This study examines the role of the EU-India Trade and Technology Council (TTC) as a discursive space where digital sovereignty is negotiated, contested, and, in some areas, aligned. Using a constructivist approach and political discourse analysis, the research investigates how the European Union (EU) and India conceptualize, operationalize, and articulate digital sovereignty within the TTC. By analyzing policy documents, official statements, and ministerial outcomes, the study identifies convergence in AI and semiconductor cooperation, where digital sovereignty is framed as a tool for strategic autonomy and technological resilience. Conversely, divergences in data governance and cybersecurity persist due to fundamentally different sovereignty claims—the EU favors regulatory control and global interoperability. At the same time, India prioritizes state-driven digital nationalism and security-focused policies. The findings suggest that digital sovereignty is not a fixed concept but an evolving discourse shaped by institutional negotiations and geopolitical pressures. The TTC serves as a mechanism for policy coordination and a structured arena for sovereignty contestation, allowing the EU and India to maintain strategic engagement despite regulatory divergences. However, the study also reveals limitations in the TTC’s ability to harmonize sovereignty claims in deeply contested areas, such as cross-border data flows and cybersecurity governance.

This study examines the role of the EU-India Trade and Technology Council (TTC) as a discursive space where digital sovereignty is negotiated, contested, and, in some areas, aligned. Using a constructivist approach and political discourse analysis, the research investigates how the European Union (EU) and India conceptualize, operationalize, and articulate digital sovereignty within the TTC. By analyzing policy documents, official statements, and ministerial outcomes, the study identifies convergence in AI and semiconductor cooperation, where digital sovereignty is framed as a tool for strategic autonomy and technological resilience. Conversely, divergences in data governance and cybersecurity persist due to fundamentally different sovereignty claims—the EU favors regulatory control and global interoperability. At the same time, India prioritizes state-driven digital nationalism and security-focused policies. The findings suggest that digital sovereignty is not a fixed concept but an evolving discourse shaped by institutional negotiations and geopolitical pressures. The TTC serves as a mechanism for policy coordination and a structured arena for sovereignty contestation, allowing the EU and India to maintain strategic engagement despite regulatory divergences. However, the study also reveals limitations in the TTC’s ability to harmonize sovereignty claims in deeply contested areas, such as cross-border data flows and cybersecurity governance.

Constructing Digital Sovereignty in the Cyber Age: A Comparative Analysis of the EU and India’s Strategic Autonomy and the Role of the Trade and Technology Council

NIKOLIC, JOVAN
2024/2025

Abstract

This study examines the role of the EU-India Trade and Technology Council (TTC) as a discursive space where digital sovereignty is negotiated, contested, and, in some areas, aligned. Using a constructivist approach and political discourse analysis, the research investigates how the European Union (EU) and India conceptualize, operationalize, and articulate digital sovereignty within the TTC. By analyzing policy documents, official statements, and ministerial outcomes, the study identifies convergence in AI and semiconductor cooperation, where digital sovereignty is framed as a tool for strategic autonomy and technological resilience. Conversely, divergences in data governance and cybersecurity persist due to fundamentally different sovereignty claims—the EU favors regulatory control and global interoperability. At the same time, India prioritizes state-driven digital nationalism and security-focused policies. The findings suggest that digital sovereignty is not a fixed concept but an evolving discourse shaped by institutional negotiations and geopolitical pressures. The TTC serves as a mechanism for policy coordination and a structured arena for sovereignty contestation, allowing the EU and India to maintain strategic engagement despite regulatory divergences. However, the study also reveals limitations in the TTC’s ability to harmonize sovereignty claims in deeply contested areas, such as cross-border data flows and cybersecurity governance.
2024
Constructing Digital Sovereignty in the Cyber Age: A Comparative Analysis of the EU and India’s Strategic Autonomy and the Role of the Trade and Technology Council
This study examines the role of the EU-India Trade and Technology Council (TTC) as a discursive space where digital sovereignty is negotiated, contested, and, in some areas, aligned. Using a constructivist approach and political discourse analysis, the research investigates how the European Union (EU) and India conceptualize, operationalize, and articulate digital sovereignty within the TTC. By analyzing policy documents, official statements, and ministerial outcomes, the study identifies convergence in AI and semiconductor cooperation, where digital sovereignty is framed as a tool for strategic autonomy and technological resilience. Conversely, divergences in data governance and cybersecurity persist due to fundamentally different sovereignty claims—the EU favors regulatory control and global interoperability. At the same time, India prioritizes state-driven digital nationalism and security-focused policies. The findings suggest that digital sovereignty is not a fixed concept but an evolving discourse shaped by institutional negotiations and geopolitical pressures. The TTC serves as a mechanism for policy coordination and a structured arena for sovereignty contestation, allowing the EU and India to maintain strategic engagement despite regulatory divergences. However, the study also reveals limitations in the TTC’s ability to harmonize sovereignty claims in deeply contested areas, such as cross-border data flows and cybersecurity governance.
Digital Sovereignty
Strategic Autonomy
EU-India Relations
Constructivism
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Jovan_Thesis_Final.pdf

accesso aperto

Dimensione 702.66 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
702.66 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri

The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/84006