Search

Defence date: 30 September 2006 Examining board: Prof. Michael Keating (European University Institute - supervisor) ; Prof. Philippe Schmitter (European University Institute - co-supervisor) ; Prof. Arthur Demchuk (Moscow Lomonosov State University) ; Prof. Stephen White (University of Glasgow) PDF of thesis uploaded from the Library digitised archive of EUI PhD theses completed between 2013 and 2017

This paper gives a viewpoint on a controversial issue of transnational regional cooperation (TRC) in Eurasia covering the analysis of cooperation between Europe and the regions of Russia. By promoting the favorable regime of transnational regional cooperation, both sides become more effective in managing such common problems as mutual security, political, economic and environmental challenges; illegal immigration; drug- and human-trafficking; etc. What is needed for the successful development of TRC in Eurasian context? What factors make a crucial impact on the development of regional cooperation, whether it is further "inclusion" or "exclusion" of the regions from cooperation with European neighbors? Is it the geopolitical location of the regions that makes regional cooperation more feasible or are there other factors that influence the success of this process? How might the regulatory and administrative tools of central government facilitate or complicate this process? To answer these questions, the study attempts to re-conceptualize the theories of integration, Europeanization, and regionalism. Then, it addresses the role of ethnicity, economical development, and geopolitical factors in the establishment and development of transnational regional cooperation. It also investigates the importance of "domestic-policy factors" (reforms in the federal governments) in the development of TRC.

The paper summarises the findings of this special issue and suggests avenues for future research. It concludes that the Eurasian regionalisms’ development in the 2010s was influenced, among other factors, by Russia’s concerns about external threats and by its control over the Eurasian space. However, the design of the regional institutions does not make them incompatible with global governance. The cooperation between global and regional institutions varies depending on the agenda of the specific regional organisation. In addition to direct competition between global and regional institutions, there may be an indirect one through offering access to different forms of economic benefits. Through this indirect strategy, regional institutions may reduce the incentives for individual countries to comply with their obligations to global institutions. This paper also places Eurasia within a global context of analysis and considers similar trends world-wide as well as outlines the agenda for future studies of global versus regional governance., Alexander Libman appreciates the support of the MOE Project of Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities of China (Centre for Russian Studies of East China Normal University), Project Number: 16JJDGJW004. Anastassia V. Obydenkova is grateful to the Centre for Institutional Studies of the National Research University – Higher School of Economics and to the Institut Barcelona d’Estudis Internacionals for hosting her as a leading research fellow and a visiting professor.

Which limitations does the hegemon face when exerting financial statecraft through multilateral institutions? Recent studies indicate that intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) that are tools of collective financial statecraft sponsored by the United States, like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, lead developing states to align with Washington in the United Nations (UN). The same effect is verified in the case of US bilateral aid. Little, however, has been discussed about the effect of American-sponsored regional development banks (RDBs) in the same context. RDBs are IGOs with unique characteristics as each of them covers a region of the world and relies on resources from developed sponsors and developing borrowing members alike. In this article we aim to fill this gap in the debates on economic and financial statecraft by demonstrating through tobit models that the higher the material capabilities of a borrowing state that takes loans, the less likely it is to align with the United States at the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Membership of all RDBs but the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) yields the same effect. Results indicate the need to develop further research on RDBs to assess whether they create incentives for challenging the hegemon., Fung Global Fellows Program, Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies (PIIRS), Princeton University (NJ, United States). Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) – Processo USP nο 15.1.1118.1.0 (Brazil).

This paper analyses the ideational interaction underlying attempts at regional integration and cooperation in Eurasia. While the ideas and values of the European Union have been relatively well-studied within the theory of Europeanisation, the key concepts, ideas, values and principles driving Eurasian regionalism have remained out of the main focus of Western scholarship. This paper aims to shed more light on this ideational basis of Eurasian regionalism by unveiling the discourse developed in Russian scholarship and available only in Russian. Understanding interactions between institutions will always remain partial as long as the ideational interaction is not addressed. Such concepts as ‘integrative mentality’, as a segment of the wider category ‘foreign policy mentality’, and the theory of neo-Eurasianism have been incorporated into Russian political discourse and therefore affect public opinion through specific interpretation of economic, political and cultural processes in the EU’s near neighbourhood and the EU as an actor. The analysis presented in this paper indicates the development of new ideational competition, in addition to the well-documented geopolitical one. The paper also aspires to contribute to emerging research on public support to governmental strategic choices and self-legitimation of international organisations in Eurasia.

“This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Regional & Federal Studies on 2013, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13597566.2012.742071”., The article aims at contributing to the understanding of the dynamics of federalismin Russia and Spain. It traces the dynamics of decentralization in both states and addresses a puzzle on reversible (Russia) and irreversible (Spain) outcomes of territorial reforms and regime transition. Among other explanatory factors, this article argues that the role of the political parties as mediating actors—proactive or reactive—has been crucial in shaping institutional building in both countries. Concluding remarks envisage some scenarios of further territorial developments in comparative perspective.