Content uploaded by Fredrik Söderbaum
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Fredrik Söderbaum on Feb 18, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Theories of Regionalism
Abstract
The goal of this chapter is to provide an overview of some of the key theoretical debates and controversies in the field that are particularly relevant for the study of Asian regionalism. More specifically, the chapter will relate Asian regionalism to the historical development of the field and to the over-emphasis on European integration theory and practice in the field of regionalism as well as to the crucial relationship between formal and informal regionalism.
The study builds upon the understanding that it is not relevant to develop a theory about Asian regionalism per se. Rather, it is of specific interest to situate Asian regionalism within a more general theoretical and comparative discussion. Yet, a related assumption is that Asian regionalism is crucial for the further development of the broader field of regionalism.
... Esto no se hizo en el acto fundacional porque, tratándose de formaciones estatales relativamente incipientes y frágiles, donde el comunismo era la principal amenaza interna y externa (Söderbaum, 2012), la ASEAN buscaba garantizar primero la paz, la estabilidad política y la seguridad regional (Beeson, 2009;Bartesaghi, 2014;Bartesaghi y De María, 2022). Para la época era fundamental superar múltiples diferencias nacionales, de forma pacífica y perdurable, dada la existencia de inestabilidad política, enemistades, difíciles relaciones económicas, factores geopolíticos, tendencias antichinas o los sucesos bélicos de la península de Indochina que marcaron las décadas de 1960, 1970 y parte de la de 1980 por el combate al comunismo (Stuart-Fox, 2003;Cintra, 2011;Fernández-Guillén, 2019a;Bartesaghi y De María, 2022;Ramoneda, 2022;Giacalone, 2023). ...
... Respecto de la ASEAN,Söderbaum (2012) manifiesta que como la razón de ser del bloque era constituirse en baluarte contra la expansión comunista en la región asiática, el triunfo del capitalismo derivó en que ese enfoque se desplazara hacia otro a finales del siglo XX: lograr un mayor desarrollo económico y garantizar la seguridad en el nuevo contexto liberal.Dicho escenario de post guerra fría, caracterizado por la apertura y la liberalización económica global, explica varias dinámicas desencadenadas en la ASEAN, con miras a su adecuación hacia una economía globalizada, en los albores del siglo XXI. La revisión y ampliación de sus objetivos y propósitos, la profundización del regionalismo abierto, la institucionalización de su integración económica diferenciada y el mayor acercamiento y posterior asociación con China, motorizada por la preeminencia de la diplomacia económica 32 tras el ingreso del gigante asiático al orden económico internacional en 2001, son algunas de ellas (Fernández-Guillén, 2022d).De este modo, una vez superada la fase inicial de construcción de reglas para el establecimiento de certezas, entendimiento y de una sociedad de confianza entre sus miembros, basada en la seguridad, la ASEAN avanzó profundizando el proceso de adaptación a la globalización para no quedar fuera de ella, rasgo distintivo de su regionalismo abierto 33 . ...
Although ASEAN and MERCOSUR are located at considerable geographical distances and have historical and cultural differences, as regional integration processes they share certain common features. Even with different origins, functioning, and results, the 21st century has shown how economic interdependence at the commercial level has risen between them. Through an empirical research approach, supported by documentary survey techniques and statistical data, this study describes and analyzes the institutional logic of both sub-regions, the diplomatic rapprochement process between them, the state of MERCOSUR-ASEAN inter-regional relations and, through indicators of position and commercial dynamics, it quantifies the flows of their exchanges and determines their relative interregional dynamics (comparative advantages, degree of similarity of their export baskets, magnitude of their complementarity, trade nature and intra-industrial potential), as well as the intensity of trade relations from 2001 to 2022. After a comparative analysis of their institutional logic and functioning in interregional negotiations, the thesis concludes that there are reasons to relaunch and deepen MERCOSUR-ASEAN inter-regionalism, but MERCOSUR needs to make some institutional adjustments to fully take advantage of the opportunities it presents.
... While the term has been primarily used by policymakers as policy guidance, there is no doubt that it is extensively discussed by scholars studying regional cooperation (Armstrong and Drysdale 2022;Choong 2019). One important premise here is that region is not given, but a social construct (Söderbaum 2012), which implies that the 'central' status in a wider region can also be constructed by strategically crafting regional groups and partnership. ...
