Interregionalism's impact on regional integration in developing countries: the case of Mercosur

Mahrukh Doctor

doi:10.1080/13501763.2014.992932

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis article examines the impact of interregionalism on deepening regional integration processes in non-European Union (EU) regions, specifically the Southern Common Market (Mercosur). It considers whether ‘capacity-building’ functions of interregionalism are present in EU–Mercosur relations. It argues that although negotiations for an association agreement might have helped Mercosur survive periods of severe crisis in the past, the terms of the agreement under negotiation were not sufficiently attractive to encourage deeper integration in Mercosur. Moreover, interregionalism cannot be expected to compensate for low institutionalization, nor substitute for weak political willingness to deepen integration. Ultimately, Mercosur alone can decide how far it wants to take its regional integration.

Highlights

This article examines the impact of interregionalism on deepening regional integration processes in non-European Union (EU) regions, the Southern Common Market (Mercosur)
There is theoretical as well as empirical value in better understanding the impact of interregionalism on regional integration, whether ‘engaging in interregionalism creates a need for regions to consolidate’ (Söderbaum, Stahlgren and Langenhove 2005:379)
While much has been written about whether and how non-EU regions respond to ideas of regional integration per se, less has been published on whether these regions benefit from engaging in interregionalism

Summary

Introduction

This article examines the impact of interregionalism on deepening regional integration processes in non-European Union (EU) regions, the Southern Common Market (Mercosur). The article develops these arguments in four sections: (i) theoretical framework examining the functions of inter-regionalism; (ii) the EU’s role in promoting interregionalism; (iii) interregionalism and Mercosur integration; and (iv) implications of the tensions between Mercosur’s internal and external agendas (i.e. regionalism and interregionalism respectively).

Results

Conclusion