Withthe aim of methodological reflection, this article analyses the threeapproaches (realist, constructivist and relational) in international relationstheory most commonly employed to study foreign policy and the global influenceof the European Union. Pivotal notions such as 'agency', 'identity', 'norms', 'system'and 'practice' provide us with navigation points between these approaches,enabling us to achieve a clearer impression of the many different meaningsthese terms can contain. These meanings, in their turn, fix the direction,limitations and scope of any concrete theoretic analysis. This article is meantto draw particular attention to Bourdieuvian practice theory and Alexander Bogdanov'stektology as two differing variants of relationism, with a view to overcomingcertain deficiencies in application to the studies of the EU of methodologicalindividualism, as employed in more 'traditional' theories. To illustrate therelationalist way of theorising when dealing with the paradoxes of the EUexternal policies and global role, a follow-up interpretation, based ontektology, is given in conclusion to the resilience turn in the EU globalstrategy.

中文翻译：

---

论欧盟作为元组织的规范和习惯

本文以方法论反思为目的，分析了国际关系理论中最常用于研究外交政策和欧盟全球影响的三种方法（现实主义、建构主义和关系主义）。“代理”、“身份”、“规范”、“系统”和“实践”等关键概念为我们提供了这些方法之间的导航点，使我们能够更清楚地了解这些术语可能包含的许多不同含义。这些意义反过来又确定了任何具体理论分析的方向、局限和范围。本文旨在特别关注布迪夫实践理论和亚历山大·博格丹诺夫的科学论作为关系主义的两种不同变体，以克服在欧盟方法论个人主义研究中应用的某些缺陷，正如在更“传统”理论中所采用的那样。为了说明在处理欧盟外部政策和全球角色的悖论时的关系主义理论化方式，基于技术学的后续解释对欧盟全球战略的弹性转向进行了总结。