ASEAN centrality is a term that has emerged in the recent literature on international relations and institutions focussing on the region surrounding ASEAN. It refers to the idea that ASEAN has or should have a central role in forming the political and economic institutional architecture of a wider region. Unfortunately, however, previous studies have failed to identify whether ASEAN has centrality or not. There are two problems. First, the concept of centrality is vague. Second, a sound method to assess the centrality is absent. This study attempts to contribute to the literature mainly from theoretical (conceptual) and, to a lesser degree, empirical perspectives. From the theory front, the paper elaborates the notion of centrality, by differentiating the two concepts related to centrality: core and hub. From the empirical front, the paper claims the usefulness of comparative analysis. Even if the level of centrality cannot be measured, we can better assess whether ASEAN hold the core and/or hub status in regional institutional architecture, if it is compared with other institutions.
... When it comes to regionalisation, there are several disputes and theoretical frameworks spanning from politics to economics. However, all conceptual frameworks have been heavily questioned, and not one is broadly accepted (Söderbaum, 2011). As a result, there is no credible and acceptable theoretical discussion on regionalisation in the literature. ...
Aim of Study: Over the years, all South Asian countries have experienced repeated regime changes throughout the political spectrum. However, most South Asian countries, like most developing countries, currently have a hybrid regime. Gaps in the research highlight the necessity to investigate and establish the relationship between the hybridity ratio and its influence on South Asia's regionalisation possibilities. As a result, this article explores the influence of different regime types on regionalisation in South Asia and why, despite several regimes, regionalisation has remained an elusive goal for the area. Methodology: The methodologies used in this study are descriptive and exploratory, emphasising assessing, comparing, and analysing the data's multiple dimensions and interpretations, both hidden and apparent. Findings and conclusion: As a result, it may be inferred that the role of regimes in defining the possibilities of South Asian regionalisation is unclear and requires additional reflection. However, there is enough evidence to assume that altering the hybridity ratio (toward democratic inclinations) may assist South Asia in the pursuit of its goal of regionalisation.
... Conventional justifications for RTA formation gravitate towards economic and well-being-centred objectives such as reducing transaction cost, exploiting comparative advantage and economies of scale by forming an expanded market sphere, augmenting future policy predictability and signalling a stable environment to prospective investors (WTO 2011). Under some circumstances, economic regionalism can be perceived, particularly within the European context, as a harbinger or a preliminary step towards a more comprehensive political integration as envisaged by the (neo)functionalist theory of regionalism (Söderbaum 2012). Yet, under securitised regionalism, there is a security logic to it-the impelling forces animating member countries are primarily, if not exclusively, security concerns and geopolitical dynamics. ...
This article examines the evolution of Asian regionalism, through the analytical prism of securitised regionalism, a concept that marries security concerns with regional cooperative efforts. It highlights the transformation from an initial focus on economic integration to a tool for geopolitical manoeuvring in response to evolving international relations in Asia. Initially shaped by the Cold War’s ideological confrontations, organisations like the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization and Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) underscored the security-driven nature of early Asian regionalism. However, the post–Cold War era witnessed a shift towards economic collaboration and integration, as evidenced by the development of the ASEAN Free Trade Area, Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, indicating a phase of de-securitisation. Recent trends, however, suggest an America-led resurgence of securitised regionalism in Asia, marked by the emergence of initiatives like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and a series of supply chain alliances. These initiatives, influenced by major power competition, especially the strategic interests of the United States in Asia, signify a renewed emphasis on geopolitical and security concerns. Additionally, the formation of strategic supply chain alliances aimed at reducing dependency on China points towards an enhanced focus on internal economic security within securitised regional blocs.
... These efforts reflect China's strategic objectives in the region, enhancing its influence and contributing to regional security dynamics. However, the associated challenges highlight the complex interplay of regional politics and international relations (Singh, 2024;Haas, 2020;and Söderbaum, 2012). ...
This study examines China's integration initiatives and their impact on South Asian regional integration, focusing on economic ties, security dynamics, and diplomatic strategies. Applying neo-functionalism as a theoretical framework, the research highlights the role of Chinese investments in enhancing infrastructure, connectivity, and regional integration in South Asia while addressing challenges such as debt dependency and geopolitical tensions. The findings reveal a nuanced interplay between economic opportunities and strategic competition, particularly involving India as a regional power and the USA and Russia as global power competitors.
