A Typology of Academic Priorities in the EU and Türkiye-EU Relations Research

Abstract

There is a lack of comprehensive studies examining the specific topics that academics in Türkiye prioritize, their research trends, and the broader impact of their work. This study aims to address this gap by identifying the main topics and priorities in academic research on the EU and Türkiye-EU relations. It seeks to answer the main question: What topics do academics in Türkiye prioritize in their studies on the EU and Türkiye-EU relations? The study focuses on three main topics: Political Issues Within the EU (PIWEU), Political Problems in Türkiye-EU Relations (PPTREUR), and The Role of Academia in Türkiye-EU Relations (RATREUR). To explore these priorities, the study uses a survey conducted with 30 A-NEST academics and analyzes the data using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS). AHP evaluates the relative importance of the main topics, while TOPSIS ranks the subtopics, providing a clear picture of academic priorities. This study highlights the research priorities of academics in Türkiye focusing on the EU and Türkiye-EU relations. It offers useful insights for understanding the challenges in Türkiye-EU relations and provides a foundation for addressing these challenges through both academic research and policy-making processes.

Keywords

• Political Issues within the EU
• Political Problems in Türkiye-EU Relations
• The Role of Academia
• AHP
• TOPSIS

AB'de Akademik Önceliklerin Tipolojisi ve Türkiye-AB İlişkileri Araştırması

Öz

Türkiye'de AB ve Türkiye-AB ilişkileri çalışan akademisyenlerin hangi konulara odaklandığı ve araştırma eğilimleri konusunda kapsamlı bir inceleme eksikliği bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, AB ve Türkiye-AB ilişkilerine dair akademik araştırmalardaki temel tercihlerini ve önceliklerini belirleyerek bu boşluğu doldurmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu bağlamda, çalışmada şu temel soruya cevap aranmaktadır: Türkiye'deki akademisyenler, AB ve Türkiye-AB ilişkileri konusundaki araştırmalarında hangi konulara öncelik vermektedirler? Araştırma, üç temel konuya odaklanmaktadır: AB İçindeki Politik Meseleler (PIWEU), Türkiye-AB İlişkilerindeki Politik Sorunlar (PPTREUR) ve Türkiye-AB İlişkilerinde Akademinin Rolü (RATREUR). Çalışmada, 30 A-NEST akademisyeni ile gerçekleştirilen bir anket üzerinde Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (AHP) ve TOPSIS yöntemleri kullanılarak analiz yapılmıştır. Bu yöntemler aracılığıyla, akademisyenlerin belirlenen ana konular ve alt konular arasında hangi konulara öncelik verdiği tespit edilmiştir. AHP, konuların göreceli önemini değerlendirirken, TOPSIS alt başlıklar için bir sıralama sağlamıştır. Bu çalışma, Türkiye'de AB ve Türkiye-AB ilişkilerine odaklanan akademisyenlerin önceliklerini aydınlatarak, Türkiye-AB ilişkilerindeki zorlukları anlama ve bu zorlukların üstesinden gelme konusunda önemli içgörüler sunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• AB İçindeki Politik Meseleler
• Türkiye-AB İlişkilerindeki Politik Sorunlar
• Akademinin Rolü
• AHP
• TOPSIS

Kaynakça

1. Aczél, J., and Saaty, T.L. “Procedures for synthesizing ratio judgements.” J Math Psychol, no.27, (1983): 93-102.
2. Abbas, Mustafa. “After Crisis: Health, Politics and Reflections on the European Refugee Crisis.” Medicine, Conflict and Survival 35, no. 4 (2019): 295-312.
3. Acikmese, Sinem Akgul, and Dimitrios Triantaphyllou. “The Nato–Eu–Türkiye Trilogy: The Impact of the Cyprus Conundrum.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 12, no. 4 (2012): 555-573.
4. Adaman, Fikret. “Is Corruption a Drawback to Türkiye’s Accession to the European Union?”. In Türkiye and the Eu: Accession and Reform, 101-13: Routledge, 2020.
