Suchergebnisse

Regionalism as an international phenomenon dates back to post-WWII decades. It is well studied both in theoretical and practical perspective. It is quite clear to most researchers what the "old" or "new" regionalism is, and what kind of logic stands behind it. However, the classic theory of regionalism does not explain contemporary processes of interregional and transregional integration, which we witness today. A common point of the three approaches (namely, regionalism, interregionalism and transregionalism) is that all of them are related to globalization. Each of these approaches constitutes a response to globalisation's challenges, which varies from region to region. Nevertheless, their aims and scope differ greatly. Regionalism represents interstate and transnational co-operation within an international region. It is derived from the logic of institutionalized interactions that may take a range of forms—from regular consultations on the ministerial level to creation of supranational bodies and common policies. Interregional co-operation implies institutionalized agreements between states representing two or more regions, which can act either on their own (i.e. quasi-interregionalism, or hybrid interregionalism) or as a part of a regional organization / informal regional group of states. The logic of interregionalism dwells on the wish for widening the geographic scope of economic interaction by opening new regional markets. Transregional cooperation, on the contrary, is promoted primarily by political factors, such as the wish of some states, which share common values, to unite their efforts in order to play a greater role in global governance. It is argued that the study of regionalism, interregionalism and transregionalism can make an essential contribution to the development of the contemporary theory of international relations. ; Регионализм как феномен международных отношений имеет давнюю историю, берущую начало в послевоенные годы. Он хорошо изучен как теоретически, так и практически. Исследователям не составляет труда идентифицировать «старый» и «новый» регионализм, объяснить его логику. Вместе с тем, классическая теория регионализма не позволяет осмыслить современные процессы межрегиональной и трансрегиональной интеграции, разворачивающиеся на наших глазах. Общим для них является то, что все они связаны с процессом глобализации и представляют собой коллективную реакцию на него, варьирующуюся от региона к региону. Вместе с тем, цели и масштаб их существенно разнятся. Регионализм опирается на межгосударственное и, шире, транснациональное сотрудничество в пределах международного региона. Он подчиняется логике установления институционализированных взаимосвязей, которые могут принимать различные формы – от регулярных консультаций на министерском уровне до создания наднациональных органов и выработки общей согласованной политики. Межрегиональное сотрудничество развивается на базе институционализированных соглашений между государствами-представителями двух и более международных регионов, которые могут выступать как поодиночке (так называемый квази- или гибридный межрегионализм), так и в составе региональной организации или неформального регионального блока. Логика межрегионализма основывается на стремлении расширить географию экономического взаимодействия за счёт выхода на новые региональные рынки. В основе трансрегионального сотрудничества, напротив, лежат, в первую очередь, политические факторы, а именно, стремление отдельных государств, разделяющих общие ценности, объединиться ради более эффективного участия в глобальном управлении. Представляется, что исследования регионализма, межрегионализма и трансрегионализма могут внести существенный вклад в развитие современной теории международных отношений.

This inception paper expatiates on the conditions that are necessary in determining the effectiveness of the European Union's (the EU's) leadership in science and cultural diplomacy (SCD) on regionalism and inter-regionalism in the South. These conditions include willingness, capacity and acceptance. Willingness delineates the scope of the ambition of the EU in SCD. Capacity covers elements that pertain to breadth and depth/ quality and quantity of resources mobilized and available to lead SCD that delivers results. Acceptance refers to the nature of the credibility that the EU is able to command both within and outside the Union respecting its influence to attract followers both amongst Member States of the Union as well as third states, regional and international organizations. The emphasis of the paper is on effectiveness in terms of impact on regionalism and inter-regionalism in the South. Focus is placed on regional and inter-regional processes/ initiatives in Africa, Southeast Asia and Latin America.

The European Union (EU) has adopted a very generous region-to-region approach towards Latin America in recent decades. However, although the EU adopted the same interregional strategy across different policy areas, the quality of interregional interaction (and success) vary significantly. An interesting case of EU-driven interregionalism is the case of EU-Latin America science diplomacy. In this policy area, it seems that the EU's interregional approach has been particularly successful, as both regions continuously call for the creation and strengthening of a "Common Area for Higher Education, Research and Technology", and various high-level working groups and action plans have been established to achieve this end. Yet, a critical assessment of EU-Latin America interregional cooperation in the field of science, higher education and innovation has not been produced to date. This paper aims to fill this notable academic (and policy-making) gap by providing a thorough overview of (1) the EU's drivers behind this particular foreign policy action and the chosen interregional approach; (2) the applied policy instruments and actions of this specific case of EU-Latin American interregional relations; and (3) achieved impact of this specific case of EU-Latin American interregional relations.

