Download Assignment compilation and more Exams Computer Networks in PDF only on Docsity!
INTRODUCTION
Europe and Africa are both experiencing deep transformations that affect their integration paths and interregional relationship. In the last two decades, the European Union (EU) has been characterized by phases of progressive deepening and widening of the integration process and prolonged stalemates. The reforming fatigue that resulted from the adoption and implementation of the Lisbon Treaty, accompanied by the economic and financial crisis erupted in 2008, have questioned the validity and sustainability of the EU model and opened new avenues for alternative – selected and/or differentiated – forms of integration. Today’s Africa is still marked by enduring instability in Libya and Somalia, governance and electoral crises in Central African countries, disease outbreak and epidemics in West Africa and terrorist threats from the Sahel region to the Horn. At the same time, it is characterized by positive developments such as efforts at fostering continental and regional integration through the African Union (AU) and African Regional Intergovernmental Organizations (RIGOs). At the economic level Africa has also experienced some marginal improvements. From the end of the 1990s till the current global financial and economic crisis, economic growth began to recover, rising and staying above population growth. However, the sustainability of this economic development is challenged by factors such as external instability, domestic conflicts, inflexible production systems, and unequal distribution of wealth. Contemporary regionalism in Africa and Europe cannot be understood by looking only at governmental integration in the framework of continental organizations such as the EU and the AU. Regional and interregional dynamics need to be analyzed through additional levels and forms of interaction. State actors apart, various types of non-state actors, including social and professional groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community-based and cultural organizations, play an increasingly important role in these processes, both within and outside existing regional and interregional arrangements. Based on the assumptions outlined above, the paper aims at mapping relevant trends of regionalism and interregionalism in and between Europe and Africa, by looking at the historical evolution and in light of recent developments. The analysis will go beyond formal regionalism and interregionalism by addressing and comparing informal patterns of integration at regional and transnational levels. Except for the (formal and informal) continental regional integration processes linked to the EU and the AU, focus is put on other regional actors developed in connection with specific regional areas in Africa. It will be articulated in the three sectors of
trade; security; and environment with a view to identify relevant conclusions on the current status of African-European interregionalism. Conceptualizing Regionalism in Europe and Africa
Equating regionalism and “European integration theory” (Wiener and Diez 2004) is misleading, as the basic conditions of European integration, namely industrial economy and liberal politics, are not “readily transferable to other regional contexts” (Haas 1961: 378). In this paper, the authors reject the paradigmatic approach that tends to judge the achievements of other integration projects on the basis of the European example. At the same time, the analysis contests the assumption that “Euroexceptionalism” (Acharya 2012: 11), and in particular the uniqueness or sui generis character of the European integration represented by the EU, should be considered as an impeding factor for a comparative study that takes into consideration the EU and other forms of regionalism. Following the approach suggested by Luk Van Langenhove, we adopt “a perspective that, on the one hand, allows us to consider regions of all kinds (wherever they are located) without being 'Eurocentric', but with the possibility of understanding the EU as a special case” (Van Langenhove 2012: 24). In particular, we refer to Glyn Morgan's categorization of the project, the process and the product of integration (Morgan 2005: 4) and evaluate regionalism in Europe and Africa through a distinction between: (1) the main determinants in the origin (the project) and evolution (the process) of regionalism in Europe and Africa with a view to compare their characteristics; and (2) the current outcome (the product) of the integration processes in both regions on the basis of their products, namely political institutions, policies and practices. In order to assess the product of integration processes in Europe and Africa, the analysis takes into consideration different sectors of integration, in particular: (1) trade; (2) security; and (3) environment. The same sectors will be used to evaluate the development and status of interregionalism between Europe and Africa. This analysis does not neglect the traditional approaches to regionalism, “which stressed formal structures and intergovernmental interactions” (Acharya 2012: 8), but their scope is enlarged so as to include the basic features of a new regionalism, in which the role of non-state actors and informal processes of interactions represent constitutive elements. As for formal structures and intergovernmental interactions, our study focuses on the EU as the most prominent and comprehensive regional organization on the European side. On the African side, we identify the AU, the continental organization that replaced the Organization for the African Unity (OAU) in 2002, as the most inclusive and