This introductory chapter examines the complexities surrounding the concept of “development” and its entanglement with power dynamics, colonial legacies, and capitalist imperatives. From Truman’s 1949 address to the emergence of the era of development amidst colonialism, the discourse on development has been fraught with challenges. The chapter highlights how mainstream paradigms, exemplified by the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)’s initiatives, often prioritize corporate interests over community well-being. Critiques of ASEAN’s model underscore the need for alternative approaches rooted in principles of equality, solidarity, and sustainability. Various alternative visions, from grassroots initiatives to civil society movements, challenge neoliberal capitalism and advocate for a pluriversal approach that embraces diverse ways of being and knowing. By foregrounding marginalized voices, these alternatives offer pathways toward a more inclusive future. The chapter sets the stage for exploring decolonial alternatives in Southeast Asia beyond the geographical, political, and socio-economic scope imposed by ASEAN.
The different cases discussed in this volume serve as examples of development alternatives that question and go beyond the homogenizing claims of modernist approaches to development. Rather than starting from universalist, topdown concepts, these initiatives tend to be rooted in local cultural values and norms, subaltern identities, and everyday practices. From these cases, this chapter interrogates the possibility of a regionalism based on ‘real regions’ that become spaces of emancipation, self-realization, and empowerment.
Although there is a clear rise in academic interest in region formation, theoretical approaches of the topic vary greatly, stemming from geopolitical identifications of objective regional boundaries, through functionalist ideas of regional linkages, to post-structuralist ideas about fluid regional belonging. This article provides a typology of region formation approaches, based on the ontological assumptions of its authors. The typology is based on two main debates within contemporary international relations ontology: regarding the basic components of reality (material vs. ideational) and regarding the status of theories (transfactual vs. phenomenalist). The presented matrix provides an ideal-typical position for each of these four iterations and illustrates its viability in the case of region formation literature on the Asia-Pacific. Doing so, the text contributes to (meta)theoretical discussions of how regions are formed while at the same time illustrating the often-overlooked stories of region formation.
This chapter unfolds in four sections. Following this introduction, the second sections outlines the shifting contours of the international economic order against which developing countries have had to work in order to pursue their preferred paths to development. This discussion serves as a backdrop to the third section that identifies four variants of developmental regionalism in the Global South following the end of the Second World War. Beginning with the Marxist-inspired structuralist version of developmental regionalism, the discussion focuses on how this gave way to three forms of what look to be instances of ‘open’ regionalism but demonstrate significant variations. By focusing on broad trends in ideas, interests and practices and drawing on key examples from Latin America, Africa and East Asia where the intertwining of development and regional integration as well as their contestation are especially evident, this chapter identifies three variations of a fundamentally open form of developmental regionalism – neoliberal open regionalism, economic nationalist variants of open and developmental regionalism, and public goods regionalism.
Buku ini mengupas transformasi konglomerat Indonesia, khususnya aktivitas ekonomi dan relasi politik mereka dalam dua dekade terakhir. Dalam trajektorinya, para konglomerat—juga disebut dengan pengusaha besar swasta, kelompok bisnis, dan korporasi besar—mendominasi dan membentuk arah perekonomian Indonesia sejak tahun 1970-an hingga akhir 1990-an melalui kedekatan dan perlindungan dari pemerintah Orde Baru.
Meskipun hampir bangkrut dihantam krisis moneter Asia tahun 1997, disusul jatuhnya Presiden Soeharto sebagai patron politik, para konglomerat berhasil bangkit. Kali ini tidak saja kembali menguasai sektor-sektor strategis, tapi terlibat langsung dalam politik dan kebijakan pemerintah. Dalam perkembangannya, salah satu aspek yang tidak banyak mendapat perhatian adalah transformasi konglomerat Indonesia yang semakin terintegrasi ke dalam ekonomi global, yaitu melalui internasionalisasi kapital di pasar Asia Pasifik, khususnya Asia Tenggara, baik melalui merger, akuisisi, dan usaha patungan yang melibatkan perusahaan lintas negara.
Buku ini mengulas transfigurasi konglomerat Indonesia secara mendalam melalui studi terhadap proyek integrasi ekonomi di kawasan Asia Tenggara, yaitu kesepakatan regional Masyarakat Ekonomi ASEAN. Melalui pendekatan ekonomi politik, buku ini manawarkan argumen dan analisis baru bahwa proyek integrasi ekonomi regional sebenarnya bersumber pada proses perkembangan kapitalisme beserta kekuatan sosial dominan yang muncul di dalamnya. Dalam hal ini, kebangkitan, reorganisasi, dan ekspansi bisnis dari korporasi besar di pasar kawasan—termasuk konglomerat Indonesia—menjadi penopang dan pendorong kerja sama ekonomi regional ASEAN.
