Research Papers

The administrative Holy Grail of coherence is not particular to the European Union but the nature and the extent of the problem have gained much attention. A buzz word in the EU since four decades already, coherence is at the centre of the Lisbon Treaty. It is of particular political salience in external relations. Indeed, the risk of incoherence is deeply embedded in the institutional framework of that policy domain. The consequence of incoherence is presented as disastrous for the EU: a “failure to meld foreign policy and external relations into a coherent whole [hinders] the EU from punching its weight in world affairs” (Spence, 2006). Coherence is seen as a permanent quest while its alternative, incoherence, carries a negative baggage. Systematically associated with an effective, legitimate, credible and visible external action, coherence is often approached as a miracle solution to enhance the international status of the EU. In turn, the focus on coherence has major institutional implications in the EU, resulting in the setting up of coordination mechanisms to bring different actors in line and enhance horizontality. The institutional focus also reflects the international call for coherence to address complex situations and the participation of the EU in global governance. Goal-oriented, coherence is generally praised as increasing effectiveness and efficiency of the EU in international relations; but this positive causality has not even been questioned all too often. This paper aims to fill this void: why and to what extent is coherence a miracle solution? Is coherence a virtue or a vice which diverts attention from other objectives? To what extent does coherence actually impact the international status of an actor such as the EU? The paper will discuss the contribution of different theoretical perspectives to the coherence debate and their answers to the challenge.