5. Aktaş, R., Doğanay, M. M., Gökmen, Y., Gazibey, Y. and Türen, U., Sayısal Karar Verme Yöntemleri, Beta Yayınevi, 2015.
6. Alioğlu Çakmak, Gizem, İşbaşaran, Volkan, “Terrorist Attacks in Europe and Türkiye: Securitization of Türkiye in the 8th European Parliament Plenary Debates,” Contemporary Research in Economics and Social Sciences 4, no. 1 (2020): 7-33.
7. Almeida, Dimitri. “Europeanized Eurosceptics? Radical Right Parties and European Integration.” Perspectives on European Politics and Society 11, no. 3 (2010): 237-253.
8. Alpan, Başak and Özgehan Şenyuva, “Brexit in Turkish Political Debates: End of the Road or a New Trajectory?” in Changing Perceptions of the EU at Times of Brexit Global Perspectives Routledge, 2020.

9. Amadio Viceré, Maria Giulia, and Monika Sus. “Differentiated Cooperation as the Mode of Governance in Eu Foreign Policy.” Contemporary Security Policy 44, no. 1 (2023): 4-34.
10. Aydın-Düzgit, Senem, “European Parliament ‘doing’ Europe: Unravelling the right-wing culturalist discourse on Turkey’s accession to the EU,” Journal of Language and Politics 14, no. 1 (2015): 154-174.
11. Baban, Feyzi, Suzan Ilcan, and Kim Rygiel. “Syrian Refugees in Türkiye: Pathways to Precarity, Differential Inclusion, and Negotiated Citizenship Rights.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 43, no. 1 (2017): 41-57.
12. Baird, Bruce F. Managerial decisions under uncertainty: An introduction to the analysis of decision making, John Wiley & Sons, 1989.
13. Balci, Ali, and Filiz Cicioglu. “Türkiye in the Discourse of European Far Right: The Uses and Abuses of Türkiye’s Membership Process for a Counter-Hegemony.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 28, no. 1 (2020): 100-113.
14. Behzadian, Majid, Otaghsara, S. K., Yazdani, M. and Ignatius, J., “A state-of the-art survey of TOPSIS applications,” Expert Systems with applications 39, no. 17, (2012): 13051-13069.
15. Bélanger, Marie-Eve, and Frank Schimmelfennig. “Politicization and Rebordering in EU Enlargement: Membership Discourses in European Parliaments.” Journal of European public policy 28, no. 3 (2021): 407-426.
16. Bossong, Raphael. “EU Cooperation on Terrorism Prevention and Violent Radicalization: Frustrated Ambitions or New Forms of EU Security Governance?”. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 27, no. 1 (2014): 66-82.
17. Brown, Katy. “When Eurosceptics Become Europhiles: Far-Right Opposition to Turkish Involvement in the European Union.” Identities 27, no. 6 (2020): 633-654.
18. Bulut-Sahin, Betül, Perim Uyar, and Bugay Turhan, “The impact of the Erasmus Program and the institutional administration of internationalization in Türkiye.” Higher Education Governance 3, no. 2 (2022): 133-146.
19. Calderaro, Andrea, and Stella Blumfelde. “Artificial Intelligence and EU Security: The False Promise of Digital Sovereignty.” European Security 31, no. 3 (2022): 415-434.
20. Cebeci, Münevver. “De-Europeanisation or Counter-Conduct? Türkiye’s Democratisation and the EU.” South European Society and Politics 21, no. 1 (2016): 119-132.
21. Cross, Mai’a K Davis. “Counter-Terrorism in the EU’s External Relations.” Journal of European Integration 39, no. 5 (2017): 609-624.
22. Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Ameyaw, E. E., Owusu, E. K., Pärn, E., & Edwards, D. J. “Review of application of analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in construction.”, International journal of construction management 19, no.5, (2019): 436-452.
23. Delegation of the European Union to Türkiye, “A-NEST Academic Network for European Union Studies in Türkiye,” https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/t%C3%BCrkiye/academic-research-nest_en?s=230.
