Ebru Turhan’s research while affiliated with Turkish-German University and other places

Starting from the ‘gender problem’ in European studies, we scrutinize the gendered knowledge production patterns in a least likely case to be gendered, EU–Turkey studies, due to the overrepresentation of women in the field and its feminine image. We utilize feminist standpoint theory and apply research synthesis and citation analysis techniques to two original datasets comprising 300 articles in 26 Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) journals, published from 1996 to 2020 and involving 8494 citations. Our findings reveal that male‐dominated knowledge marks even EU–Turkey studies with men outnumbering women in authorships and an extremely limited number of articles focusing on gender, whilst ampler disparities transpire in first authorships and citations. Whilst women have progressively disrupted male‐dominated knowledge by surpassing male authorship numbers since 2014, engaging in greater theoretical sophistication and having a greater inclination to cite women, limited incorporation of women's standpoint hinders the field's potential to address gender inequalities and promote gender‐sensitive policies and development.

As relations between the European Union (EU) and Turkey have progressed, so has the body of literature on the relationship – to the extent that we can now identify ‘EU–Turkey studies’ as a boutique sub-discipline of EU studies. This article provides a systematic mapping of the evolution of EU–Turkey studies from 1996 to 2020 in order to explore the degree of epistemic diversity featured in the discipline as an indicator of epistemic (in)justice. Utilising the research synthesis technique, we analyse a novel dataset involving 300 articles published in 26 SSCI journals to scrutinise the extent of epistemic diversity in the discipline. Our mapping reveals two central features of EU–Turkey studies. First, the transformation of the discipline has largely been contingent on critical milestones in EU–Turkey relations. Lately, increasing conflictual dynamics in bilateral relations resulted in diminishing scholarly commitment to studying EU–Turkey relations. Second, epistemic diversity has remained fairly limited given the lack of geographic diversity in authorship, the accumulation of the publications in specific journals, and the segregated co-authorship clusters that limit the amalgamation of different ideas and values. At the same time, knowledge production in EU–Turkey studies has been mainly Eurocentric, due to the almost exclusive use of grand and up-and-coming theories/concepts of European integration, while the proliferation of issue areas since the launch of the discipline has not culminated in a strong focus on non-traditional, avant-garde research topics as such. To ensure epistemic justice in the discipline, EU–Turkey studies should place stronger emphasis on unconventional issue areas and on the explanatory power of mainstream and unorthodox (IR) theories that have the potential to explore the relationship within the context of the multilateral system in which EU–Turkey relations increasingly operate.

Küreselleşmenin etkisiyle Avrupa Birliği (AB) ve üçüncü ülkeler arasında giderek güçlenen (asimetrik) karşılıklı bağımlılık, AB’ye üye olmayan ülkelerin AB normlarını kısmen benimsemesinin ehemmiyetini arttırmıştır. Dolayısıyla, AB müktesebatının belli kısımlarının Birlik sınırlarının ötesinde uygulanması olarak tanımlanan harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon (external differentiated integration) konusunda gerçekleştirilen akademik çalışmalar önem kazanmıştır. Türkiye, bir yandan üyelik perspektifi oldukça zayıflamış bir aday ülke, öte yandan da birçok politika alanında AB’nin stratejik ortağı olarak, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon çalışmaları açısından önemli bir örnek teşkil etmektedir. Son yıllarda AB, düzensiz göçün yönetimi amacıyla sınır yönetimi normlarının Türkiye’ye aktarımını, Türkiye ile olan diyaloğunun merkezine yerleştirmiştir. Buna bağlı olarak sınır yönetimi, Türkiye’nin AB’ye harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonunu kavramsal ve ampirik açılardan analiz etmek için oldukça elverişli bir politika alanı olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Çalışmada, Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonunun sınırları ve belirleyici faktörleri analiz edilmektedir. Çalışma, bu politika alanında kilit öneme sahip iki konuyu mercek altına almaktadır: Türkiye tarafından Entegre Sınır Yönetimi (ESY) sisteminin uygulanması ve AB Sınır ve Sahil Güvenlik Ajansı (FRONTEX) ile işlevsel iş birliğinin durumu. Makalenin kuramsal bölümünde, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon ve belirleyici faktörleri, farklı politika aktarımı modelleri ve literatür haritalandırılması üzerinden kavramsallaştırılmaktadır. Ampirik bölümdeyse, ESY’nin uygulanması ve FRONTEX ile iş birliği konularında gerçekleşen farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonun kapsamı Avrupa Komisyonu Türkiye ilerleme/ülke raporları temel alınarak incelenmektedir. Entegrasyonun kapsamını ve sınırlarını etkileyen faktörler, makalenin kuramsal bölümünde gerçekleştirilen haritalandırmadan yararlanılarak ele alınmaktadır. Makalenin ana bulgusu, cazip ve güvenilir teşviklerin Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile entegrasyonunu kolaylaştırırken, sektörel siyasallaşmanın ve öngörülen yüksek uyum maliyetlerinin harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonu olumsuz etkilediğidir.

