The Limits and Contributions of the EU to Democracy in Latin America: The Cases of Mexico, Venezuela and Honduras

  • Roberto DomínguezEmail author
Part of the Global Power Shift book series (GLOBAL)


While most of the analyses have focused on the interregional relations or on the relationship between the EU and individual Latin American countries, the impact of the EU on Latin American policies has received lesser attention. This chapter examines the contributions and impact of the EU to the improvement of democracy in Latin America. Theoretically, the paper discusses three stages for the study of EU norm-diffusion in Latin American countries. The first is the setting for diffusion of norms, the second is the strength of positive and negative conditionality, and the third is the conditions of the norm-takers to embrace the orientation of EU values, to develop a sense of ownership and to enhance the dialogue with the EU. Depending on the sub-region or the country in Latin American, the EU norm-diffusion policies have a diverse impact on the internalization of democratic values, practices of rule of law and human rights. The chapter is divided into three sections. After reviewing the analytical framework of diffusion of norms, the paper provides an overview of the EU-Latin American relationship; the third section presents the empirical analysis of three contrasting cases: Mexico, Venezuela and Honduras.


European Union Latin American Country Free Trade Agreement Association Agreement European Neighborhood Policy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Barroso, J. M. (2006, May 12). Speech to Heads of State and Governments at the 4th EU-Latin American and Caribbean Summit, SPEECH/06/295, Vienna. (June 2, 2012).
  2. Berry, F. S., & Berry, W. (2007). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  3. Björkdahl, A. (2005). Norm-maker and norm-taker: Exploring the normative influence of the EU in Macedonia. European Foreign Affairs Review, 10, 257–278.Google Scholar
  4. Börzel, T. A. (2010, February). The transformative power of Europe reloaded: The limits of external Europeanization (KFG Working Paper 11). Research College “The Transformative Power of Europe.” Berlin: Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
  5. Börzel, T. & Risse T. (2007, May). Venus approaching mars? The EU as an emerging civilian world power. Presented at the Bi-Annual European Union Studies Association Conference. Montreal.Google Scholar
  6. Brehuer, A. (2007). Institutions of direct democracy and accountability in Latin America’s presidential democracies. Democratization, 14, 554–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Domínguez, R. (2008). La unión europea y México: En busca del dinamismo perdido. In L. Philippe De, K. Shigeru, & R. José Briceño (Eds.), Del regionalismo latinoamericano a la integración regional. España: Fundación Carolina-Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
  8. Domínguez, R. (2011, December). The perceptions of the EU in Latin America. Presented at the KFG International Conference “Europe From the Outside In,” Berlin.Google Scholar
  9. Domínguez, R., & Roy, J. (Eds.) (2005). The European Union and regional integration. A comparative perspective and lessons for the Americas. Miami: European Union Center of Excellence/Jean Monnet Chair, University of MiamiGoogle Scholar
  10. Domínguez, R., & Roy, J. (Eds.). (2007). After Vienna: the EU-Latin America-Caribbean relationship. Miami: European Union Center of Excellence/Jean Monnet Chair, University of Miami.Google Scholar
  11. Economist Intelligence Unit. (2009, April 6). Caribbean: Russia’s first base. Business Latin America. London.Google Scholar
  12. European Commission. (2007a, May 5). Country strategy paper: Mexico. E/2007/1063.Google Scholar
  13. European Commission. (2007b, November 4). Country strategy paper: Venezuela. E/2007/622.Google Scholar
  14. European Commission. (2007c, March 29). Country strategy paper: Honduras. E/2007/478. (June 5, 2012)
  15. European Commission. (2008, May 1). Report on the Third Round of Negotiations between the EU and the Andean Community. External Relations Directorate General, RELEX G/3/MVS.Google Scholar
  16. European Commission. (2010). EU and Latin America. (June 2, 2012)
  17. European Commission. (2011, March 18). Statement of the EU and MERCOSUR after the 4th round of negotiations. Directorate-General for Trade, Press Release.Google Scholar
  18. Freedom House. (2009). Freedom in the World. (March 15, 2012)
  19. Freedom House. 2011. Freedom in the World. Honduras. (June 16, 2012)
  20. Glatz, A.-K. (2007). “Norm Diffusion” Top-Down or Bottom-Up? Small arms norms in El Salvador, South Africa, and on the international level. Presented at the 47th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association. Chicago.Google Scholar
  21. Grabendorff, W., & Seidelmann, R. (2005). Relations between the European Union and Latin America. Biregionalism in a Changing Global System. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar
  22. Hyde-Price, A. (2006). Normative power: A realist critique. Journal of European Public Policy, 13(2), 217–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jonasson, A. -K. (2009, July). The prospects for EU democracy promotion towards its muslim neighbors around the Mediterranean: A theoretical framework. Presented at the 21st International Political Science Association World Congress. Santiago, Chile.Google Scholar
  24. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2009). Governance matters VIII: Governance indicators for 1996–2008. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar
  25. Kelley, J. (2004). Ethnic politics in Europe. The power of norms and incentives. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2005a). Ties that bind? leverage, linkage, and democratization in post-cold War Era. International Studies Review, 7, 519–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2005b). International linkage and democratization. Journal of Democracy, 16, 20–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Manners, I. (2002). Normative power in Europe: A contradiction in terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(2), 253–258.Google Scholar
  29. McDonagh, E. (2008). Is democracy promotion effective in Moldova? The impact of European institutions on development of civil political rights in Moldova. Democratization, 15, 142–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Risse-Kapen, T., Ropp, S. C., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.). (1999). The power of human rights: International norms and domestic change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Schimmelfennig, F., & Scholtz, H. (2007a, May). EU democracy promotion in the European Neighborhood: Conditionality, economic development, and linkage. Presented at the Bi-Annual European Union Studies Association Conference. Montreal.Google Scholar
  32. Schimmelfennig, F., & Scholtz, H. (2007b, February). Democracy promotion in Europe: Economic development, regional diffusion and European conditionality. Presented at the 47th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association. Chicago.Google Scholar
  33. Schimmelfennig, F., & Sedelmeier, U. (Eds.). (2005). The Europeanization of central and eastern Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Smith, K. (2003). European Union foreign policy in a changing world. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  35. Tafel, H. (2008, March). The EU as a democracy promoter: EU identity, leverage, and institutions. Presented at the 48th Annual Conference of the International Studies Association. San Francisco.Google Scholar
  36. Vogel, T. (2009, July 20). Honduras faced a institutional crisis in July 2009. EU suspends aid to Honduras. European Voice. (May 4, 2012)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced StudiesEuropean University InstituteSan Domenico di Fiesole (FI)Italy

Personalised recommendations