24. Demirel, Arzu, “Euro Krizi ve Avrupa Birliği’nin Demokratik Meşruiyeti,” Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 16, no. 2 (2017): 25-64.
25. Demirsu, Ipek, and Damla Cihangir-Tetik. “Constructing the Partnership with Türkiye on the Refugee Crisis: EU Perceptions and Expectations.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 6 (2019): 625-642.
26. De Wilde, Pieter, Anna Leupold, and Henning Schmidtke. The Differentiated Politicisation of European Governance. Routledge, 2018.
27. Directorate for EU Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Türkiye, Civil Society Dialogue Programme Between Türkiye and the EU, (2022), https://www.ab.gov.tr/siteimages/pub/small_csd_v_compendium_eng-310723.pdf.
28. Doğanay, M. M., “Hisse Senedi Fonlarının Çok Kriterli Karar Yaklaşımı ile Derecelendirilmesi,” Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Dergisi 57, no. 3, (2002): 31-47.
29. Down, Ian, and Kyung Joon Han. “Far Right Parties and ‘Europe’: Societal Polarization and the Limits of EU Issue Contestation.” Journal of European Integration 43, no. 1 (2021): 65-81.
30. Durusoy, Serap, Edgardo Sica and Zeynep Beyhan, “Economic Crisis and Protectionism Policies: The Case of the EU Countries,” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 5, no. 6 (2015): 57-68.
31. Erhan, Çağrı, Gürbüz, Aysun, “Türkiye’nin AB Ile İlişkilerinde Alternatif Model Arayışı: ‘Kapsamlı Ekonomik Entegrasyon Anlaşması,’” Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 12, no. 1 (2013): 47-78.
32. Eslen-Ziya, Hande, and Nazlı Kazanoğlu. “De-Democratization under the New Türkiye? Challenges for Women’s Organizations.” Mediterranean Politics 27, no. 1 (2022): 101-122.
33. European Commission, “Erasmus + 2020 in Numbers,” https://ec.europa.eu/assets/eac/factsheets/factsheet-tr-2020_en.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
34. European Commission, “Türkiye Financial Assistance under IPA,” https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/enlargement-policy/overview-instrument-pre-accession-assistance/turkiye-financial-assistance-under-ipa_en?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
35. Eylemer, Sedef and İlkay Taş, “Pro-EU and Eurosceptic Circles in Turkey,” Journal of Communist Studies and Transition Politics 23, no. 4 (2007): 561-577.
36. Fanoulis, Evangelos. “Knowledge of the EU and Citizen Participation in European Governance: An Agonistic Democracy Perspective. European Politics and Society, 19 (1), 35-48.” 2018.
37. Ferrara, Federico Maria, and Hanspeter Kriesi. “Crisis Pressures and European Integration.” Journal of European public policy 29, no. 9 (2022): 1351-1373.
38. Haas, Jörg S, Valerie J D’Erman, Daniel F Schulz, and Amy Verdun. “Economic and Fiscal Policy Coordination after the Crisis: Is the European Semester Promoting More or Less State Intervention?”. In Economic and Monetary Union at Twenty, 40-57: Routledge, 2021.
39. Harker, Patrick T., “The art and science of decision making: The analytic hierarchy process,” in B.L. Golden, E.W. Wasil and P. T. Harker (Eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Applications and Studies, Springer-Verlag, 1989.
40. Hwang Ching-Lai and Yoon, K. S., Multiple Attribute Decision Making-Methods and Applications, Springer-Verlag, 1981.
41. Ioannou, Demosthenes, Patrick Leblond, and Arne Niemann. “European Integration and the Crisis: Practice and Theory.” Journal of European Public Policy 22, no. 2 (2015): 155-176.
42. İpek Tunç, Gül and Semiha Öztürk, “The Role of Taxation in the European Union Sovereign Debt Crisis,” Journal of Ekonomik Yaklaşım Association 32, no. 119 (2021): 143-174.