Amaç: Bu çalışma, Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonunun sınırlarını ve belirleyici faktörlerini Entegre Sınır Yönetimi (ESY) sisteminin uygulanması ve AB Sınır ve Sahil Güvenlik Ajansı (FRONTEX) ile işlevsel işbirliğinin durumu kapsamında analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Yöntem: Makalenin kuramsal bölümünde, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon ve belirleyici faktörleri, farklı politika aktarımı modelleri ve literatür haritalandırılması üzerinden kavramsallaştırılmaktadır. Ampirik bölümdeyse, ESY’nin uygulanması ve FRONTEX ile işbirliği konularında gerçekleşen farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonun kapsamı Avrupa Komisyonu Türkiye ilerleme/ülke raporları temel alınarak incelenmektedir. Entegrasyonun kapsamını ve sınırlarını etkileyen faktörler, makalenin kuramsal bölümünde gerçekleştirilen haritalandırmadan yararlanılarak ele alınmaktadır.Bulgular: Makalenin ana bulgusu, cazip ve güvenilir teşviklerin Türkiye’nin sınır yönetimi konusunda AB ile entegrasyonunu kolaylaştırırken, sektörel siyasallaşmanın ve öngörülen yüksek uyum maliyetlerinin harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyonu olumsuz etkilediğidir.Özgünlük: AB-Türkiye ilişkilerinin ele alındığı yazında, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon konusundaki kuramsal çalışmalar az sayıda olmakla birlikte, oldukça da yeni bir alandır. Bunun ötesinde, kuramsal tartışmaları farklı politika alanları bağlamında inceleyen sınırlı sayıda ampirik çalışma bulunmaktadır. Bu makale, AB-Türkiye ilişkilerini, göç ve sınır yönetimi gibi oldukça önemli ve güncel bir politika alanında, harici farklılaştırılmış entegrasyon tartışmaları bağlamında inceleyerek özellikle Türkçe yazına önemli ve özgün bir katkı sağlamaktadır.

This chapter investigates and unravels the extent and drivers of Turkey’s external differentiated integration with the European Union (EU) in the field of border management. While Turkey’s EU accession negotiations remain in a state of coma, there is a continuing need for policy convergence and alignment in areas of common interest such as migration governance. With a view to combat irregular migration, the EU has placed the export of its border management norms and rules at the centre of its dialogue with Turkey. Thus, EU–Turkey relations in the field of border management represent an appealing case to study policy convergence between the EU and Turkey outside the accession scheme and examine the ever-evolving phenomena of external differentiated integration from both policy-centred and theory-directed angles. The chapter first conceptualizes external differentiated integration and introduces the five explanatory factors that have been recurrently used by the literature to explain the variance in (external) differentiation: politicization, extent of mutual interdependence, asymmetry of interdependence, incentives and domestic conditions. It then critically assesses the effect of these prevailing drivers of differentiation on the three central issue areas concerning EU–Turkey dialogue on border regime: the implementation of the Integrated Border Management (IBM), Turkey’s operational cooperation with FRONTEX and the March 2016 EU–Turkey Statement. Our findings reveal that attractive and credible material rewards functioned as a key driver of policy transfer in consideration of strong interest asymmetries in favour of Turkey. At the same time, issue-specific politicization and unfavourable domestic adaptation costs weakened Turkey’s external differentiation with the EU in the field of border management.

This chapter presents the rationale, objectives, and structure of this volume and introduces the reader to the new complexities that epitomize EU–Turkey relations. To this end, it provides a set of guiding questions for the volume, offers a systematic overview of the major milestones in the EU–Turkey relationship, and classifies the key determinants of these developments under three categories: multilateral frameworks and external crises, internal EU and Turkish domestic developments, and EU–Turkey bilateral processes. The chapter then introduces the three-dimensional approach of the volume that brings together the analytical lenses of (1) theories and concepts, (2) institutions, and (3) policies based on a comprehensive survey of both key primary sources and academic literature dealing with the relationship. In a final step, the chapter presents the ensuing fifteen contributions to the volume.

