Why regionalism has failed in Latin America: lack of stateness as an important factor for failure of sovereignty transfer in integration projects

What Leads International Organizations in Latin America to be Active or Paralyzed? a Qualitative Comparative Analysis

“…Additionally, they found that "diverging preferences among member states and the degree of institutionalization can explain the replacement of IOs", and "systemic and domestic factors do not explain IO failure" (Debre and Dijkstra 2021:311). The latter result contrasts with Latin American literature, which states that the most relevant variable for the limited role of regional international organizations -as a more profound consequence of regionalism -is the result of internal characteristics of Latin American states, such as limitations of state-building and complex socio-political-economic issues (Buelvas 2013;Garcés Velástegui 2017).…”

“…The study of International Organizations is vast in analyzing institutional designs, but it is still beginning to grasp the factors that lead IO to survival 2 Buelvas (2013) uses the concept of stateness proposed by Zaytsev (2013), which is based on four dimensions: resource mobilization capacity, external sovereignty, maintenance of internal order, and state activism in regulatory, economic and social issues. We understand that statehood -defined as "a phenomenon that is made up of three distinct, though interrelated, dimensions: state authority, state capacity and state legitimacy (ACL)" (Grävingholt, Ziaja, and Kreibaum 2012:06) -can be used as an indicator of levels of stateness.…”

“…According to the general literature on IO, the following elements are important for the functioning/ non-functioning of IOs: scope (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni 2020; Gallarotti 1991), number of states (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni 2020), size of the secretariat staff (Debre and Dijkstra 2021), quality of staff (Gray 2018), and IOs political autonomy (Gray 2018). Specifically, political autonomy (Petersen and Schulz 2018) and the lack of stateness (Buelvas 2013) have been highlighted from the literature on Latin America.…”

“…2 Buelvas (2013) specifically points to the "Lack of Stateness" as a causal mechanism for the fickleness of regionalism in the subcontinent since the weaknesses of state-building "have limited the development of regional ties necessary to advance to a 'deeper' regionalism" (Buelvas 2013:444). Although Buelvas (2013) is referring specifically to regionalism and integration projects, it is possible to extrapolate that "deeper regionalism" involves some level of support from regional organizations, so it is a hypothesis that needs to be evaluated. However, when taking into account general studies on IOs, the probability of IO survival in the Americas is higher than in Europe (Eilstrup-Sangiovanni 2020), a region with higher levels of stateness than in the American continent.…”

O regionalismo na América do Sul no início do Século XXI: uma análise de suas inflexões práticas e da produção intelectual brasileira

“…É interessante observar que o debate sobre "as variedades de regionalismos" sul-americanos tem sido conduzido, em sua maioria, por pesquisadores estrangeiros (LEGLER, 2013;BUELVAS, 2013;GARDINI, 2015;KLEINSCHMIDT;GALEGO PÉREZ, 2017). Apenas um artigo que discute as variedades e contrapõe os modelos distintos de regionalismo é de pesquisadora brasileira.…”