Abstract:
The current state of the South American agenda –particularly the Mercosur– regarding the signing of trade agreements, has become one of the issues discussed mostly within the bloc.

This debate is held with varying success for the claim of the smallest members of Mercosur (Uruguay and Paraguay), but more recently and more drastically, also by the Brazilian private sector. There are at least two reasons that lead to the increasing relevance of the issue at hand for the internal agenda of South American countries.

On the one hand, changes internationally in recent years according to trade liberalisation of countries, international trade patterns and new forms of production. Furthermore, the recent creation of the Pacific Alliance, which by its nature and members positioned itself as a last generation agreement, not set to classic integration models usually reviewed by the classical theory.

Resumen:
El estado actual de la agenda sudamericana –en particular del Mercosur– en lo que refiere a la suscripción de acuerdos comerciales, se ha transformado en uno de los asuntos mayormente debatidos al interior del bloque. Dicho debate es sostenido con mayor o menor éxito por el reclamo de los miembros más pequeños del Mercosur (Uruguay y Paraguay), pero más recientemente, aunque de forma cada vez más firme, también por el sector privado brasileño.

Continue reading

Abstract:
Emerging powers have tried to build functional regional power bases in their respective spheres of influence to gain support for their leadership projects and representative capacities on the global stage. This has caused diverse contestational responses by secondary powers in differentregional orders. In this context, we analyse the shift of Colombia’s contestation approach towards the Brazilian leadership claim in South America. With the arrival of President Santos, Colombia turned from collateral hard balancing against Brazil to institutional contestation through the Pacific Alliance. Besides furnishing evidence of the broader Colombian soft-balancing strategy in other policy areas, the article explores and balances the domestic, structural and behavioural drivers of the strategic turn to institutional contestation through the Pacific Alliance without neglecting the economic and political motives of Colombia’s engagement in the pro-market alliance.

Resumen:
No disponible

Authors: Daniel Flemes and Rafael Castro
Journal reference: Bulletin of Latin American Research, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 78–92, 2016
Full document: not available

Abstract:
The Pacific Alliance, launched in 2011, has focused its energies upon advancing trade and integration while maintaining that the association is strictly apolitical—a first in Latin America. This note argues that while the Pacific Alliance will bring success to its member countries, this same success will divide Latin American nations.

The division will in turn cause decreased trade amongst the nations, and the region will lose the opportunity to engage in complementary growth. In order to mitigate these adverse effects, the Pacific Alliance should make efforts to maintain enduring and meaningful relations with the rest of Latin America. On the eve of its possible expansion, it is essential, however, that the Pacific Alliance maintain its focus on trade liberalisation and not become another refuge for politically like-minded countries.

Part II explains the different levels of integration offered by trade agreements and provides a brief history of regionalism in South America. To predict the future of the Pacific Alliance, the structure must be evaluated, and the past must be contextualised.

Part III presents the first argument of the paper, mainly that the Pacific Alliance will bring success to its member nations. The three factors required for a successful regional trade agreement are common national characteristics, policies that foster long-run economic growth, and the establishment of both a supranational entity and an effective dispute resolution system. Continue reading

Abstract:
The purpose of this article is to address the supranational integration process in South America from the perspective of the internationalisation of constitutional law. To do so, the first part proposes a basic classification to understand the supranational integration clauses, what they are and what purpose they serve. The second part applies the categories proposed and provides an analytical compilation of the (twelve) constitutions currently in force in South America. Based on an analysis of the explicit text in these constitutions, it identifies both their common features and the discrepancies, to pose questions that may contribute to the economic, political and social integration of the region.

Resumen:
Este artículo tiene el propósito de abordar la integración supranacional en América del Sur desde la perspectiva de la internacionalización del derecho constitucional. Para ello, en la primera parte propone una clasificación básica para entender las cláusulas de integración supranacional; cómo son y para qué sirven. En segundo lugar, aplica la clasificación planteada y ofrece una compilación analítica de las (doce) constituciones vigentes en la región. A partir del examen del texto explícito en las disposiciones, identifica características comunes y discordancias, para proceder a plantear consideraciones que podrían contribuir al proceso de integración económica, política y social que está planteando la región.

