Jacques Steenbergen

Bio: Jacques Steenbergen is an academic researcher from Katholieke Universiteit Leuven. The author has contributed to research in topics: Globalization & Regionalism (international relations). The author has an hindex of 2, co-authored 13 publications receiving 112 citations.

Global Politics of Regionalism : Theory and Practice

Abstract: This book explores the phenomenon of regionalism In a seeming contradiction to globalization, there is a growing tendency for countries to enter into regional arrangements as a response to the pressures of operating in a global marketplace But regionalism is also emerging as a phenomenon in its own right, serving distinct purposes and taking different forms in different areas The contributors explore how these patterns impact on wider issues such as global governance, democracy and trade The book reviews the major theoretical approaches to regional cooperation including perspectives from international relations, political economy, economics and sociology It is divided into three main sections: theoretical approaches to regionalism; issues of regional cooperation (such as security, monetary issues, identity and integration); and an exploration of specific case studies including the Middle East, Africa, the Americas, China, Europe, Asia and the Pacific With an international range of contributors, including Bjorn Hettne, Louise Fawcett and Andrew Hurrell, this in-depth and multi-disciplinary guide will be of interest to students across the social sciences and to the wider policy community

The Problem of Comparison in Comparative Regionalism

Abstract: There is virtually no systematic debate on the fundamentals of comparative research in the study of international regionalism. The field of research is very fragmented and there is a lack of interaction between EU studies and regionalism in the rest of the world. There is also a lack of communication between scholars from various theoretical standpoints and research traditions. Related to these two divides is the tension between idiographic and nomothetic methodologies. The purpose of this article is to contribute to the largely neglected debate on how to conduct and address three interrelated problems: a conceptual, a theoretical and a methodological one. Our claim is that the future of comparative regionalism should be one where old divides are bridged. This requires a combination of conceptual rigor, theoretical eclecticism, and sounder empirical research methods.

The Problem of Comparison in Comparative Regionalism

Abstract: There is virtually no systematic debate on the fundamentals of comparative research in the study of international regionalism. The field of research is very fragmented and there is a lack of interaction between EU studies and regionalism in the rest of the world. There is also a lack of communication between scholars from various theoretical standpoints and research traditions. Related to these two divides is the tension between idiographic and nomothetic methodologies. The purpose of this article is to contribute to the largely neglected debate on how to conduct and address three interrelated problems: a conceptual, a theoretical and a methodological one. Our claim is that the future of comparative regionalism should be one where old divides are bridged. This requires a combination of conceptual rigor, theoretical eclecticism, and sounder empirical research methods.

Security Theory in the 'New Regionalism'

Abstract: The relevance of regional security theories has grown in the wake of the Cold War. The global system has more participants — is less Eurocentric with Third World states having greater autonomy and involvement — and clearly unipolar, shifting the locus of conflict down from the global level. A new wave of regionalist scholarship has arisen in response. This review identifies this literature’s central themes and suggested new variables. Its foundational and most contested challenge to international relations (IR) theory revolves around the autonomy of a regional level of analysis between the state and the globe. Accepting such autonomy, the literature broadly settles on three variables specific to regional structures. First, regional subsystems are porous. Intervention from above can overlay local dynamics. Second, proximity qualifies the security dilemma dramatically. Most states only threaten their neighbors, thus creating meaningful and distinct regional dynamics. Third, weak state-dominant regional complexes generate a shared internal security dilemma that trumps the external one. Regional organizations serve to repress shared centrifugal threats through pooled rather than ceded sovereignty.

Migration as Diplomacy: Labor Migrants, Refugees, and Arab Regional Politics in the Oil-Rich Countries

Abstract: This article explores the political dynamics of labor migration in the Middle East. It seeks to explain the politics of Arab population movements by looking at historical trends in regional integration and contends that migration to the oil-rich countries, including refugee flows, has been the key factor driving Arab integration in the absence of effective institutions and economic integration processes. To account for the influence of this largely forgotten factor, the article looks at the formal and informal institutions that have shaped massive labor flows from the 1970s onward. It offers historical evidence pointing to the role of migration in Arab regional integration by looking at free circulation of Eritrean refugees and migrants in the Arab region using oral history and administrative archives. Linking labor migration, refugee movements, and regional politics, the article introduces the concept of “migration diplomacy” as an analytical framework and argues that the politics of regional integration can be better understood when looked at through the lens of migration.

Across the EU Studies-New Regionalism Frontier: Invitation to a Dialogue

Abstract: This article notes a lack of communication between two broad schools of scholarship on regional integration: EU studies and analyses of the 'new regionalism'. It is argued that the existence of this divide, which is perpetrated by proponents of both schools, is an impediment to the elaboration of useful theory as well as being a missed opportunity. The benefits and problems of using the EU as a comparator in studies of regionalism are assessed. While the mistake of giving the EU analytical primacy as a benchmark or model is to be avoided, it is argued that careful treatment of accumulated insights from EU studies (including a proper re-inspection of classical integration theory) brings clear methodological and meta-theoretical benefits for the project of comparative regional integration scholarship.