Fredrik Söderbaum

Theorising the Rise of Regionness

We are witnessing a resurgence of regionalism in world politics. Drawing on the significant but rather diverse old and new theorising in the field, this article seeks to move towards a more coherent construction of a New Regionalism Theory (NRT), built around the core concept of ‘regionness’, indicating the multidimensional result of the process of regionalisation of a particular geographic area. The concept of regionness — ranging from regional space, regional complex, regional society, regional community to region-state — is outlined and suggested as a comparative analytical tool for understanding the emergence and construction of regions and the formation of relevant actors in a historical and multidimensional perspective. To some extent the five levels express a certain evolutionary logic, but there is, for sure, nothing deterministic with the rise of regionness. Furthermore, there are many regionalisms and the processes of regionalisation at different points in time provides various entry points into the globalised order for particular regions.

The Problem of Comparison in Comparative Regionalism

There is virtually no systematic debate on the fundamentals of comparative research in the study of international regionalism. The field of research is very fragmented and there is a lack of interaction between EU studies and regionalism in the rest of the world. There is also a lack of communication between scholars from various theoretical standpoints and research traditions. Related to these two divides is the tension between idiographic and nomothetic methodologies. The purpose of this article is to contribute to the largely neglected debate on how to conduct and address three interrelated problems: a conceptual, a theoretical and a methodological one. Our claim is that the future of comparative regionalism should be one where old divides are bridged. This requires a combination of conceptual rigor, theoretical eclecticism, and sounder empirical research methods.

Introduction: The EU as a Global Actor and the Role of Interregionalism

Abstract This article introduces the topic of this special issue, namely the study of the EU as a global actor and the role of interregionalism. It starts with mapping out the general theme and the key questions that guide the issue, such as: to what extent are regions becoming ‘actors’ of world politics; what is the strength of interregionalism in the EU’s foreign policies towards regions and across sectors; why is interregionalism being pursued and who are the actors driving such policy; and what are the implications for world order and global governance? Region–to–region interactions are no novelty, as such, but they have only recently started to emerge on a more comprehensive scale. Interregionalism is related to changes in world order and needs therefore to be historically situated. The authors suggest that interregionalism needs to be related both to globalisation and to the restructuring of the nation–state, but above all to ‘the regionalist movement’. In the second section, the emergence of interregionalism is presented from an historical perspective and the concept of interregionalism is discussed. The article ends with a brief overview of the structure and content of the special issue as a whole.

The EU as a Global Actor and the Dynamics of Interregionalism: a Comparative Analysis

Abstract This article presents a comparative analysis of the role of interregionalism in the European Union’s foreign policies and external relations, with a particular focus on some of the most important regions around the world: Africa, Asia, South America, North America and Central and Eastern Europe. After a brief comparative assessment of the EU’s interregional relationships, the article provides three partly overlapping and intersecting accounts of the variation in the policy of interregionalism across regions: (i) promoting a liberal internationalist agenda; (ii) building the EU’s identity as a global actor; and (iii) promoting the EU’s power and competitiveness. The analysis concludes by sketching some ingredients of an emerging research agenda on the study of the EU’s foreign policy and interregionalism.

Introduction: Theories of New Regionalism

The resurrection and redefinition of regionalism are among the dominating trends in today’s international studies. Regionalism has been brought back in to the academic as well as the policy debates after some decades of neglect. Notwithstanding the hegemony of globalization and resultant anti-globalization, regionalism constitutes a set of middle-level adjuncts or alternatives in policy and practice as well as analysis. This is especially so in the post-bipolar world of the 1990s, now reinforced by the challenges to both assumptions and action constituted by the September 11 syndrome. New regionalism — a range of formal/informal mid-level ‘triangular’ relations among not only states but also non-state actors, notably civil societies and private companies — is a central aspect of the ‘new’ inter- or transnational relations.