43. Johansson-Nogués, Elisabeth, and Ann-Kristin Jonasson. “Türkiye, Its Changing National Identity and EU Accession: Explaining the Ups and Downs in the Turkish Democratization Reforms.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 19, no. 01 (2011): 113-132.
44. Joshi, Rohit, Banwet, D. and Shankar, R., “A Delphi-AHP-TOPSIS based benchmarking framework for performance improvement of a cold chain,” Expert Systems with Applications 38, no. 8, (2011)
45. Kahraman, Sevilay, “Brexit and the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement in comparison: EU principles and practices of governing the neighbourhood,” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 31, no. 3 (2023): 944-959.
46. Kaya, Ayhan, “Right-wing populism and Islamophobism in Europe and their impact on Turkey–EU relations,” Turkish Studies 21, no. 1 (2020): 1-28.
47. Kırmızıoğlu, Hale, “Fiscal Framework Changes in European Monetary Union Before and After Sovereign Debt Crisis,” in Global Financial Crisis and Its Ramifications on Capital Markets, Contributions to Economics, Springer International Publishing, 2017.
48. Kimya, Fırat. “Political Economy of Corruption in Türkiye: Declining Petty Corruption, Rise of Cronyism?”. Turkish Studies 20, no. 3 (2019): 351-376.
49. Kirchner, Emil. “EU Security Alignments with the Asia-Pacific.” In Alliances in Asia and Europe, 144-62: Routledge, 2023.
50. Kirişçi, Kemal, “Türkiye ve Avrupa Birliği: Katılım Öncesi Dönemin İç ve Dış Politika Dinamikleri,” International Relations 2, no. 8 (2005-2006): 79-118.
51. Kreuder-Sonnen, Christian. “An Authoritarian Turn in Europe and European Studies?”. Journal of European Public Policy 25, no. 3 (2018): 452-464.
52. Kubicek, Paul. “Political Conditionality and European Union’s Cultivation of Democracy in Türkiye.” In Democracy Promotion in the EU’s Neighbourhood, 26-47: Routledge, 2013.
53. Kuşku Sönmez, Eda, “Turkey’s Ambivalent Allies in Central and Eastern Europe: Dynamics of Support for Turkey’s European Union Process,” Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 17, no. 1 (2018): 153-179.
54. Lu, J., Zhang, G., Ruan D. and Wu, F., Multi-Objective Group Decision Making: Methods, Software, And Applications With Fuzzy Set Techniques, Imperial College Press, 2007.
55. Malloy, Brandon, Zeynep Ozkok, and Jonathan Rosborough. “Is Brexit an Outlier? Euroscepticism and Public Support for European Integration.” European Politics and Society 25, no. 2 (2024): 286-309.
56. Masud, A. S. M. and Ravindran, A. R., “Multiple Criteria Decision Making,” in A. R. Ravindran (Ed.), Operations research methodologies, (CRC Press, 2009).
57. Mercan, Sezgin, Kıvılcım Romya Bilgin, Haluk Karadağ, and Yelda Ongun, “Academic Trends in European Union Studies in Turkey within the Framework of Turkey-EU Relations,”.International Relations 19, no. 76 (2023): 53-68.
58. Miller, George A.“The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.”, Psychological Review 63, no.2, 1956: 81–97
59. Mousseau, Demet Yalcin. “Is Türkiye Democratizing with EU Reforms?: An Assessment of Human Rights, Corruption and Socio-Economic Conditions.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 12, no. 1 (2012): 63-80.
60. Munier, Nolberto, A Strategy for Using Multicriteria Analysis in Decision-making: A Guide for Simple and Complex Environmental Projects, Springer, 2011.
61. Muftuler-Bac, Meltem. “Externalization of Migration Governance, Türkiye’s Migration Regime, and the Protection of the European Union’s External Borders.” Turkish studies 23, no. 2 (2022): 290-316.
62. Müftüler-Baç, Meltem, “Turkey’s Ambivalent Relationship with the European Union: To Accede or not to Accede,” International Relations 13, no. 52 (2016): 89-103.
