 2010 , foi suficientemente aberto aos fluxos de contribuições dos mais diversos grupos de interessados, moldando o produto final do procedimento normativo e, assim, contribuindo para a redução dos questionamentos acerca deste produto, sendo possível concluir que o procedimento adotado pode ser considerado como indutor de legitimidade, na forma da Teoria da Legitimação pelo Procedimento. Assim, restou evidenciado que outros mecanismos de legitimação são necessários além dos relacionados à função exercida pelas agências, como os utilizados no bojo deste procedimento administrativo, que permitiram o estabelecimento de uma comunicação eficaz entre o Estado Regulador e os interessados das mais diversas categorias, mediante a apresentação de contribuições por estes e de respostas justificadas pela Agência, que permitiram o enquadramento do procedimento às bases da teoria em referência, uma vez que ao procedimento a aptidão necessária para a realização de transformações estruturais nas expectativas dos envolvidos, reduzindo a possibilidade de não aceitação da decisão estatal encartada na resolução em referência.

<p>The purpose with this essay was to examine how the European Union is working to</p><p>transfer norms to states they signed an agreement with and provide support for in</p><p>frame of the Barcelona process and the Tacis programme. The theory which we</p><p>used was Ian Manners (PhD in Political Science) theory of "the EU as a unique</p><p>normative power". The aim was to examine whether the EU - which Manners mean</p><p>- has had a normative power to influence states to change. We used a qualitative</p><p>approach through the use of a multiple case study and qualitative text and content</p><p>analysis. The States which formed the basis of our study were within the Barcelona</p><p>Process; Morocco and Tunisia as well as Azerbaijan and Armenia funded by the</p><p>Tacis programme. To this end, we were to answer the following questions: Can we</p><p>identify transfer of norms in the written bilateral agreements with these states, and</p><p>are there any normative demands? Can we on the basis of our study answer</p><p>whether the EU holds a normative power to influence these countries to change, in</p><p>accordance with the normative theory? The agreements that we studied was the</p><p>bilateral agreements that the EU signed with these States. In order to make</p><p>Manners five norms (peace, freedom, democracy, rule of law and human rights),</p><p>which he argues that EU is based on measurable; we used the Freedom House</p><p>freedom index, and also by a historical study the development of the country. The</p><p>results we found were the following; in all the studied bilateral agreements we</p><p>found clear - but to varying degrees - the transfer of norms. Although it differs in</p><p>degree of regulatory requirements and also in the formulation of how the country is</p><p>committed to abide by and comply with the normative requirements differ</p><p>according to the agreements, we can find the so-called "carrot and stick</p><p>relationship" that Manners believes that the EU use in the transfer of norms. Three</p><p>of the states that we investigated under the Freedom House freedom index did not</p><p>developed in a democratic way did, and the positive steps taken cannot be directly</p><p>traced back to the EU's efforts. It may also be due to other States or other forces</p><p>influence. We can’t, through our study confirm that Manners is right in these states</p><p>but we can’t either rule out the possibility that the EU through the written</p><p>agreements has changed the norms of the state in question, although progress</p><p>seems to go very slowly.</p>

<p>Through the use of political conditionality, the EU has exercised what many have chosen to call an international normative power. The fast democratisation process of the central European countries that joined the EU in 2004 has often been attributed to the force of EU’s normative power. Here, the core of the political conditionality was found in a promised future membership – acting as a reward in exchange for democratic reforms. The new European Neighbourhood Policy however, initiated briefly after the 2004 enlargement, gave rise to new prerequisites to the Unions new neighbours and this time enlargement fatigue prevailed in the EU policy. This case study examines and assesses the ability of the EU to exercise its normative power on Ukraine through the new conditions set up by the European Neighbourhood Policy, were a membership perspective neither is promised nor ruled out. The result show that the effective conditions for the conditionality are favourable and that a good progress on the areas of democracy, rule of law and human rights has been achieved. Although difficult to prove, I argue that this progress most probably is partly due to EU’s normative power on Ukraine.</p>