The construction of cross-border regions (CBRs) as an example of microregionalism is best related to the more general rescaling of economic, political, and social processes. For CBRs both respond and contribute to the ‘relativization of scale’ associated since the early 1980s with the decline in the relative structured coherence among national economy, national state, and national society that had characterized the heyday of the post-war boom. The crisis of the post-war mode of economic growth in the advanced capitalist economies, the end of the ‘Second Cold War’, the rise of global neoliberalism, the breakup of the Soviet Bloc, China’s ‘opening’ to foreign capital, and the growing number of so-called failed states have all contributed to this relativization of scale. This is reflected in a proliferation of scales on which attempts occur to restructure economic, political, and social relations — ranging from policies to promote economic globalization, global governance, and global culture through various forms of mega-, macro-, and meso-regionalism to concerns with micro-regional economies, local community empowerment, and ‘tribal’ identities. This chapter explores some of the processes and strategies linked to the emergence and consolidation of CBRs and comments on their significance for economic and political restructuring.
This chapter deals with the recent wave of regionalism and regionalization in the context of global transformation and competing world order projects which have the purpose of regulating a turbulent global condition. It builds and elaborates on results from a United Nations University/World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU/WIDER) sponsored international research project on the New Regionalism, for which the author was the project director. The thrust of this project, which was carried out in the latter half of the 1990s, was to explore the role of the regional factor in the emerging world order. Under the assumption that this regional wave was qualitatively new and that there was a need for a more empirical exploration, the project used a broad comparative approach that came to be called the New Regionalism Approach (NRA). The overall purpose here is to move away from ‘region-centrisn’, which may be as limiting as state-centrism, the original sin for which the UNU/WIDER project was to be a cure. This strong concentration on the empirical regions must be understood against the background of the surprising explosion of regional initiatives starting in the mid-1980s in many parts of the world; and constituting a new wave of regionalization processes, or what was called ‘the new regionalism’.
In 1984 George Orwell pictured a world divided between three rival totalitarian powers — Eastasia, Oceania, and Eurasia. It was a condition of perpetual war and total mobilization, in which two of the powers were always fighting the third. Orwell took his names for these three powers from the three geographical centres of the struggle for territory and resources during the Second World War. Fifty years later, the same three areas featured once again in predictions that the world order was dividing territorially and was heading towards conflict. The nature of this conflict was widely assumed to be a zero-sum game in which each state competed to improve its relative share of territory, resources, and wealth within a global total which was fixed. In this neorealist perspective regionalism simplified and intensified this conflict by combining the most important states into more or less cohesive groups under the leadership of the dominant state in each region. The pressure on a region to become cohesive increased in relation to the success of other regions in unifying themselves. As each regional power sought to maximize its wealth and extend its territory, the risk of economic wars rose, because in a zero-sum world each regional power was assumed to calculate that conflict would yield more benefit than would cooperation.
The study and practice of regionalism have attracted growing interest in interrelated analytical and policy realms as globalization and differentiation have likewise increased. Reflective of such attention, analyses and debates have also proliferated with the end of the Cold War and the expansion and/ or emergence of regional schemes, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the European Union (EU), the Southern Common Market (Mercosur), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), to mention but a few. The debate has also widened. At least, it is beginning to be acknowledged that regional interactions and organizations focus not only on states but also on continuing linkages among a heterogeneous set of actors and realms, including states, economies/companies and societies.
This 2003 book develops the idea that since decolonisation, regional patterns of security have become more prominent in international politics. The authors combine an operational theory of regional security with an empirical application across the whole of the international system. Individual chapters cover Africa, the Balkans, CIS Europe, East Asia, EU Europe, the Middle East, North America, South America, and South Asia. The main focus is on the post-Cold War period, but the history of each regional security complex is traced back to its beginnings. By relating the regional dynamics of security to current debates about the global power structure, the authors unfold a distinctive interpretation of post-Cold War international security, avoiding both the extreme oversimplifications of the unipolar view, and the extreme deterritorialisations of many globalist visions of a new world disorder. Their framework brings out the radical diversity of security dynamics in different parts of the world.
This volume features up-to-date studies of regional integration efforts in all major parts of the world, especially North America, South America, and East Asia. Comparisons are drawn between these efforts and those made in the EU, where integration has progressed much further. The book asks: What explains the variation in achievements? What kind of agreements and institutions are needed to produce regional integration? Is 'pooling and delegation' of sovereignty necessary to overcome 'collective action problems'? How important is regional leadership? This work is a major new contribution to the literature on regional integration, and will appeal to theorists, policymakers, students and other readers concerned about world developments. It will also be of value to courses covering international political economy, international relations and regional integration, at both undergraduate and graduate level.