IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/intorg/v30y1976i02p173-212_01.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Turbulent fields and the theory of regional integration

Author

Listed:
  • Haas, Ernst B.

Abstract

Theories of regional integration are becoming obsolescent because three core assumptions on which these theories have been based are becoming less and less relevant to the behavior patterns actually displayed by governments active in regional organizations. These three assumptions are (1) that a definable institutional pattern must mark the outcome of the process of integration, (2) that conflicts of interests involving trade-offs between ties with regional partners and ties with nonmembers should be resolved in favor of regional partners, and (3) that decisions be made on the basis of disjointed incrementalism. The history of the European Communities since 1968 shows that most governments no longer behave in accordance with these assumptions, although they did earlier. The explanation for the new trend is to be found in awareness of the various novel kinds and dimensions of interdependence between countries, issues, and objectives, particularly with reference to policies involving those aspects of highly industrial societies which do not respond readily to the incentives of a customs union. A new decision-making rationality–labelled “fragmented issue linkage”–seems to be competing with incremental habits, suggesting that efforts are being made to cope with “turbulence” in the industrial environment so as to avoid piecemeal solutions. The effort to cope with turbulence, in turn, is unlikely to lead to any “final” set of regional institutions.

Suggested Citation

  • Haas, Ernst B., 1976. "Turbulent fields and the theory of regional integration," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 30(2), pages 173-212, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:30:y:1976:i:02:p:173-212_01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0020818300018245/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bjärstig, Therese, 2013. "The Swedish forest sector's approach to a formalized forest policy within the EU," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 131-137.
    2. Dermot Hodson, 2019. "The New Intergovernmentalism and the Euro Crisis: A Painful Case?," LEQS – LSE 'Europe in Question' Discussion Paper Series 145, European Institute, LSE.
    3. Charles Boehmer & Timothy Nordstrom, 2008. "Intergovernmental Organization Memberships: Examining Political Community and the Attributes of International Organizations," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(3), pages 282-309, November.
    4. P. Siousiouras & Í. Nikitakos, 2006. "European Integration: The Contribution of the West European Union," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(1-2), pages 113-113.
    5. Valerie D'Erman & Amy Verdun, 2022. "An Introduction: “Macroeconomic Policy Coordination and Domestic Politics: Policy Coordination in the EU from the European Semester to the Covid‐19 Crisis”," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(1), pages 3-20, January.
    6. Douglas W. Arner & Paul Lejot & Wei Wang, 2010. "Governance and Financial Integration in East Asia," Chapters, in: Masahiro Kawai & Jong-Wha Lee & Peter A. Petri & Giovanni Capanelli (ed.), Asian Regionalism in the World Economy, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Colin W. Lawson & John Hudson, 2015. "Who Is Anti-American in the European Union?," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, May.
    8. Eric Tremolada & Carlos Tassara & Olivier Costa, 2019. "Colombia y la Unión Europea. Una asociación cada vez más estrecha," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1101, October.
    9. Jofre Rocabert & Frank Schimmelfennig & Loriana Crasnic & Thomas Winzen, 2019. "The rise of international parliamentary institutions: Purpose and legitimation," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 607-631, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:intorg:v:30:y:1976:i:02:p:173-212_01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/ino .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.