Suchergebnisse

"Comparative Regionalism" published on by Oxford University Press.

The consolidation of regionalism as a broad field of research attracting scholars across disciplines demands an inquiry on its scientific foundations. This inquiry should consider the object of research, the methods and the theories used. First, regionalism scholars lack a consensually agreed definition of their subject. Second, research focusses mainly in case studies, led by area specialists and comparative research is a rather occasional methodological occurrence. Finally, regionalism has not produced significant theoretical advances vis-à-vis neighbouring disciplines. In summary, regionalism contribution to knowledge is scarce and this paper suggests, instead, applying mainstream political science and international relations objects, methods and theories.

This article provides an account of Our Regionalism to supplement the many accounts of Our Federalism. After describing the legal forms regions assume in the United States — through interstate cooperation, organization of federal administrative agencies, and hybrid state-federal efforts — it explores how regions have shaped American governance across the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. In the years leading up to the New Deal, commentators invoked regions to resist centralization, arguing that state coordination could forestall expansion of the federal government. But regions were soon deployed to a different end, as the federal government relied on regional administration to develop its bureaucracy. Incorporating regional accommodations and regional organization into new programs allowed the federal government to expand its role in domestic policymaking. As interstate regionalism yielded to federal regionalism, the administrative state was propelled forward by a strategy that had arisen to resist it. Even as regions facilitated the expansion of the New Deal administrative state, however, the regional organization and argument that underpinned this development left room for state influence within federal programs and for new projects of multistate and joint state-federal governance. The century's next regional moment brought this potential to the fore, with regions brokering the resurgence of the states in Great Society programs. In the early twenty-first century, new regional undertakings have been celebrated as fluid, nonhierarchical networks. Although the network metaphor has been exhausted, this characterization anticipates the emergence of "regionalism without regions": collaborations among multiple state and federal actors that need not involve contiguous areas. Just as regional improvisation has responded to governance challenges of past decades, this nascent development responds to today's polarized partisanship. It betokens both the revival and the transformation of the political sectionalism that has always informed American regionalism even as it slipped behind an administrative veneer for much of the twentieth century.

Birgit M. BAURIDL, From Grafenwoehr to 'Graf': A Transnational American Region in BavariaKatharina GERUND, Sisterhood Is Regional? US-American Women's Activism between the Global and the Local; Amy Doherty MOHR, Over There: Willa Cather's Mobilization of Domestic Spaces in One of Ours -- Rachael PRICE, Blue Northers and Barbed Wire: Modernization and the Village in Larry McMurtry's The Last Picture Show; Tanja N. AHO, Reality Television, Critical Regionalism, and Low Theory: Paranoid and Reparative Readings of Representations of Class and Race in the US South.

Since the Asian crisis and with renewed impetus since the adoption of the ASEAN Charter in 2008, ASEAN has proved to be a formidable source of conceptual creativity pertaining to regional integration. While clinging to ASEAN's defining principle of non-interference, as expressed in the treaty of Amity and Cooperation and while maintaining a persisting aversion for any "Europe-like" transfer of national sovereignty to supranational entities, a new language, symbol of a renewed political rhetoric of integration, has emerged. Formulas, such as "visions", "roadmaps", "blueprints", "connectivity", "scorecards" and "soft regionalism" have served to keep a consensual narrative of a voluntary-based integration, while bringing a qualitative change to the initial 'ASEAN way' doctrine. Whereas neo-realists dismiss them as mere artifacts, aimed at maintaining the "delusion" of an Asian integration process, these new concepts and mechanisms, perhaps, encapsulate the dynamics necessary to fulfill the political commitments put forward by ASEAN leaders in the ASEAN Economic Blueprint, to turn ASEAN into a 'single market and production base' and a 'competitive region' but also the longer-term objective of promoting its centrality as a hub for regional integration in East Asia. ; ISSN: 2294-7828 ; info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Interpretation des brasilianischen Dezentralisierungsprozesses im Zusammenhang mit Tendenzen zur Umbildung der politischen Allianzen und zur Neubestimmung der regionalen Prioritäten im Zuge weltweiter Veränderungen im kapitalistischen Klassengefüge. Erklärung der spezifischen Ausprägung des Regionalismus und der Autonomiebestrebungen aus den Disparitäten in der Produktionsstruktur und der fortbestehenden Dominanz der exportorientierten Landwirtschaft

For more than a decade regionalism has been on the rise in the global economy. Based on the concept of allocative efficiency, standard trade theory regards regionalism as a form of protectionism. The paper confronts this view with an institutionalist explanation and draws on recent research on the role of specific investments into international market access, uncertainty and asymmetric information in policy coordination. A distinction between regionalism and regionalist policies is proposed. Endogenous regionalism reflects the economic forces of path-dependent comparative advantage and manifests the embeddedness of trade relations in social networks. Regionalism translates into regionalist policies via political entrepreneurship in policy networks that aims at stabilizing expectations about future market access and balancing negotiation power in a multilateral setting. Regionalism is thus presented as the standard case in global economic integration between the two extremes of unilateral liberalization and complete multilateralism.

In her sixty years on earth, Gene Stratton-Porter was many things: a women's club organizer, nature photographer, naturalist, conservationist, best-selling novelist, and a burgeoning film producer who died just as her film studio began to realize her mission of adapting her novels into movies that could further her education and conservation efforts. By 1960, eight of her books had been turned into twenty-one films—silent and sound, black and white and color, from Poverty Row studios to members of the Big Five. This article examines how Stratton-Porter and others translated her regionalism and conservationism to film across a span of forty-three years that saw major revolutions in Hollywood filmmaking. The Hollywood studio system, I argue, appropriated her successful brand of regionalism and her audience of women's club members, while also augmenting her problematically genteel mode of activism.