The many faces of the European Council make it a core component of the institutional machinery maintaining relations between the EU and third countries, including Turkey. This chapter identifies the European Council’s roles as the EU’s ‘master of enlargement’, ‘external voice and crisis manager’, and ‘agenda and direction setter’ as its three primary functions that drive the EU–Turkey relationship. The central focus of the chapter is the evolution of the European Council in framing relations with a candidate country—or what many now call a ‘strategic partner’—and the identification of the critical turning points and shifts in the central functions, internal dynamics, and preferences of this key institution. The findings indicate a growing trend toward a more conflictual, relatively hostile relationship between the European Council and Turkey as a result of diverging geopolitical interests—especially in the Eastern Mediterranean—and normative considerations. Furthermore, the analysis reveals an expanding impact of bilateral issues and member states’ individual preferences on the European Council’s role as a driver of EU–Turkey relations. Still, with their powers, the Heads of State or Government are likely to remain a key driver of the future trajectory of the relationship, demonstrating an increased interest in ‘thinking outside of the accession box’ and in framing a relationship model that would safeguard EU–Turkey relations amidst growing disagreements with Ankara.

This chapter summarizes the key insights derived from a three-dimensional perspective on EU–Turkey relations that combines the analytical lenses of (1) theories and concepts, (2) institutions, and (3) policies. It furthermore reflects upon the different periodizations of the EU–Turkey relationship. On this basis, we offer a systematic survey of the conditions under which cooperative trends in EU–Turkey relations could be (re)invigorated. The analysis shows that despite the high potential for reciprocity inside and outside the accession framework, the relationship currently rests on unfavorable conditions for cooperation on both sides. Important enablers of cooperative behavior—trust, communication, reputation, fairness, enforcement, and common identity—cannot properly operate in the current setup. The chapter puts forward possible means to allow for these enablers to facilitate cooperative behavior in EU–Turkey relations in the future. It concludes by discussing the future trajectory of the relationship and pinpointing avenues for a future research agenda for EU–Turkey studies.

This open access book explores the new complexities and ambiguities that epitomize EU-Turkey relations. With a strong focus on the developments in the last decade, the book provides full access to a comprehensive understanding of the multifaceted relationship through three entry points: (1) Theories and Concepts, (2) Institutions, and (3) Policies. Part I brings together complementary and competing analytical approaches to study the evolution of EU-Turkey relations, ranging from traditional integration theories to novel concepts. Part II investigates the institutional machinery of EU-Turkey relations by analyzing the roles and perspectives of the European Council, the European Commission, and the European Parliament. Part III offers analyses of the policies most relevant for the relationship: enlargement policy, trade and macroeconomic policies, foreign and security policy, migration and asylum policies, and energy policy. In Part IV, the volume closes with a systematic survey of the conditions under which cooperative trends in EU-Turkey relations could be (re)invigorated. The systematic setup and the balanced combination of distinguished experts from EU- and Turkey-based institutions make this book a fundamental reading for students, researchers, lecturers, and practitioners of EU-Turkey relations, European integration and Turkish foreign policy. Wulf Reiners is Senior Researcher and Head of the ‘Managing Global Governance’ (MGG) Program of the German Development Institute / Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik (DIE). Ebru Turhan is Assistant Professor at the Department of Political Science and International Relations, Turkish-German University in Istanbul, Turkey.

The Turkish accession process has proved to be a sui generis case of EU enlargement as it has so far been dominated by a vicious cycle of ebbs and flows. This paper explores the impact of the EU’s member states on the construction of Turkey’s crooked EU path by focusing on both the pre-negotiation phase and the official negotiation phase. It traces interstate interaction among member states, and their interaction with relevant EU institutions and Turkish authorities, prior to and during the processes of decision-making regarding Turkey’s EU membership during 1999–March 2016 within two EU institutions of particular importance to EU enlargement: the European Council and the Council. A close look is taken at the preferences and actions of the largest member states in the EU, the so-called ‘Big Three’ (Germany, France and the UK), and at those of Greece and Cyprus, two small states that have paid particular attention to the progression of the Turkish accession process in the light of distinct bilateral disputes. The paper concludes that member states matter in the formation of EU enlargement politics vis-à-vis Turkey, while the scope and particulars of member states’ influence significantly evolved during 1999–March 2016.