The birregional strategic partnership between the EU and LAC initiated in 1999, has evolved to adapt to both; changes in the global context and the restructuring of power, and changes in regional integration processes that have altered the balance and nature of the relationship. Currently the EU and LAC have multiple levels of relationship - inter-regional, trans-regional and sub-regional - comprising a heterogeneous set of actors in a complex interregionalism scheme, surpassing the traditional categories of the studies on nterregionalism. ; La Asociación estratégica birregional entre la UE y ALC iniciada en 1999, ha evolucionado para adaptarse tanto los cambios en el contexto global y la re-estructuración del poder, como a transformaciones en los procesos de integración regional que han alterado el equilibrio y la naturaleza de la relación. Actualmente la UE y ALC tienen múltiples niveles de relación –global, inter-regional, transregional y sub-regional– abarcando un conjunto de actores heterogéneos en un esquema de interregionalismo complejo, que sobrepasa las categorías tradicionales de los estudios sobre interregionalismo.

Today's world is witnessing the remarkable development of transregional ties between distinct regions and powers within the international system evolving towards multipolarity. However, the essence of transregionalism remains understudied to the extent that there is no clear consensus for which terminology should be used to define this phenomenon. The article compares existing approaches to transregionalism conceptualization, analyzes the differences in the use of terms, and discusses the global impact of transregional relations on world politics and economy. The author advocates a term transregionalism (instead of interregionalism, crossregionalism, macroregionalization etc.) and suggests its definition. ; В современном мире все активнее набирают силу трансрегиональные процессы, вовлекающие в себя целые регионы и основные полюсы эволюционирующей к полицентричности мировой системы. При этом сам феномен по-прежнему остается недостаточно изученным, о чем свидетельствует отсутствие консенсуса даже на этапе выбора терминологии. В настоящей статье сравниваются различные подходы к концептуализации трансрегионализма, анализируются используемые термины, а также рассматривается влияние трансрегионализма на мировую политику и экономику. Автор обосновывает целесообразность использования термина «трансрегионализм» (вместо используемых терминов «интеррегионализм», «кроссрегионализм», «макрорегионализация» и т.д.) и предлагает его определение.

В современном мире все активнее набирают силу трансрегиональные процессы, вовлекающие в себя целые регионы и основные полюсы эволюционирующей к полицентричности мировой системы. При этом сам феномен по-прежнему остается недостаточно изученным, о чем свидетельствует отсутствие консенсуса даже на этапе выбора терминологии. В настоящей статье сравниваются различные подходы к концептуализации трансрегионализма, анализируются используемые термины, а также рассматривается влияние трансрегионализма на мировую политику и экономику. Автор обосновывает целесообразность использования термина «трансрегионализм» (вместо используемых терминов «интеррегионализм», «кроссрегионализм», «макрорегионализация» и т.д.) и предлагает его определение. ; Today's world is witnessing the remarkable development of transregional ties between distinct regions and powers within the international system evolving towards multipolarity. However, the essence of transregionalism remains understudied to the extent that there is no clear consensus for which terminology should be used to defi ne this phenomenon. The article compares existing approaches to transregionalism conceptualization, analyzes the differences in the use of terms, and discusses the global impact of transregional relations on world politics and economy. The author advocates a term transregionalism (instead of interregionalism, crossregionalism, macroregionalization etc.) and suggests its defi nition.

Le dialogue interrégional existant entre l'Afrique et l'Amérique du Sud a été marqué par des moments d'intensification et par des moments de distanciation. Dès 2006 commence une période d'accélération de ces liens à travers notamment la création d'un Forum de coopération ASA et par la revitalisation de la Zone de Paix et de Coopération de l'Atlantique sud (ZOPACAS). Cet article questionne l'importance stratégique de ces forum interrégionaux dans la Politique Extérieure du Brésil et dans sa stratégie d'insertion internationale. Il est défendu l'idée que le dynamisme qu'a connu le dialogue interrégional entre les deux rives de l'Atlantique Sud a offert de nouveaux espaces d'action au sein desquels le Brésil a exercé un leadership en promouvant à la fois ses propres intérêts et en impulsant une diffusion idéationelle à travers sa rhétorique. ; Peer reviewed