Commission and the right of intervention mentioned above. Moreover, its objectives include, among others, to accelerate the political and socio-economic integration of the continent; to promote and defend African common positions; and to achieve peace and security in Africa (Constitutive Act of the African Union 2000: Art. 3). Regarding the involvement of non-state actors in European and African regionalism, beyond a shared commitment to embed civil society organizations (CSOs) in the implementation of policies, EU and AU have chosen different approaches. On the EU side, civil society’s participation has been structured around self-selected groups that usually gather a broad array of non-state actors and networks (Silvestre 2009). Such an informal system has the advantage to avoid bureaucratic and lengthy procedures, but at the same time it has serious difficulties in providing continuity due to high turnover of members and a lack of resources (Miranda 2012:68). On the African side, the AU Constitutive Act contains a formal commitment to base the AU on a partnership between governments and all segments of civil society (Constitutive Act of the African Union 2000: Art. 4). Social groups, professional groups, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), community-based and cultural organizations, as well as African diaspora organizations are included in the Economic, Social and Cultural Council (ECOSOCC), an AU advisory body created in 2008. The ECOSOCC, represents the main channel for the involvement of the African civil society and such a degree of formalization has impeded the transparent and effective participation of CSOs in AU policy processes (Miranda 2012:69-71). The colonial roots of regionalism in West Africa can be found in the geographical break-up between French and British colonies (Gandois 2014). It was the Francophone states that took a lead in the (formal) integration of the region after independence in the 1960s, forming West African Economic Community in 1974. At the same time, Nigeria, a former British colony, contested Francophone integration promoting a more inclusive RIGO; the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), which was eventually created in 1975. ECOWAS soon became the dominant RIGO in the region. Principles related to trade enhancement through elimination of obstacles to free trade dominated the treaty. The treaty was revised in 1993, which changed the organization institutionally and gave it a more explicit security and democracy mandate. ECOWAS has often been used as a political forum for state leaders to advance their national agendas (Hartmann 2013: 10). Nevertheless, ECOWAS has made some provisions for the collaboration with civil society on a regional level. The revised treaty of 1993 calls for ECOWAS to cooperate with NGOs in order to encourage popular involvement in regional co-
operation (Gandois 2013: 200). In 1994 ECOWAS became the first RIGO to grant observer status to CSOs at its meetings and in 1996 the Forum of Associations Recognized by ECOWAS was created by ECOWAS to coordinate CSO activities and act as a link between the CSOs and the Secretariat. In 2003, a civil society unit in the Secretariat was created. In principle, most CSOs have adopted a partnership strategy, concerned with implementing various ECOWAS instruments (Iheduru 2014). However, there is still potential friction as ECOWAS officials and West African civil society sometimes disagree on approaches towards regional issues (Olonisakin 2009: 111). Outcome of regionalism in Europe and Africa: trade, security and environment Trade Regional trade integration in Europe As outlined above, the process of market integration laid the ground for European regionalism: a cornerstone of this process was the adoption and implementation of a major legislative programme, the Single Market Programme, resulting in the elimination of non-trade barriers by 1 January 1993. The next major steps were the creation of an Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) in 1999 and the introduction of the Euro in 2002 (European Commission 2007). The integration of the goods and services market is still progressing 20 years after the launch of the Single Market. Approximately three-quarters of the trade in goods within the EU are covered by harmonized regulations. However, member states have shown an enduring resistance to complete the Single Market, especially in certain areas such as energy, the service sector, the digital industries and telecommunication markets, and defence. Some recent initiatives, such as the 2013 European Commission Roadmap to strengthen the internal market, have been undertaken to boost integration in these sectors. Intra-EU market represented around 17% of EU GDP in 1999 and close to 22% in 2011 (European Commission 2012). This positive general trend in terms of integration hides contrasting situations among member states. While the evolution of intra-EU imports and exports to GDP ratios in the period 1999-2011 has been positive in some member states, negative trends or stagnation can be seen in others (European Commission 2012). Moreover, intra-EU trade saw a sharp downward trajectory in the last four years, which implies that global trading partners are becoming more important (Bruegel, 2014). Regional trade integration in Africa Support for economic integration on in Africa is strong among the continent’s external partners and African elites (Draper 2012: 67). Many initiatives have been undertaken by the AU in this