63. Nas, Çiğdem, “The EU’s Approach to the Syrian Crisis: Türkiye as a Partner?”, Uluslararası İlişkiler 16, no. 62 (2019): 45-64.
64. Navarro, Julien. “A Disruptive Moment? Parliaments, Brexit, and the Future of European Integration.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 29, no. 4 (2021): 443-451.
65. Önnerfors, Andreas. «Between Breivik and Pegida: The Absence of Ideologues and Leaders on the Contemporary European Far Right.» Patterns of Prejudice 51, no. 2 (2017): 159-175.
66. Özer, Yonca. “Modernising the EU-Türkiye Customs Union as an interest-driven initiative,” Ankara Avrupa Çalışmaları Dergisi 19, no. 1 (2020): 175-197.
67. Panagiotou, Ritsa. “The Western Balkans between Russia and the European Union: Perceptions, Reality, and Impact on Enlargement.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 29, no. 2 (2021): 219-233.
68. Pavlovich, William V. “Noxious Geopolitics, Festering Populaces and Transmutable Pasts: Reframing the Limits of Acceptable Politics through European Refugee Crises.” Patterns of Prejudice 52, no. 2-3 (2018): 244-269.
69. Pennisi di Floristella, Angela. “Security Cooperation in and with Asia: Towards a Pragmatic Turn in the EU’s Security Policy?”. European security 29, no. 2 (2020): 170-188.
70. Petrovic, Milenko, and Nikolaos Tzifakis. “A Geopolitical Turn to EU Enlargement, or Another Postponement? An Introduction.” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 29, no. 2, (2021): 157-168.
71. Puetter, Uwe. “Europe’s Deliberative Intergovernmentalism: The Role of the Council and European Council in EU Economic Governance.” Journal of European Public Policy 19, no. 2 (2012): 161-178.
72. Romya Bilgin, Kivilcim and Mercan, Sezgin, “European Financial Assistance Provided to Türkiye and the CEECs: An Equity Shift,” Turkish Studies 12, no. 3 (2011): 491-510.
73. Saaty, Thomas L. Decision Making for Leaders-The Analytic Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World, RWS Publications Press, 1990.
74. Saaty, Thomas L., “A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures,” Journal of mathematical psychology 15, no. 3, (1977): 234-281.
75. Schimmelfennig, Frank. “EU Enlargement and Differentiated Integration: Discrimination or Equal Treatment?”. In The European Union: Integration and Enlargement, 39-56: Routledge, 2016.
76. Seikel, Daniel. “European Integration, Power Resources and Social Classes. A Proposal for a Political Economic Extension of the Europeanisation Approach.” Journal of European Public Policy 31, no. 9 (2024): 2556-2581.
77. Sosay, Gül. “Delegation and Accountability: Independent Regulatory Agencies in Türkiye.” Turkish Studies 10, no. 3 (2009): 341-363.
78. Soyaltin-Colella, Digdem. “How to Capture the Judiciary under the Guise of EU-Led Reforms: Domestic Strategies of Resistance and Erosion of Rule of Law in Türkiye.” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 22, no. 3 (2022): 441-462.
79. Sönmez, Pelin and Hikmet Kırık, “Turkish-EU Readmission Agreement: A Critique of EU-Turkey Migration Dialogue,” Security Strategies 13, no. 25 (2017): 1-26.
80. Stefanovic, Djordje, and Geoffrey Evans. “Multiple Winning Formulae? Far Right Voters and Parties in Eastern Europe.” Europe-Asia Studies 71, no. 9 (2019): 1443-1473.
81. Steinbach, Armin. “EU Economic Governance after the Crisis: Revisiting the Accountability Shift in EU Economic Governance.” Journal of European public policy 26, no. 9 (2019): 1354-1372.
82. Stivachtis, Yannis, and Stefanie Georgakis. “Changing Gender Attitudes in Candidate Countries: The Impact of EU Conditionality—the Case of Türkiye.” European Integration 33, no. 1 (2011): 75-91.
