Networked Regionalism As Conflict Management by Anna Ohanyan

Author:Anna Ohanyan [Ohanyan, Anna]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Stanford University Press
Published: 2015-04-01T16:00:00+00:00

FIG. 5.1. Policy Network in the Security and Justice and Home Affairs Areas in the Balkans, Based on RCC Perception of Initiatives, 2012. (Source: Prezelj, Iztok. 2013. “Challenges of Multilateral Regional Security and Defence Cooperation in South East Europe.” European Perspectives 5 (2): 83–112.)

Heteropolarity

Heteropolarity is a regional network feature that describes whether a network that has multisectoral membership is also connecting local actors with national and global levels of governance (Der Derian 2011). Such networks in the Western Balkans are observed more in some issue areas than others. Higher levels of heteropolarity, along with higher levels of institutional density, are associated with networked governance. Parker (2007) makes a distinction between networks and networked governance, arguing that in contrast to fragmented network operations, networked governance processes result in steering, setting directions, and influencing behavior. Heteropolar networks produce stronger grounds for networked governance because they provide both the public and private sectors of the society with various access points. Combined with engagement from the local to the global levels of governance, heteropolar networks legitimize network-based governance processes and enhance their policy implementation capacities (Ohanyan 2009).

Indeed, in addition to the presence of public and private sectors in regional networks, the extent to which local levels of governance are connected to global ones is important. One particular organization, the Network of Associations of Local Authorities of South-East Europe (NALAS), is a good example. NALAS’s heteropolar credentials are manifest in its ability to connect both local and global actors to its governance structure. Empowered local structures of governance are a key ingredient in fostering cross-border trade as well as regional integration models in general. NALAS acts as a crucial forum and a voice for local authorities; it connects them to the global levels of politics. Similar regional networks are numerous. The issue of heteropolarity matters to the extent that such regional networks add up to regional governance processes.

Another example of a heteropolar network is in the higher education sector. In July 2008, the South East Europe Regional Network for Qualifications Frameworks was established to provide a platform for exchanging ideas and experiences and promoting good practice among member countries in developing and implementing their national qualifications frameworks in accordance with the European Higher Education Area.7 The network connects both governmental authorities and institutions of higher education, thereby serving as an institutional mechanism to connect public and private actors in the higher education sector with international governmental organizations—namely, the EU. The network is financed by its membership dues, which reflects the fact that the concrete rationale for regional cooperation in an otherwise highly sensitive area of higher education has been realized by its members.

Like patterns of mobilization and institutional density, levels of heteropolarity tend to vary from one issue area to the next. Regional cooperation in political and military areas is more contingent on the capacity and political will of national administrations, whereas in the sphere of economic and social development successful regional networks, particularly the ones deployed through top-down patterns of mobilization, are heavily reliant on the private sector for successful implementation.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.