the creation of an European External Action Service; the establishment of Permanent Structured Cooperation in the area of defense, through which willing and able EU member states would work together to improve their military capabilities; and the improvement of the European Parliament’s role in the field of security and defense. Regional security integration in Africa The concept of providing “African solutions to African problems” underlines the identity dimension of security issues in Africa (Makinda and Okumu, 2008). Hence, the AU has securitized the pan-African project, both through the deployment of a number of AU peacekeeping missions and by the ongoing establishment of a new African Peace and Security Architecture (APSA). The APSA envisages cooperation on prevention, management and resolution of conflicts in Africa between the AU and regional entities such as ECOWAS, SADC and EAC. It includes an institutional structure the Peace and Security Council (PSC) and a Panel of the Wise (PoW); an operational arm (a Continental Early Warning System (CEWS) and the African Stand-by Force (ASF); and a Peace Fund. Environment Regional environment integration in Europe Environmental policy is a central area of the European integration process since the 1970s. Since then, an impressive body of environmental legislation has been developed in the EU framework. With the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, climate change policy remains a shared competence between the Union, primarily the European Commission with its Directorate- Generals (DGs) on Environment and Climate Action, and EU member states (European Commission 2013). The environmental policy of the EU has been formulated in a series of EU Environmental Action Programs, the last of which was in force until 2012. On March 2010, the European Commission inaugurated the Europe 2020 Strategy, which integrates environmental protection issues in the overarching EU development strategy. Among the priorities of Europe 2020 Strategy, there is a strong commitment to resource efficiency and biodiversity protection. The main challenge remains implementation. In particular over the last two decades, the EU has put a lot of effort into developing effective domestic policies in climate change and global environmental governance in general. In line with this approach, the Europe 2020 Strategy proposes stricter reviews and controls of the national reform programs (Papadaki 2012). Both the decision-making and the implementation process of EU legislation in the field of environment is
influenced by non-state actors, in particular environmental NGOs, industries and citizens exercising their participatory rights. Regional environment integration in East Africa There are signs of growing interstate cooperation at the regional level on issues such as biodiversity and climate change (Compagnon, Florémont and Lamaud 2011). The EAC is the most important example of this. During the past ten years or so, a number of initiatives have been taken by East African states to regionally manage common environmental challenges, in particular on the Lake Victoria Basin (LVB). For example, in 2003 the EAC Summit signed the Protocol for Sustainable Development of the Lake Victoria Basin, enacting regional legislation on environment and natural resource management. Consequently, the Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) became operational in 2004, providing policy guidance in relation to promoting sustainable use of the lake resources and coordinating development activities in the area. The most important regional project under the LVBC is the so-called Lake Victoria Environmental Management Project (LVEMP). Another major player in regional environmental governance in East Africa is the Lake Victoria Fishery Organization (LVFO), a technical regional organisation under the EAC responsible for coordinating and managing fisheries resources of Lake Victoria (Godsäter 2013b). LVEMP and LVFO are considered to have contributed enormously to the EAC’s knowledge of the LVB environment as well as to poverty reduction around the lake (Okurut and Othero 2012). Lastly, the EAC recently adopted a Climate Change Policy, which addresses the adverse impacts of climate change in the region (EAC 2011). Comparing regionalism in Europe and Africa As outlined above, the EU and the AU present many commonalties in terms of institutional architecture and also share some principles and strategic objectives. Nevertheless, if we look at the reality of their achievements in terms of development and implementation of policies in the three fields analyzed above – trade, environment and security – striking differences emerge. It must be recognized that the two organizations evolved at different pace, being the AU a much younger organization than the EU and confronted with different challenges. While the EU acts in a relatively stable and peaceful context, the AU has to address problems ranging from extreme poverty, endemic war, serious health issues such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and ebola, poor state governance and severe radicalization phenomena.