Author: Juan Camilo Herrera
Spanish Title: Las Cláusulas de Integración en las Constituciones de Suramérica: 200 años después de la Carta de Jamaica
Full document: 2016, Herrera, Las Cláusulas de Integración en las Constituciones de Suramérica- 200 años Después de la Carta de Jamaica

Abstract:
Current region-building projects are crafting higher education governance around the world. In fact, almost every regional scheme has launched programs and policies to promote the coordination, cooperation and/or integration of higher education systems and institutions. This paper focuses on the South American region and develops a comparative analysis of regional schemes, focusing on four cases: the Common Market of the South (Mercosur), the Bolivarian Alliance for the People of Our America – People’s Trade Agreement (Alba-TCP), the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Pacific Alliance (AP). These regional projects –regardless their ideological orientation– are delivering policies to promote university cooperation, coordination and/or integration.

We argue that at least three trends of internationalisation of the university are being diffused and consolidated through regionalism: first, a status-quo internationalisation (hegemonic); second, a revisionist internationalisation; third, a counter-hegemonic internationalisation. The Pacific Alliance reveals the first type; Mercosur is the revisionist case; and ALBA-TCP represents an attempt of a counter-hegemonic process. UNASUR is an “in-between” case, as the Atlantic versus Pacific divide has not yet been resumed. We unfold the argument by pursuing a comparative approach.

Resumen:
Los actuales proyectos de construcción de región están generando modificaciones en la gobernanza de la educación superior en todo el mundo. De hecho, casi todos los esquemas regionales han puesto en marcha programas y políticas para promover la coordinación, cooperación y / o integración entre sistemas e instituciones de la educación superior. Este documento se centra en la región de América del Sur y desarrolla un análisis comparativo de cuatro regionalismos, a saber: el Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur), la Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América – Tratado de Comercio de los Pueblos (ALBA-TCP) , la Unión de Naciones Suramericanas (UNASUR) y la Alianza del Pacífico (AP). Estos proyectos regionales, independientemente de su orientación ideológica, están encaminando políticas para promover la cooperación, coordinación y/o integración universitaria.

Nuestro argumento es que al menos tres tendencias de la internacionalización de la universidad se difunden y se consolidan a través del regionalismo: primero, una internacionalización status-quoísta (hegemónica); segundo, una internacionalización revisionista; tercero, una internacionalización contra-hegemónica. La Alianza del Pacífico revela el primer tipo; el Mercosur es el caso revisionista; y el ALBA-TCP representa un intento de un proceso contra-hegemónico. UNASUR es un caso “en el medio”, en tanto presenciamos una división entre un eje Atlántico y otro Pacífico. Desarrollamos nuestro trabajo a partir de un esquema de regionalismo comparado.

Author: Daniela Vanesa Perrotta
Spanish Title: Regionalismo y Educación Superior en Suramérica: Un Análisis Comparado para Entender la Internacionalización
Full document: 2016, Perrota, Regionalism and Higher Education in South America- A Comparative Analysis for Understanding Internationalization

Abstract:
South America has recently experienced two models of integration in the process of economic globalisation. In the nineties, open regionalism prioritised growth in trade through the free market and the minimum governmental intervention. In the 21st century, the integration model known as new integration proposed to raise intra-regional benefits beyond the economic field.

Both models coexist, and they could even complement each other. However, beyond theory, it is timely to question which one has generated significant commercial integration.

The application of several indexes shows how the exchange between South American countries was higher in the nineties that in the 21st century. This is attributed to the irruption of China in the market that has absorbed a significant part of the regional trade in the last years. The situation invites to consider that open regionalism has generated more commercial integration than new integration, seduced by international opportunities.

Resumen:
Sudamérica ha experimentado recientemente dos modelos de integración en el proceso de globalización económica. En los noventa, el regionalismo abierto priorizaba el crecimiento del comercio y promovía para ello el libre mercado y la mínima intervención del Estado.

En el siglo XXI, la nueva integración proponía un comercio intrarregional capaz de crecer y generar beneficios más allá de los económicos apoyándose para ello en la UNASUR. Ambos modelos conviven en el discurso y podrían llegar a complementarse en la práctica pero, más allá de la teoría ¿cuál ha generado una mayor integración comercial?

La aplicación de varios índices muestra cómo el intercambio entre países sudamericanos era mayor en los noventa que en el siglo XXI por la irrupción de China en el mercado, que ha absorbido en los últimos años parte importante del comercio regional, lo que invita a considerar que el regionalismo abierto ha generado más integración comercial que la nueva integración, seducida por las oportunidades desde el exterior.

Author: Susana Herreo Olarte
Spanish Title: Regionalismo Abierto y Nueva Integración, ¿Qué modelo Genera más Integración Comercial en Sudamérica?
Full document: 2017, Herrero, Regionalismo Abierto y Nueva Integración, ¿qué Modelo Genera más Integración Comercial en Sudamérica?