83. Sweeney, Simon, and Neil Winn. “EU Security and Defence Cooperation in Times of Dissent: Analysing Pesco, the European Defence Fund and the European Intervention Initiative (Ei2) in the Shadow of Brexit.” Defence Studies 20, no. 3 (2020): 224-249.
84. Şahin, Muhittin, and Halil Yurdugül. «A content analysis study on the use of analytic hierarchy process in educational studies.», Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology 9, no.4 (2018): 376-392.
85. T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği Başkanlığı, “TR- AB Mali İş Birliği,” https://www.ab.gov.tr/tr-ab-mali-isbirligi_5.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
86. T.C. Dışişleri Bakanlığı Avrupa Birliği Başkanlığı, “Horizon 2020,” https://www.ab.gov.tr/horizon-2020_49614_en.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
87. Tangör, Burak, and Alpay Alpaydin. “Human Security Governance: The Case of Syrians in Türkiye.” European Security 32, no. 2 (2023): 314-334.
88. Tetik, Mustafa Onur. “Discursive Reconstruction of Civilisational-Self: Turkish National Identity and the European Union (2002–2017).” European Politics and Society 22, no. 3 (2021): 374-393.
89. The Presidency of Migration Management of Türkiye, https://en.goc.gov.tr/refugee.
90. The Presidency of Migration Management of Türkiye, https://en.goc.gov.tr/conditional-refugee.
91. Turhan, Ebrun and Wolfgang Wessels, “The European Council as a Key Driver of EU–Turkey Relations: Central Functions, Internal Dynamics, and Evolving Preferences,” in EU-Turkey Relations Theories, Institutions, and Policies, Palgrave Macmillan, 2021.
92. Türkes, Mustafa and Göksu Gökgöz, “The European Union’s Strategy towards the Western Balkans: Exclusion or Integration?” East European Politics and Societies 20, no. 4 (2006): 659-690.
93. Ulusoy, Hasan and Oğuz Güngörmez, “Right-Wing Populist Discourse in the European Parliament on Turkish Foreign Policy,” Insight Turkey 25, no. 3 (2023): 169-197.
94. Ulusoy, Kıvanç. “The Cyprus Conflict: Türkiye’s Strategic Dilemma.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 18, no. 4 (2016): 393-406.
95. UNHCR Türkiye, “Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Türkiye,” https://www.unhcr.org/tr/en/kime-yardim-ediyoruz/refugees-and-asylum-seekers-tuerkiye#:~:text=The%20Republic%20of%20T%C3%BCrkiye%20is,events%20occurred%20outside%20of%20Europe.
96. Vieten, Ulrike M, and Scott Poynting. “Contemporary Far-Right Racist Populism in Europe.” Journal of Intercultural Studies 37, no. 6 (2016): 533-540.
97. Vilpišauskas, Ramūnas. “Eurozone Crisis and European Integration: Functional Spillover, Political Spillback?”. In Redefining European Economic Governance, 167-79: Routledge, 2016.
98. Yalman, Galip and Asuman Göksel, “Transforming Turkey? Putting the Turkey-European Union Relations into a Historical Perspective”, International Relations 14, no. 56 (2017): 23-37.
99. Yilmaz, Kamil. “The EU—Türkiye Customs Union Fifteen Years Later: Better, yet Not the Best Alternative.” In Türkiye and the EU: Accession and Reform, 27-41: Routledge, 2020.
100. Yılmaz, Hakan, “Eurosceptism in Turkey: Parties, Elites and Public Opinion,” South European Society and Politics 16, no. 1 (2011): 1-24.
101. Zeleny, Milan, Multiple Criteria Decision Making, McGraw-Hill, 1982.
102. Zihnioğlu, Özge. “The ‘Civil Society Policy’of the European Union for Promoting Democracy in Türkiye: Golden Goose or Dead Duck?”. Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 13, no. 3 (2013): 381-400.
103. ———. “European Union Funds and the Assumed Professionalization of Turkish Civil Society Organizations.” Turkish Studies 20, no. 5 (2019): 657-679.