institutions to address governance issues at national level and build a conducive environment for commitment and participation in the integration project. In terms of regional integration in Africa, there are many common denominators between the three regions analyzed in this study. Regional integration is essentially based on economic and trade related premises with the aim of increasing intra-regional trade among the members of the respective organizations. Hence, trade liberalization schemes and monetary convergence have been on the center stage in the creation of various regional governance mechanisms. It should be mentioned that this enthusiasm only concerns formal trade. ICBT, regardless of its scope, is generally looked at with suspicion and the link between poverty reduction and informal trade is not acknowledged. However, with its increasing focus on regional security, West Africa deviates slightly from this picture. ECOWAS and its member states have worked hard to put in place advanced regional security architecture and have been reasonably successful in hindering internal conflicts from spilling over to other countries. The political leaders have slowly developed a regional understanding of peace and security agreeing that stability in the region can only occur if resources and peacebuilding efforts are pooled. The environment is generally of low relevance in regional governance, but the EAC stands out in this regards. The political leaders have gradually come to the conclusion that managing the Victoria Lake resources must be done in a collaborative fashion and have developed a rather sophisticated regional framework in the environmental field. Furthermore, regional integration is a slow process in all three regions, of which one manifestation is the low level of intra-region trade, ranging from 9, 5% in Southern Africa to 19% in East Africa. The member states are, to a large extent, hesitant to give up part of their sovereignty to the regional level, making it very hard to harmonize trade-related policies but also concerning security. Such state-centrism is linked to a general suspicion towards the role of civil society in regional integration, despite grand declarations stating the opposite. In the trade field CSOs are particularly excluded, most notably in SADC. On the whole, regionalism is highly top- down giving little space for popular involvement. However, there are important instances of increasing civil society participation in regional governance, especially in the environmental area. Also, in the security field, even if CSOs generally have a hard time participating in policymaking, ECOWAS deviates from this pattern. Here, NGOs have made a significant contribution to the regional peace and security architecture.
Conclusion Andrew Hurrell (Hurrell 2007: 132) identifies three ways in which regionalist models come to be diffused around the world: through regional competition, through teaching and support and through conditionality. Regional competition did not emerge as a defining feature in EU-Africa relations. Instead, the EU has heavily influenced the development of regionalism in Africa through teaching and support. For example, the EU has committed relevant financial and technical resources to help the AU in the process of developing its capacity in the field of peace and security, in particular through the African Peace Facility. Conditionality is also at the heart of the EU-Africa relations, particularly in the fields of trade and development cooperation. The EU has included political conditionality clauses in most of its international agreements since 1995, when the Lomé Convention has defined human rights, democracy and the rule of law as ‘essential elements’ of cooperation (Del Biondo, 2011:380). This means that, when partner countries do not respect such essential elements, the EU can suspend the agreement. The typical example of conditionality clause in agreements with African countries is now Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement (European Parliament, 2009:3). Such article has been invoked by the EU especially in cases of coups d’état or flawed elections (Del Biondo, 2011:381). Moreover, the Cotonou Agreement has extended conditionality, through Article 97, to good governance and corruption. Finally, EPAs contain clauses which allow for measures to be adopted according to Articles 96 and 97 of the Cotonou Agreement (European Parliament, 2009:3). Criticism raised towards conditionality clauses has to do both with their effectiveness (Faust, 2013:1) and the EU’s consistency in implementing them (Del Biondo, 2011:390). The 2007 JAES has the declared objective to take the Africa-EU relationship to a more ambitious strategic level by moving away from the traditional donor-recipient relationship based on the conditionality principle and establishing a “partnership among equals” and enhancing cooperation on jointly identified priorities. However, it seems that this principle is still struggling between rhetoric and facts, as the AU remains heavily dependent on the EU in terms of financial support and this inevitably hamper the possibility of African actors to shape the common agenda. In terms of EU-RIGOs relations, the EU is very dominant in all three regions and fits the teaching and support category above well. The relationship between the EU and SADC, EAC and ECOWAS respectively is fundamentally characterized by the former influencing regional policy of, and providing funds and capacity building to, the latter.
