129
Arctic Yearbook 2013
Jegorova
This view is supported by other writers as well: citing Andrew Hurrell, R.E. Kelly (2007: 205)
concurs that natural regions are non-existent. Väyrynen (2003) goes further in analysis and, while
critiquing earlier studies for excessive focus on physical, political, and economic aspects of
regionalisation, points out the emergence of other region types. He argues that regions can be
physical (regions in the traditional sense – based on geography and military strategy) and functional
(socially constructed regions – with focus on economic, environmental and cultural issues). From
Väyrynen‘s point of view, the distinction between Hettne's Old and New Regionalism characteristics
is congruent with the inherent qualities of physical and functional regions respectively.
One important aspect of understanding regions is defining their borders. Hettne and Söderbaum
(2002) allow for a degree of flexibility, stating that although traditionally regions are regarded as a
group of neighbouring and interdependent
nation-states
, it is also possible for them to include
only
parts
of the state territory (38). Väyrynen (2003) adheres to his physical-functional framework and
argues that physical regions are to be defined as ―spacial clusters of states‖, whereas functional
regions are a result of ―the interplay of subnational and transnational economic, environmental, and
cultural processes‖ (27). Although the sources provide different degree of precision and strictness,
the implication – that a region‘s borders are defined based on a particular case – is the same in both
works.
Regionness – the Process of Regionalisation and its Indicators
The concept of ―regionness‖ does not follow a rigid pattern. Quite the opposite, due to its close link
to the globalisation process, regionalisation can stem from a variety of stages of unity and
interdependence, ―by implication also leading to different regionalisms‖ (Hettne & Söderbaum,
2002: 45). Focusing on globalisation, integration of micro-macro perspectives and socio-systemic
approach, Hettne and Söderbaum (2002) identify five different degrees of regionalisation that
feature various levels of regional involvement and institutionalisation, also described in Hettne
(2002):
regional space
, or a ―pre-regional zone‖ that is characterised by a certain level of isolationism;
regional complex
, tantamount to Buzan‘s (1983) security complex (to be discussed further below);
regional society
, featuring various patterns of multidimensional interaction between a multitude of
actors;
regional community
, within which for the first time there emerges a transnational civil society;
and finally,
regional institutionalised polity
, or
region-state
– a hypothetical democracy-based entity, weaker
yet similar to a nation-state.
3
Authors note that regionalism should not be labelled ―a stage theory‖,
pointing to the fact that these regionalisation categories do not constitute a continuous development
process and do not necessary occur in a particular order.
All in all, with some exceptions (such as Väyrynen‘s physical regions) New Regionalism scholars
understand the process of regionalisation to be caused by more than simply geographic peculiarities.
They presume regions to be a product of social construction, created to fulfil different (economic,
political, cultural) purposes and shaped in the making by various (global, regional, national, local)
forces. The end product of regionalisation itself is the establishment of ―patterns of cooperation,
integration, complementarity and convergence within a particular cross-national geographical space‖
(Hettne & Söderbaum, 2002: 34). Although regions can be broadly categorised under Hettne and