MODERN MODIFICATIONS OF REGIONALISM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2786-9385/2025-5-10Keywords:
interregionalism, macroregion, macroregionalism, interregionalism, interregional relations, neoregionalism, regionalization, transregionalismAbstract
The article examines the latest practices of regionalization that fall within the scope of neoregionalism. The study is based on a comprehensive approach to understanding the nature of neoregionalism as a complex set of interactions at the level between the regional and global. It is concluded that the development of neoregional practices entails important structural and substantive consequences for the system of international relations. It is emphasized that the essence of interregionalism/interregionalism and transregionalism is formed by a set of objective and subjective factors that depend on the general trends of the world political process. Transregionalism is made possible by the experience of democratization, the potential for spatial differentiation, and the prospects for the decline of American-centrism and the formation of a multipolar world. The deepening of globalization in terms of increasing the transparency of national borders has provided opportunities for intensive interaction between state and non-state actors from different continents, which has created an environment of transnational relations and recreated the basis for the formation of transregional associations.Current practices of neoregionalism, which manifest themselves in the emergence of certain modifications of regionalism, contribute to the formation of relatively stable functional macro-regions in the modern world, which involves the interaction of regional associations, individual states from different geographical regions, and non-state actors. Traditional interregional interaction was based on the institutionalization of relations through agreements between states of different international regions, which focused on the possibilities of obtaining economic benefits from the established cooperation. Neo-regionalism practices focus on the desire to take into account the presence and involvement of different types of international actors and to establish cooperation in order to obtain a consolidated position with joint achievement of goals and realization of interests on the widest possible range of issues.
References
Брусиловська О. Дослідження регіоналізму: чи чекати подальшої еволюції? Міжнародні та політичні дослідження. 2023. № 36. С. 30–42. URL: http://heraldiss.onu.edu.ua/article/view/288705/282423 (дата звернення: 20.04.2025).
Hanggi H. Interregionalism as a Multifaceted Phenomenon: In Search of a Typology. Interregionalism and International Relations: A Stepping to Global Governance? / Ed. By H.Hanggi, J.Ruland, R.Roloff. N.Y.-L.: Routledge, 2005. P. 31–62.
Gardini G., Malamud A. Debunking Interregionalism: Concepts, Types and Critique – With a Transatlantic Focus. Atlantic Future Working Paper. 2015. № 38. P. 1–23. URL: https://repositorio.ulisboa.pt/bitstream/10451/22372/1/ICS_AMalamud_Debunking_WPI.pdf (дата звернення: 18.04.2025).
Dent C. From Inter-Regionalism to Trans-Regionalism? Future Challenges for ASEM. Asia Europe Journal. 2003. Vol.1. № 2. P. 223–235. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/226314139_From_inter-regionalism_to_trans-regionalism_Future_challenges_for_ ASEM (дата звернення: 17.04.2025).
Rueland J. Balancers, Multilateral Utilities or Regional Identity Builders? International Relations and the Study of Interregionalism. Journal of European Public Policy. 2010. № 17. P. 1271–1283. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233256470_Balancers_Multilateral_Utilities_or_Regional_Identity_Builders_International_Relations_and_the_Study_of_Interregionalism (дата звернення: 17.04.2025).
Чернишова Л.О. Співробітництво країн БРІКС як новий формат інтеграційного об’єднання. Економіка та суспільство. 2021. Вип. 33. URL: https://economyandsociety.in.ua/index.php/journal/article/view/931/893 (дата звернення: 21.04.2025).