Regionalism versus Realism

Abstract

This paper is a critical discussion of the ‘bottom-upward’ school of regional studies associated particularly with the names of John Friedmann and Walter Stöhr. First identified is the key argument of what we may call neoregionalism, namely its advocacy of regional self-government coupled with policies of local economic protectionism. Whereas neoregionalism approaches the problems of spatially uneven development from the point of view of the individual region, I argue, adopting a ‘realist’ perspective, that these problems can only be interpreted and resolved within a national framework. In particular, the prospects for regional self-government must be assessed in the light of their implications for national economic performance, political integration, and interregional competition. Federal systems offer a fruitful field for study of the national and interregional implications of regional autonomy, particularly where that autonomy is used for protectionist ends. The comparative experience is briefly reviewed and cautionary lessons are noted about some potential disbenefits of decentralisation to which insufficient attention has been paid within the neoregionalistic perspective. Finally, conclusions are drawn about regional reform and what can realistically be expected of it.