Political science theories have their raison
d'être in their ability to explain and
predict developments within their field. As theories of political science are not natural
science theories, they will not be able to explain and predict in the same detailed,
law-like way, but they should be able to explain and predict a substantial part of an
actual occurrence. This goes for theories of Regional Integration (RI) as well, and it
must be the overall aim of comparative RI theories to contribute to this.
There seem to be a certain agreement among scholars that regionalization
or even RI has gained momentum over the past decades. Seen from a pure
rational choice point of view the enhanced cooperation among states laying
geographically close to one another, makes sense in a time of increased globalization. But in
spite of `rationality' RI is not straitforward; neither practically nor theoretically. RI
theory should give us insights into why and how RI happens; what promotes it and
what slows it down or prevents it.
But before constructing new theories, it might be reasonable to ask the
question: were the classical theories of RI given up too readily? And thus this paper
attempts to be a small contribution to the formation of a genuine theory of RI.
After a short discussion of the method `comparative studies' and the
analytical concept `regional integration', two classical theories of
RI federalism and
neofunctionalism—are introduced later in the paper. This presentation will aim
at condensing the key explanations of RI. On the basis of this `condensation' the
next section will look at the Middle East and South America where the theories in
an explorative fashion are asked to tell us what is happening, and what may
happen to be able to judge the potential for the theories. To avoid the threat of
Euro-centeredness the European Union (EU) is deliberately kept out of the analysis. |