Transmission belt for transnational capital or facilitator for development? Problematising the role of the state in the Maputo Development Corridor

This article problematises the role of the state in what is claimed to be the ‘flagship’ of the South African Spatial Development Initiative (SDI) programme, the Maputo Development Corridor (MDC). The purpose is to assess to what extent the state is best understood as a ‘transmission belt’ for transnational capital or as a ‘facilitator’ for development. The study reveals several flaws in the MDC which reinforce the role of the state as a transmission belt for transnational capital, rather than as a facilitator for development. For instance, the neo-liberal market fundamentalism and big-bang approach inherent in the MDC spells ‘jobless growth’. Similarly, the notion that ‘good governance is less government’, implies that the state is to a large extent reduced to an ‘investment promotion agency’. Having said this, the MDC does contain several novel and positive features, and its problematic aspects can be overcome through some strategic changes in the MDC approach. These may be summarised as a heavier focus on ‘development’, a more pro-active state, and more comprehensive and inclusive governance structures.

EU Studies and the ‘New Regionalism’: What can be Gained from Dialogue?

Abstract This article explores what can be gained from increased dialogue between European Union studies and ‘new regionalism’ studies within International Relations, focusing on two crucial analytical dimensions: the link between globalisation and regionalism, and the link between regionalism and the state. First, globalisation is a universal process, and it provides the context for regionalism across the globe, which enhances the potential for cross‐fertilisation between EU studies and ‘new regionalism’ studies. Cross‐regional comparison is, however, constrained by the fact that globalisations effects are unevenly spread around the globe. Second, comparing the EU with other forms of regionalism highlights the difficulty faced by scholars when moving across the divide separating advanced industrial states from developing countries/emerging economies. Strong state institutions and structures matter in the shaping of both national and regional governance; so does national wealth. Given the difficulties when trying to work across that divide, a focus on comparative regionalism should be viewed with both excitement and caution. The possibility for dialogue and cross‐fertilisation depends therefore strongly on the compatibility of (meta‐)theoretical perspectives and basic assumptions about states as well as regional institutions.

Regionalisation and Civil Society: The Case of Southern Africa

This article argues that the general neglect of civil society in the majority of the literature on regionalism is above all a theoretical and methodological failure. It argues that a critical perspective on regionalism in the form of the new regionalism approach (NRA) provides a useful point of departure for better understanding civil society on at the regional level. To this approach should be added general insights from literature on civil society and the post-colonial state in Africa. The analysis shows that Southern African civil societies in Southern Africa are is not powerless, is not simply ‘national’, nor is it necessarily subject to state policies or states-led regional organisations. Rather, civil society in Southern Africa is extending its field of competence and is increasingly engaged in various forms of regionalisation activities, particularly in fields such as social economic justice and debt, trade, health, democracy and human rights, the environment, and research. But regional civil society is by no means harmonious. It encompasses several paradoxes and internal conflicts within itself, and comprises complex relations with states and donors.

Conclusion: What Futures for New Regionalism?

Anyone following the development of international affairs in the post-Cold War era will be struck by the revitalization and proliferation of regionalism. The widening and deepening of the European Union (EU) is perhaps the most recognized and debated example of this trend, but a rich variety of other formal and informal regionalization processes can also be observed around the world. This volume has taken as its point of departure the assertion that we need theory in order to make the new regionalism more intelligible. The problem to date has been a lack of systematic theoretical debate in the study of new regionalism; but in our view this also constitutes a challenge, even an opportunity.

Networking and capacity building: The role of regional research networks in Africa

This article seeks to contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the much neglected study of regional research networks (RRNs) and their influence on capacity building in Africa. As a point of departure some conceptual ambiguities and inconsistencies in the field are addressed, with emphasis on the concepts of networking, network and organisation. This discussion serves as an inroad into the construction of four ideal types of RRNs in Africa: (i) regional research associations; (ii) regional research organisations; (iii) regional research centres; and (iv) regional research programmes and projects. Thereafter links between various types of RRNs and capacity building are discussed, followed by a discussion of some negative consequences for networking and capacity building of the way donors operate. A main argument developed is that RRNs should be integrated within a holistic, systems-oriented approach to research capacity building. It is concluded finally that the challenge for future research is to uncover not only the comparative advantages of various types of RRNs per se, but also the synergy effects promoted by RRNs in conjunction with other levels of research capacity building.