ALUSA, Doreen. Multipolar Politics and Regional Integration in East Africa: Opportunities and Challenges for Nonstate Actors. In: OMEJE, Kenneth and Tricia Redeker HEPNER, eds. Conflict and Peacebuilding in the African Great Lakes Region. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2013, pp. 65-81. BA, Abdou Yéro. La contribution de l'Union Africaine au Maintien de la Paix, in Revue du droit international et de droit comparé , 2006, pp. 197-231. BACHMANN, Veit and James D. SIDAWAY. African regional integration and European Involvement: external agents in the East African Community. South African Geographical Journal , 2010, 92(1), pp. 1-6. BLAAUW, Lesley. Transcending State-Centrism: New Regionalism and the Future of Southern African Regional Integration , PhD-thesis, Rhodes University, 2007. BUZDUGAN, Stephen, Robert. Regionalism from without: External involvement of the EU in regionalism in southern Africa. Review of International Political Economy , 2013, 20(4), pp. 917-946. BRUEGEL. Sharp decline in intra-EU trade over the past 4 years, 27 August, 2014. http://www.bruegel.org/nc/blog/detail/article/1420-chart-sharp-decline-in-intra-eu-tradeover- the-past-4-years/ [22 Jun 2015]. CHAFER, Tony and Edward. STODDARD. The EU, ECOWAS and the Multiple Dimensions of European-West African Relations. In: AKOUTOU, Ablam, Benjamin, SOHN, Rike, VOGL, Matthias and Daniel YEBOAH, eds. Understanding Regional Integration in West Africa- a Multi-Thematic and Comparative Analysis. WAI-ZEI Paper Series, West Africa Institute/Center for European Integration Studies , 2014, No 17, 41- 69 CHIGWADA, Tendai and Fudzai PAMACHECHE. Status and Progress of SADC Regional Trade Integration In: TEKERE, Moses, ed. Regional Trade Integration, Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction in Southern Africa. Pretoria: Africa Institute of South Africa, 2012, pp.77-106. COMPAGNON, Daniel, FLORÉMONT, Fanny and Isabelle LAMAUD. Sub-Saharan Africa: Fragmented Environmental Governance and without regional integration. In: BRESLIN, S and ELLIOT, L. Comparative Environmental Regionalism. London: Routledge, 2011, pp. 92-112. Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, 2010/C 83/01, Brussels, 30 March 2010. http://eurlex. europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:083:SOM:EN:HTML [22 Jun 2015]. CRUCE, Fredrika. How Did We End Up With This Deal? Examining the Role of Environmental NGOs in EU Climate Policymaking. Bruges Political Research Papers , 2011, No 19. http://aei.pitt.edu/32320/1/wp19_Cruce.pdf [22 Jun 2015]. DE ZAMARÓCZY, Nicolas. Playing Boomerang. East African Elites, External Actors, and the Contestation of East African Regionalism. Paper delivered at the International Studies Association Annual Conference, San Diego, 1-5 April 2012. DEL BIONDO, Karen. EU Aid Conditionality in ACP Countries: Explaining Inconsistency in EU Sanctions Practice. Journal of Contemporary European Research , 2011, 7(3), pp. 380-395. http://www.jcer.net/index.php/jcer/article/viewFile/294/290 [ Jun 2015]. DELPUTTE, Sarah and Fredrik SÖDERBAUM. European Aid Coordination in Africa: Is the Commission Calling the Tune?. In: GÄNZLE, Stefan, GRIMM, Sven and Davina MAKHAN, eds. The European Union and Global Development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 37–56. DURÁN, Gracia, Marin. and Elisa MORGERA. Environmental Integration in the EU’s External Relations: Beyond Multilateral Dimensions. London: Bloomsbury Publishing,
EAC. EAC Climate Change Policy. Arusha: EAC, 2011. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Steps towards a deeper economic integration: the Internal Market in the 21st century. A contribution to the Single Market Review, Economic Papers, 2007, No. 271. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication784_en.pdf [22 Jun 2015]. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. State of the Single Market Integration 2013 , Brussels, COM(2012) 752 final, Brussels, 28 November 2012. http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/sgmktreport2013_en.pdf [22 Jun 2015]. EUROPEAN COMMISSION. Environment. Brussels: EC, 2013. http://europa.eu/pol/env/flipbook/en/files/environment.pdf [22 Jun 2015]. EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT POLICY MANAGEMENT (ECDPM). Economic Partnership Agreements: Frequently Asked Questions , Fiche
