Auge y estancamiento de la Alianza del Pacífico

The Pacific Alliance deviates from other Latin American integration agreements due to its close association between governments and the private sector. Analysts have assessed the agreement as a pragmatic experience of regional integration to facilitate the free movement of production factors, a "tail moves dog" project, or an example of deep integration to diffuse liberal normative principles. This article analyzes the Pacific Alliance Business Council discourse to identify how the private sector perceives its role in the agreement and expresses it in the group's external negotiations, for example, Pacific Alliance-Mercosur, before contrasting its selfdefined role with those assumed by interpretations in the literature. We argue that the private sector sees its role as multifaceted, and this self-perception escapes the limits of normative deep integration notions, allowing business to adapt to changes in internal and external factors. Business self-perception contributes to enhance Pacific Alliance pragmatism and the application of an inductive micro-negotiation methodology, but transversality may also influence the Business Council to support normative issues.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Section: The Private Sector Role According To Ceapmentioning

confidence: 99%

The private sector's role in and contribution to the Pacific Alliance, 2012–2021

Giacalone

2023

“…Some reasons for this situation include the finalization of the European Union–Mercosur agreement, the stagnation of the Pacific Alliance due to a divergence in the positions and domestic contexts of each member (Pastrana & Castro, 2020), the creation of Prosur, and various crises in Mercosur.…”

Section: Retraction In Integration and Contemporary Challenges To A C...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The convergence between the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur: Advances, stagnation, and contemporary challenges

Bressan

Gonçalves

2023

This article investigates the relational dynamics between the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur from 2011 to 2022. It seeks to understand the moments of advancement and retraction of both regional processes by discussing the current situation and the prospects for strengthening the convergence between them. The study is based on data analysis—documents, reports, news, and institutional archives—that highlight how the negotiations between Mercosur and the Pacific Alliance were conducted. A literature review complements the analysis by reinforcing the concepts applied in this study to support the research hypothesis—that initial competition between the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur was overcome by efforts to manage the differences between them, which culminated in an ongoing dialog between the blocs. Still, the endogenous problems of Latin American integration processes and ideological differences between the national governments have resulted in challenges for the advancement of a convergence and the establishment of common trade policies. To overcome such differences, it is essential to reach cooperation agreements that transcend the elimination of tariffs between the two regional projects. The first steps toward restoring the convergence agenda require political willingness to overcome ideological differences, as well as clear interest and engagement from the economic elites.

“…Although many studies debate the idea that the Pacific Alliance's regionalism and the ideological convergence among its four members are drivers of its ideology and identity (Chaves García, 2017; Guerra‐Barón, 2019a, 2019b; Oyarzún Serrano, 2018; Palacio, 2020; Pastrana & Castro, 2019), there is less debate about its socialization effects on its members (Castro Silva, 2022; Rouvinski, 2022). The Pacific Alliance may have had a socializing effect on its members, considering all the presidential summits and meetings with the CEAP, the signing of trade agreements with associated states, and the expansion of the observer states.…”

Section: Pragmatism Flexibility and Lean Structure: How The Pacific A...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The role of the Pacific Alliance in regionalism—whether it has stagnated (Pastrana Buelvas & Castro Alegría, 2020; Nolte, 2021) or is “still moving forward after 10 years” (Briceño‐Ruiz et al, 2021, p. 193)—is of interest because it is the only regional integration bloc that is not under stress in Latin America, due to the “restriction of its goals to the expansion of trade and a lean institutional structure” (Nolte & Weiffen, 2020; pp. 8–9).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Pacific Alliance and its influence on South American regionalism

Gonçalves

2023

When the Pacific Alliance was created in 2011, its proposal to reestablish open regionalism led to a debate on the fragmentation of regional integration and the Atlantic-Pacific divide. A decade later, Latin American regionalism is under stress, but the Pacific Alliance is not. Moreover, regionalism in South America displays features that are observed in the Pacific Alliance. From a constructivist framework, this article analyzes how the ideas from the Pacific Alliance shaped the early development of Prosur, highlighting the role of Chile, Colombia, and Peru in influencing South American regionalism. This article aims to contribute to debates on the future of Latin American regionalism by stressing how the Pacific Alliance influences regionalism, dispelling the idea that it is a mere trade bloc, and showing how it consolidates the Bogotá-Lima-Santiago axis in South American regionalism. It sheds light on the relevance of this regional bloc in political terms and on the agency capacity (achievements and limits) of Colombia, Peru, and Chile in setting a regional agenda.