Constraining or enabling the State? Regionalism as the mediator between the state and the global in Latin America?

• In Event: Highlighted Session: The State and education in Latin America: Foundations, fault-lines, and alternatives (Panel 2)

Proposal

As many scholars have argued, we are approaching a new world order, that is, a world organized in regions (Acharya, 2002; 2007; Katzenstein, 2005; Söderbaum, 2015a; 2015b; van Klaveren, 2017). In this new global arrangement, in which almost all nation states are part of one or more regionalisms (political projects), the study of regions is fundamental to understanding individual states’ economic, political, and social goals, including their educational ideologies. Regionalism and regionalization (process) have been especially significant in Latin America, emerging during the independence period as states joined forces to consolidate themselves as new nations and defend themselves against invaders (Paez Motalbán, 2016), gaining strength through the 19th and 20th centuries, and giving rise to more than twenty regional projects of which most continue working up to date. The initial goals of consolidation, identity formation, and security were replaced mainly by economic goals. Regionalism has changed how states interact with each other and how states interact with globalization. More importantly, it has shaped the way we think about the state. In this way, regionalism has become a sort of ‘mediator,’ standing in the middle between states, with their individual interests and goals, and global standards and institutions. This means studying regionalisms is critical to understanding the state and its relationship with globalization. This is especially true for the case of Latin America, where different models – the hegemonic model (where projects agree with global standards but focus mainly on economic development and are centered on legitimization and competitiveness); the post-hegemonic model (where projects share some goals with hegemonic regionalism, but also look to protect members’ internal markets and priorities and to develop some socio-cultural programs); and the counter-hegemonic model (where projects are against neoliberalism and look to safeguard member states’ identities and individualities, aiming to become economically competitive but through the strengthening of their own markets, instead of replacing them with the requirements of the global market) – of regionalism coexisted. Each model is either closer to globalization (hegemonic regionalism), closer to the state (counter-hegemonic regionalism), or an in-between (post-hegemonic regionalism). Understanding the characteristics of the regionalism model in which each state participates can provide valuable information about states’ ideals. Theoretically, this study uses a Cultural Political Economy perspective coupled with discourse analysis methodological techniques to examine the intersection of the national within the region by focusing on how these regionalisms develop educational policies that influence and shape members’ national education systems. Data is drawn from the various educational policies of regional entities, and the research question asks: How is regionalism enabling or constraining state behavior in education? In essence, its looks at the changing role of the state in response to different types of regionalism and offers lessons.

Authors

• Victoria Desimoni, Loyola University - Chicago

• Tavis D Jules, Loyola University Chicago