Trade and HIV/AIDS. PhD-thesis, University of Gothenburg, 2013a. GODSÄTER, Andréas. Regional environmental governance in the Lake Victoria region: the role of civil society. African Studies , 2013b, 72(1), pp. 64-85. HAAS, Ernst Bernard. International Integration: The European and the Universal Process. International Organization , 1961, vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 366-392. http://www.lsu.edu/faculty/lray2/teaching/7971_1s2009/haas1961.pdf [23 Jun 2015]. HARTMANN, Christof. Governance Transfer by the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). SFB-Governance Working Paper Series , DFG Collaborative Research Centre, 2013, No. 47. HURRELL, Andrew. One world? Many worlds? The place of regions in the study of international society. International Affairs , 2007, vol. 83, No. 1, pp. 127-146. HURT, Stephen. R. The EU-SADC Economic Partnership Agreement Negotiations: ‘locking in’ the neoliberal development model in Southern Africa? Third World Quarterly , 2012, 33(3), pp. 495-510. IHEDURU, Okechukwu, C. Civil Society and Regional Integrationin West Africa: Partners, Legitimizers, and Counter-hegemonic Actors. In: FIORAMONTI, Lorenzo, ed. Civil Society and World Regions. Lanham: Lexington, 2014, pp. 137-160. KIMANI, Nicolas. Reinvention of Environmental Governance in east Africa: Explanatory and Normative Dimensions. PhD-thesis, Australian National University, 2007. LE PERE, Garth. andElling N. Tjønneland. Which way SADC? Occasional Paper, Institute for Global Dialogue, 2006, No. 50. LORENZ-CARL, Ulrike. When the ‘Not So Weak’ Bargain with the ‘Not So Strong’: Whose Agency Matters in the Economic Partnership Negotiations? In: LORENZ-CARL, Ulrike. and Martin REMPE. Mapping Agency. Comparing Regionalisms in Africa. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2013, pp. 61-76. LUCIA, Elisa, Lopez. A tool for security: how is the EU fostering and shaping ECOWAS security and defense regionalization process? GR:EEN Working Paper , University of Warwick , 2012, No. 17. MAKHAN, Davine. Linking EU trade and development policies: lessons from the ACPEU trade negotiations on economic partnership agreements. German Development Institute , 2009. http://www.die-gdi.de/uploads/media/Studies_50.pdf [22 Jun 2015]. MAKINDA, Samuel M. and F. Wafula OKUMU. The African Union: Challenges of
Globalisation, Security and Governance. London and New York, Routledge, 2008. MARINOV, Eduard. Impact of the European Union on Regional Integration in Africa. MPRA Paper, Economic Research Institute at BAS , 2013, No. 60313. MATAMBALYA, Francis. A. S. T. The East African Community: Can it be a Model for Africa’s Integratioin Process?. In: MENGISTEAB, Kidane. and Redie BEREKETEAB, eds. Regional Integration, Identity & Citizenship in the Greater Horn of Africa. Woodbridge: James Currey, 2012, pp. 195-235. MATLOSA, Khabele. The role of political parties in regional integration in the SADC Region. In: BÖSL, Anton, BREYTENBACH, Willie, HARTZENBERG, Trudie andMCCARTHY, Colin and Klaus SCHADE, eds. Monitoring Regional Integration in Southern Africa Yearbook. Vol. 6. Stellenbosch: Trade Law Centre for Southern Africa,
MATLOSA, Khabele. and LOTSHWAO, Kebapetse. Political Integration and Democratisation in Southern Africa: Progress, Problems and Prospects. Johannesburg: EISA, 2010. MCCARTHY, Colin. Reconsidering regional integration in sub-Saharan Africa. In: Supporting Regional Integration in East and Southern Africa – Review of Select Issues. Stellenbosch: Trade Law Centre for Southern Africa, 2010, pp. 1-26. MIRANDA, Valérie Vicki. The Africa-EU Peace and Security Partnership and the Role of Civil Society. In: PIROZZI, Nicoletta, ed. Strengthening the Africa-EU Partnership on Peace and Security: How to Engage African Regional Organizations and Civil Society , IAI Research Papers , 2012, No. 6, pp 55-92. http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iairp_06.pdf [23 Jun 2015]. MIRANDA, Valérie Vicki, PIROZZI, Nicoletta. and Kai SCHÄFER.Towards a Stronger Africa-EU Cooperation on Peace and Security: The Role of African Regional Organizations and Civil Society. IAI Working Papers, 2012, No. 28. http://www.iai.it/sites/default/files/iaiwp1228.pdf [23 Jun 2015] MORGAN, Glyn. The Idea of a European Superstate: Public Justification and European Integration. Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2005. THE NEW PARTNERSHIP FOR AFRICA’S DEVELOPMENT (NEPAD). Action Plan for the Environment Initiative. Addis-Abeba: NEPAD, 2003. http://www.nepad.org/system/files/Environment%20Action%20Plan.pdf [23 Jun 2015].
