In the contemporary debate about regions, the Baltic Sea Region is one of the most frequently used topics. The objective of this paper is to prove that, regardless of formal speeches and co-operation in many fields, the BSR is not a natural region, but only an artificial construct according to the interests of some politicians. To work this out, I am introducing important concepts for the theory of regionalism (inside-out, outside-in and region-building approach) and apply them on the case of the Baltic Sea Region. One of the most incisive events of International Politics was the end of the Cold War in 1989. Especially in terms of the development of regions, it was a crucial event giving „(...) new actuality to the study of regions and regionalism“ (Neumann 1992, p. 3). With the fall of the Iron Curtain, regional integration received fresh impulses and is now one of the most dynamic and current processes in contemporary Europe. All over the continent regions emerge and are the object of discussion. An area of special interest in studies of regionalism is the northern part of Europe, where momentarily – for example with the Baltic Sea Region – an interesting and active process of region-forming is taking place. [...]
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The Baltic Sea Region – some general facts
2.1 Work and self-perception of the BSR
2.2 International Behavior towards the BSR
3 Theoretical background
3.1 The classical approaches
3.1.1 The inside-out approach
3.1.2 The outside-in approach
3.2 The region-building approach
4 Applied approaches
4.1 The BSR in terms of the inside-out approach
4.2 The BSR in terms of the outside-in approach
4.3 The BSR in terms of the region-building approach
5 Conclusions
Objectives and Core Topics
The objective of this paper is to critically evaluate whether the Baltic Sea Region constitutes a natural, organic region or merely an artificial political construct. The research question investigates if the region persists due to shared intrinsic values or primarily serves the strategic interests of political actors.
- Application of the "inside-out" approach regarding cultural and natural similarities.
- Evaluation of the "outside-in" approach based on geopolitical factors and external power pressures.
- Analysis of the "region-building" approach focusing on political elite interests and "imagined communities."
- Examination of institutional frameworks like the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS).
- Assessment of the sustainability of the region amidst shifting political landscapes.
Excerpt from the Book
3.2 The region-building approach
This is probably one of the reasons why the newest approach of the phenomenon is concentrated on genealogical aspects and the question „whose region“ it is. It ignores regions as something naturally and a priori given or culturally felt and emphasizes the process of developing, forming and building a region – in the most extreme case out of nothing, as Jervell said in 1996: „It is possible to draw a circle on a map and define this circle as a new region and await the events (....)“.
Within this constructivistic approach, the question of inclusion and exclusion respectively membership and non-membership of a region, has not really to do with culture or existing similarity. The only fact that matters is what similarities and dissimilarities are communicated as relevant by mainly political elite.
Personal interests – mainly economical or strategically – dominate the formation process. Mostly politicians decide to build a region as a project by including and excluding nations according to specific intentions and with certain consequences. The choice of the criteria by which regions are defined cannot be a politically neutral act. This is why region-building theorists investigate the genesis of regions and the processes of defining and redefining the region in the political (and economical) arena. For them, regions are only “imagined communities” (Neumann 1992, p. 14), and factors like culture or external threats are only used by politicians to set a common ground, create solidarity and convince people of the importance and naturalness of the ‚new‘ region. History as well is an important factor only in terms of writing and re-writing it according to interests and to create a “regional awareness”
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the historical context post-Cold War and establishes the research question regarding whether the Baltic Sea Region is an artificial construct.
2 The Baltic Sea Region – some general facts: This chapter provides an overview of the BSR's institutional framework, including the Council of the Baltic Sea States, and discusses how the region is perceived both internally and externally.
3 Theoretical background: This chapter categorizes regionalism into three primary conceptual frameworks: the inside-out, outside-in, and region-building approaches.
4 Applied approaches: This chapter tests the validity of the BSR as a region by applying the three previously defined theoretical models to current regional dynamics.
5 Conclusions: This chapter summarizes the findings, arguing that the BSR lacks sufficient natural or cultural cohesion and functions primarily as a political project.
Keywords
Baltic Sea Region, BSR, Regionalism, Region-building, Inside-out approach, Outside-in approach, Geopolitics, Council of the Baltic Sea States, CBSS, International Relations, Constructivism, Political construct, European Integration, Identity, Regional dynamics.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research paper?
The paper examines the concept of regionalism and asks whether the Baltic Sea Region is a naturally occurring region or an artificial construct created by political elites.
What are the primary thematic fields covered in the text?
The study covers geopolitical theory, constructivist regionalism, the institutional role of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS), and the intersection of politics and geography in Northern Europe.
What is the central research question?
The research seeks to prove that the Baltic Sea Region, despite formal rhetoric and cooperation, lacks the intrinsic characteristics of a natural region and persists only due to specific political and economic agendas.
Which scientific methods or frameworks are utilized?
The author employs three distinct analytical frameworks: the "inside-out" approach (focusing on cultural/natural traits), the "outside-in" approach (focusing on external geopolitical pressure), and the "region-building" approach (focusing on political constructivism).
What topics are discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body details the historical formation of the BSR, analyzes the institutionalization through the CBSS, and rigorously applies the three theoretical lenses to test the reality of the region.
Which keywords define this work?
Key terms include regionalism, BSR, region-building, constructivism, geopolitics, and political integration.
How does the author view the role of politicians in defining the BSR?
The author argues that politicians play a central role by selecting specific criteria—such as economic interests or strategic utility—to define and solidify the region to serve their own objectives.
Does the author consider the BSR a sustainable entity?
The author suggests that the BSR stands on shaky ground, as its existence is based on shared interests that could change, potentially leading to the dissolution of the "region" if political priorities shift.
- Quote paper
- Simone Prühl (Author), 2003, The Baltic Sea Region, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/38534