Cuando se piensa en la historia de la integración regional como fenómeno de las relaciones internacionales, se suele pensar en mediados del siglo XX, y siempre tomando como referencia el proceso de integración regional de la Unión Europea (UE). Del mismo modo ocurre con el uso del término "acervo", que usualmente es asociado al vocablo "comunitario", y por tanto se describe como "acervo comunitario", al conjunto de normas jurídicas que recogen los principios y objetivos políticos que han desarrollado las instituciones comunitarias de la UE. Toda iniciativa o proyecto de integración regional anterior al siglo XX es considerado como "sueños de unificación" o "anhelos de unidad". Sin embargo, ambas aseveraciones son incorrectas, por un lado, la historia de la integración regional no nace en el siglo XX, nace en los ciernes de la creación de los Estados-Nación en Europa y de las repúblicas en América, entre los siglos XVII–XX. Por otro lado, la interpretación del término "acervo comunitario", es sólo una acepción del mismo y desde una perspectiva jurídica, sin considerar en su conjunto la histórica, la política, filosófica y cultural. Acervo proviene del latín acervus que significa el conjunto de bienes morales o culturales acumulados por la tradición. Por tanto, a nuestro entender, las ideas de unificación y los proyectos de unidad, anteriores al siglo XX, deberían de ser considerados parte del acervo de integración de ambas regiones. Este trabajo presenta la teoría que el período de los siglos XVII–XX forma parte de lo que se suele denominar como acervo, por consiguiente, a este período lo denominamos período del "acervo integracionista", un acervo que es común tanto para Europa como para América, el cual forma parte de otra historia común, aún mayor entre ambos continentes, que es la historia de Occidente.When one considers the history of regional integration as a phenomenon, which is a product of international relations, it is usual to think of the mid-20th century, utilizing the process of the regional integration of the European Union (EU) as a reference. The same thing happens with the use of the term "acquis", which is usually associated with the term "community"; thus it is common to describe the assemblage of legal norms that gather the political principles and objectives developed by community institutions of the EU as an "acquis communautaire". Any initiative or regional integration project before the twentieth century has been considered as mere "dreams of unification" or a "longing for unity". However, both observations are incorrect; on one hand, the history of regional integration was not born in the 20th century, but at the earliest stages of creation of the European Nation-States and the American Republics, between the 17th and 20th centuries. On the other hand, the interpretation of the phrase "acquis communautaire" merely draws upon the strict meaning of the term from a legal perspective, and does not take into account the totality of its historical, political, philosophical and cultural context. The word "acquis" comes from the Latin term acervus, meaning a set of moral or cultural assets collected by tradition. Therefore, in our understanding, the ideas and projects of unification before the 20th century should be considered a part of the integrationist acquis of both regions. This work presents the theory that the period between the 17th and 20th centuries forms a part of what is usually termed an acquis, a historical repository; consequently, we denote this period an "integrationist acquis", a repository that is common to Europe as well as to America, and forms a part of another common history, an even greater one, which is the history of the West.

Defence date: 13 June 2016 ; Examining Board: Professor Adrienne Héritier, EUI (Supervisor); Professor Ulrich Krotz, EUI/RSCAS; Professor Alberta M. Sbragia, University of Pittsburgh; Professor Eugénia da Conceição-Heldt, TU Dresden. ; Since 2006, the European Union (EU) has increasingly made use of bilateral trade relations, and thus departed from its earlier commitment to interregionalism and multilateralism. Two examples for this are the EU's shift from interregional to bilateral relations with the Mercado Común del Sur (MERCOSUR) and its regional power, Brazil, and with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its economically most important member Singapore. This turn to bilateralism is particularly puzzling in the cases of MERCOSUR and ASEAN because of the EU's long-lasting relationship with these regional organizations and because of the EU's financial support for their regional integration. Drawing on realist theorizing, this turn to bilateralism can best be explained by the EU's motivation to secure its economic and regulatory power in South America and Southeast Asia, and by the regions' varying levels of cohesion. Factors rooted in the international system rather than inner-institutional characteristics have shaped the EU's trade policy which calls the explanatory power of liberal approaches into question. Testing an alternative theoretical model coined commercial realism against commercial liberalism and the principal-agent framework, the analysis sets out the scope condition of theorizing and analyzing EU external economic policy from a realist perspective. Employing original data from 165 media press articles, 48 standardized interviews from a survey by Dür and De Bièvre (2007), 44 standardized interviews from an original survey with interest groups enrolled in the Civil Society Dialogue, 66 consultation sheets of the European Commission's consultation on EU future trade policy, and 46 elite interviews, this thesis analyzes the EU's recent switch in approach in a comparative fashion. A combination of primary and secondary cases, triangulation of data and methods, and a combination of research strategies, including rigorous process-tracing, maximizes the research design's external and internal validity.