Centre for the Study of Governance Innovation , 2004, No. 5. PIROZZI, Nicoletta. EU support to African security architecture: funding and training components. EU Institute for Security Studies, Occasional papers , 2009, No.76. http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/op76.pdf [23 Jun 2015] QOBO, Mzukisi. The European Union. In: SAUNDERS, Chris., DZINESA, Gwinyayi, A, and Dawn NAGAR, eds. Region-Building in Southern Africa. London: Zed Books, 2012, pp. 251-263. RUDLOFF, Bettina and WEINHARDT, Clara. Economic Partnership Agreements between the EU and the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States. SWP Comments 3 , German Institute for International and Security Affairs , 2011. http://www.swpberlin. org/fileadmin/contents/products/comments/2011C03_rff_wht_ks.pdf [23 Jun 2015]. SARDC. Optimising regional integration in Southern Africa: assessing informal cross border trade in SADC. Harare: Southern African Research and Development Centre,
SICURELLI, Daniela. Africa-EU Partnership on Climate Change and the Environment. In: MANGALA, Jack. Africa and the European Union. A Strategic Partnership. New York: Palgrave Macmillian, pp. 149-169. SILVESTRE, Carmen. EU‐AU relations: What role for civil society? Open Society Institute, Brussels, 9 April 2009. http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/sites/default/files/silvestre_20090409.pdf [ Jun 2015]. SÖDERBAUM, Fredrik. Turbulent regionalization in West Africa. In: SCHULTZ, Michael, ÖJENDAL, Joakim and Fredrik SÖDERBAUM, eds. Regionalisation in a globalizing world. London: Zed Books, 2001, pp. 61-81. SÖDERBAUM, Fredrik. The Political Economy of Regionalism. The Case of Southern Africa , New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. THERON, Sonja. and Edgar Cizero NTASANO. The EU, Regional Co-operation and Conflict in the Great Lakes Region. Centre for the Study of Governance Innovation, Working Paper Series, 2014, No. 7. TRADE LAW CENTRE (TRALAC). 2012. The Regional Indicative Strategic
Development Plan: SADC’s trade-led Integration Agenda. How is SADC doing?. Trade Law Centre, TRALAC Trade Brief, 2012, No. S12TBO2. http://www.tralac.org/files/2012/04/S12TB022012-SADC-RISDP-SADC-agenda- 20120418.pdf [23 Jun 2015]. TJONNELAND, Elling, N. From Aid Effectiveness to Poverty Reduction: Is Foreign Donor Support to SADC Improving?(Vol. 4). Gaborone: Lightbooks, 2008. TSIE, Balefi. International Political Economy and Southern Africa. In: VALE, Peter, SWATUK, Larry, A, and Bertil ODÉN, eds. Theory, Change and Southern Africa’s Future. Basingstoke, Palgrave, 2001, pp. 110-147. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT. UNCTAD Africa Report 2013. Intra-African Trade: Unlocking Private Sector Dynamism. Gèneva: UNCTAD, 2013. http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/aldcafrica2013_en.pdf [23 Jun 2015]. UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME. Increased role of civil society , Africa Environment Outlook 2. Nairobi: UNEP, nd. http://www.unep.org/dewa/Africa/publications/AEO-2/content/019.htm [23 Jun 2015]. VAN LANGENHOVE, Luk. Why we need to ‘unpack’ regions to compare them more effectively. The International Spectator , 2012, vol. 47, No. 1, pp. 16-29. WIENER, Antje. and Thomas DIEZ., eds. European Integration Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.
