Is Africa Really Following Europe? An Integrated Framework for Comparative Regionalism

Abstract

Since the establishment of the AU (African Union) in 2002, there have been indications that Africa may be following in Europe's footsteps in the process of regional integration. But is this really so? This article argues that, while there is an increasing focus on comparative regionalism in scholarly debates, we have not yet developed frameworks for empirical comparative research in this field. This often leads analysts to draw general conclusions from cases of institutional isomorphism, thus neglecting other critical dimensions. By applying an integrated framework, which takes into account the multi‐dimensional aspects of old and new regionalisms, this article shows that the most critical features of the European regionalization process, from the gradual stepwise approach towards shared sovereignty to the focus on trade integration and social cohesion, are largely absent from Africa's regionalism, which presents unique characters that are often overshadowed by traditional analyses.

Africa–EU Relations and Normative Power Europe: A Decolonial Pan‐African Critique

“…If pan‐African regionalization is indeed a pseudo‐Foucauldian episteme far from its full realization, EU–AU institutional isomorphism should be expected to matter less and less in the future. Also a contemporaneous, eclectic analysis of African and European regionalism shows chiefly how significantly different the two regionalist projects are (Fioramonti and Mattheis, ). Pan‐African norms and principles will eventually become increasingly institutionalized, leading to a rather different regional organization.…”

A Clash between Creature and Creator? Contemporary Relations between the Pan‐African Parliament and the European Parliament

“…However, AU's intergovernmental decision-making processes continue to be very distinct from the supranational empowerment of the EU. Even though elements of institutional isomorphism and mimicry are easily found in the context of the AU, behind its institutional clout lies a character that is strongly protective of national sovereignty which, in fact, derives from the performance of African agents since its decolonization and the establishment of African-first regional initiatives (Fioramonti and Mattheis, 2016).…”

“…However, African elites have been adapting them to their own particular structures, which are grounded in intergovernmentalism, presidentialism and weak democratic commitments. Although the creation of the AU's organs, such as a commission, court and parliament are examples of their emulation of EU institutions (Fioramonti and Mattheis, 2016), these continental institutions have remained dependent on the decisions of the AU assembly, the high-level executive body of the AU, composed of African heads of state and government. In contrast to the EU integration history of sovereignty-pooling, Africans have historically viewed integration as a way to assert their own national sovereignty, both domestically and internationally (Bachmann and Sidaway, 2010).…”

Wessen Policy? Wie sehen Policy-Prozesse in Regionalorganisationen des Globalen Südens aus und wie können externe Akteure sie beeinflussen?

“…Diffusionsforschung nimmt vor allem institutionelle Ähnlichkeiten zwischen Regionalorganisationen und der EU zum Analysegegenstand und verfolgt dabei Ansätze des soziologischen Neo-Institutionalismus, um diese Gemeinsamkeiten zur erklären. Solche Studien lassen allerdings häufig einen plausiblen Kausalzusammenhang zur Erklärung der von ihnen beobachteten Effekte vermissen (Fioramonti und Mattheis 2016) und fokussieren sich dabei übermäßig auf oberflächliche Gemeinsamkeiten (Rüland 2016). In den vergangenen Jahren hat in der Diffusionsforschung allerdings eine inhaltliche Öffnung stattgefunden.…”