Theorising regions through changes in statehood: rethinking the theory and method of comparative regionalism

Abstract

<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:p>The study of regionalism is often characterised as too fragmented, plagued by disagreements over such fundamental matters as its ontological and epistemological premises, which also hinder efforts at substantive comparison of regionalisation processes. In this article it is argued that to overcome these problems, what is required is a more rigorous incorporation of such studies within relevant work in state theory and political geography. The key insight herein is that regionalism should not be studied separately from the state as these are interrelated phenomena. State-making and regionalisation are both manifestations of contested political projects aimed at shaping the territorial, institutional, and/or functional scope of political rule. Furthermore, the article also distils the lines of a mechanismic methodology for comparative regionalism. Its main advantage is in overcoming the implicit benchmarking of regional development we find in other approaches. The framework's utility is then demonstrated through a comparison of regional governance in Asia and Europe.</jats:p>

The contested rescaling of economic governance in East Asia: a special issue

“…As our case studies show, many forms of 'rescaling' are evident in East Asia, apart from multilateralism, but are often not granted sufficient empirical or conceptual consideration by the literature (Hameiri 2013). Because we conceive of economic regionalism as the contested rescaling of economic governance, we are able to identify and explain modes of economic governance that fall outside the national/multilateral binary.…”

The Place of the Region in IR

“…While post-Cold War ISS has centred on theoretical efforts and concepts such as 'regional security complex' , 'regional order' , and 'security community' in order to understand security dynamics in the regional level (Buzan and Waever 2003;Lake and Morgan 2007;Morgan 2007;Katzenstein 2005;Adler and Crawford 2002), IPE scholars tend to focus on the neoliberal forces of globalisation, especially on how they shape and are shaped by processes of regionalisation (Mayall 1995;Hveem 2006;Stubbs and Reed 2006). In this literature, the region is usually depicted as a scale located in the interplays of the restructuring of national economies and national security in the face of globalisation, in which institutional initiatives may or may not happen, but where it is possible to find a constellation of forces, practices and social actors from different levels operating in such a way that proximity becomes relevant and generates senses of identification as well as particular patterns of interaction and differentiation in the face of other spatialities and geographic areas (Hameiri 2013;Emerson 2014; also see Haesbaert 2009). …”

Regulatory regionalism and anti-money-laundering governance in Asia

“…How far, and in what ways, this transformation occurs is contested between socio-political forces rooted in specific political economy contexts (Hameiri 2013). …”

“…Rather than merely measuring how far regional bodies are assuming authority previously reserved to states, a regulatory regionalism perspective focuses analytical attention on the extent to which state transformation is occurring to advance regional agendas and on how the socio-political contestation surrounding such transformation shapes governance outcomes (Hameiri 2013). The key questions become: who is driving and resisting the establishment of regulatory modes of regional governance in particular instances?…”

“…Instead it requires the rescaling of ostensibly domestic agencies such that they are inserted within regional governance regimes and deploy international disciplines on other parts of their respective states and societies (see Jayasuriya 2009;Hameiri andJayasuriya 2011, 2012). FATF and the APG are thus not supranational institutions overriding national sovereignty, as international and regional organisations are typically understood, but rather the hubs of a regulatory network, coordinating domestic agencies to manage a transnational problem.…”