This book analyses how closer regional connectivity and economic integration between South Asia and Southeast Asia can benefit both regions, with a focus on the role played by infrastructure and public policies in facilitating this process. Connecting Asia: Infrastructure for Integrating South and Southeast Asia analyses how closer regional connectivity and economic integration between South Asia and Southeast Asia can benefit both regions. With a focus on the role played by infrastructure and public policies in facilitating this process, it provides a detailed and up-to-date discussion of issues, innovations, and progress. Country studies of national connectivity issues and policies cover Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, examining major developments in trade and investment, economic cooperation, the role of economic corridors, and regional cooperation initiatives. Thematic chapters explore investment in land and sea transport infrastructure, trade facilitation, infrastructure investment financing, supporting national and regional policies, and model-based estimates of the benefits of integration. They also identify significant opportunities for strengthening these integration efforts as a result of the recent opening up of Myanmar in political, economic, and financial terms. For the first time for these regions, the book employs a state-of-the-art computable general equilibrium (CGE) model incorporating heterogeneous firms to estimate the advantages of integration. Providing perspective on the latest thinking on integration policy, Connecting Asia is an essential resource for academics, policymakers, and business people alike.

This book analyses how closer regional connectivity and economic integration between South Asia and Southeast Asia can benefit both regions, with a focus on the role played by infrastructure and public policies in facilitating this process. Connecting Asia: Infrastructure for Integrating South and Southeast Asia analyses how closer regional connectivity and economic integration between South Asia and Southeast Asia can benefit both regions. With a focus on the role played by infrastructure and public policies in facilitating this process, it provides a detailed and up-to-date discussion of issues, innovations, and progress. Country studies of national connectivity issues and policies cover Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, examining major developments in trade and investment, economic cooperation, the role of economic corridors, and regional cooperation initiatives. Thematic chapters explore investment in land and sea transport infrastructure, trade facilitation, infrastructure investment financing, supporting national and regional policies, and model-based estimates of the benefits of integration. They also identify significant opportunities for strengthening these integration efforts as a result of the recent opening up of Myanmar in political, economic, and financial terms. For the first time for these regions, the book employs a state-of-the-art computable general equilibrium (CGE) model incorporating heterogeneous firms to estimate the advantages of integration. Providing perspective on the latest thinking on integration policy, Connecting Asia is an essential resource for academics, policymakers, and business people alike.

The papers and essays in this volume examine several key areas of integration that are of critical interest to the AEC moving into 2025 and beyond. The rest of this integrative chapter weaves the papers together, highlights their key ideas and recommendations, and situates a number of them in terms of the changing international environment. Section 1 presents the results of the ERIA survey of ASEAN people on their aspirations, expectations, and perceived pressing problems into 2025. This is elaborated in Volume 2, Voices of ASEAN: What Does ASEAN Mean to ASEAN Peoples, a companion to this volume. The section also discusses the two key international developments that have a critical bearing on ASEAN's future. Thus, Section 1 provides the compelling contexts to the measures and initiatives that ASEAN needs to undertake to realise the four key features of the AEC 2025 listed above. Section 2 discusses the key strategies or measures for the AEC into 2025 and beyond, based mainly on the papers and essays in the volume. Section 3 concludes and summarises the key recommendations and presents a possible snapshot of ASEAN by 2025 and 2035.

This article seeks to discuss the origins and evolution of the Natuna Islands issue within the context of Indonesia's foreign policy, and in particular, its relations with China. It is argued that while the Natuna issue will continue to crop up from time to time and in the process elicit a variety of reactions and responses from Jakarta and Beijing, it is unlikely to bring about an outright naval confrontation between Indonesia and China in the short to medium term, not least because the governing elites of both countries appreciate the value of deepening bilateral economic engagement.

Against the backdrop of a recovering yet fragile international economy and considerable political uncertainty, it cannot be overstated how important it is that the G20 "stick to its job" at the Hamburg Summit in July 2017 and beyond without diluting its focus. When G20 developed and emerging economies came together to cooperate and coordinate their efforts in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, they defined their action based on a set of core values and a shared sense of responsibility towards strengthened global governance and effective stewardship of the world economy. Accordingly, successive G20 summits have focused on strategic "jobs" where the forum holds a comparative advantage and which can be better addressed than in alternative institutions or governance mechanisms. Two such advantages are the group's composition and the ability to take a holistic approach to world financial and economic affairs. This volume brings together a collection of short essays—a number of which were presented at an ICTSD workshop held in parallel to the G20 Trade and Investment Working Group meeting in Berlin in February 2017—that reflect on some of key areas where the G20 has a comparative advantage. The authors put forward a set of policy options for the G20 to support inclusive international trade and investment.

The outlook for Southeast Asia for 2017 reflects more than challenges this broader view. 2016 saw changes to major power interests in the region as well as disruptive political dynamics in five of the six most populous Southeast Asian countries. These will play out in 2017 and beyond.