Regionalization of the World E-Book
142,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
- Sprache: Englisch
On the world map, macro-regions or global regions have gradually emerged, with varying degrees of success and following different trajectories. The authors of this book attempt to determine whether, within the context of globalization, these macro-regions have become an additional level in the spatial deployment of numerous actors, and whether they have come to stand between the national and global levels.
This question has arisen because the increasing scales of trade, environmental problems, migration routes, energy distribution, the construction of major infrastructures etc. transcend national boundaries and are leading states to implement macro-regional cooperation.
The authors ask whether these large regional groupings are becoming genuine territories and are the fruit of in-depth regional integration – economic, institutional, legal, normative, political, cultural and in terms of identity. If so, these global regions would therefore become referents that make sense and take root in social representations.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Introduction
References
1 From Regional Geography to the Geography of Regionalization
1.1. Introduction
1.2. 19th and 20th centuries: the hesitant paths of regionalization between intra-state regions and continents
1.3. 20th century: an early but timid emergence of the world
1.4. The turn of the 20th/21st century: relations between geographers and other disciplines are almost one way
1.5. References
2 The Regionalization of Migration
2.1. Introduction
2.2. Regionalization: main characteristics
2.3. The region: a relational space, crossed by intense circulation
2.4. The political dimension: a crucial aspect for understanding the structuring of migrant regions
2.5. Conclusion: the power of proximity
2.6. References
3 Energy Supply: Comparison of Regional Experiences
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Francophone approaches and determining factors of regional energy integration
3.3. Regional energy integration models and the challenge of ecological transition
3.4. Conclusion
3.5. References
4 Transport Systems and Regional Integration
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Transport and circulation: key variables in the partition models of the world into large civilizational groups
4.3. Globalized transport and hierarchical rearrangement of regional units
4.4. Continental transport corridors, at the heart of regional integration projects
4.5. The difficulty of measuring the knock-on effects of transport corridors on regional economies
4.6. TEN-T: political leverage for European integration
4.7. Towards a regionalization of international transport law?
4.8. Conclusion: the multidimensional construction of regional integrations through the lens of transport systems
4.9. References
5 The Regionalization–Globalization Pair: A Reading of the Evolution of World Trade
5.1. Introduction
5.2. A methodology for analyzing regional and global dynamics
5.3. The main lessons learned
5.4. Towards a reinterpretation of the regionalization–globalization dynamics
5.5. Conclusion: a look at the production of francophone geography on these issues
5.6. Appendix
5.7. References
6 Stock Market Activity and the Regionalization Process
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Regionalization in the practices of stock exchange activities: the case of cross-border listings
6.3. Regionalization in the organization of the stock exchange activity: the construction of stock exchange groups
6.4. What role for regionalization in the evolution of stock market activity?
6.5. Conclusion: the power of proximity
6.6. References
7 The Runet, a Region of Cyberspace?
7.1. Introduction
7.2. From the cultural to the political Runet: appropriation of the “upper layers” of cyberspace
7.3. Control and dependencies on the lower layers of cyberspace
7.4. Conclusion
7.5. References
8 Security Regions: A Heterogeneous World Between Conflicts and Cooperation
8.1. Introduction
8.2. Regional security cooperation: globalization and diversification
8.3. Realities and myths of the regionalization of insecurity
8.4. Conclusion
8.5. References
9 African Integration in All Its Forms
9.1. Introduction
9.2. Regional paper integrations?
9.3. African trade from below
9.4. Artifact-centered regionalizations
9.5. Conclusion
9.6. References
10 Europe, a Geographical Puzzle (A)
10.1. Introduction
10.2. The various definitions of Europe
10.3. Finding the limits of Europe
10.4. Conclusion: the geography of Europe, a psychoanalytical exercise for Europeans
10.5. References
11 Three Exercises in the Regionalization of Europe
11.1. Introduction: the search for Europe and three tracks for its quest
11.2. Embassy networks in the world and the renewed place of European states
11.3. Europe through the titles of regional IGOs: a perspective from Turkey
11.4. Europe and world regions in the French national daily press (2013–2020)
11.5. Conclusion: Europe and the European Union, a complex and ever-changing landscape
11.6. References
12 The Arctic, a (Macro)Region under Construction?
12.1. Introduction
12.2. The Arctic, a self-proclaimed region? The notion of region mobilized (or not) by the Arctic actors
12.3. A region built mainly from above: institutional regionalism draws the boundaries of a contested region
12.4. Building a functional Arctic region from below?
12.5. Conclusion
12.6. References
13 North America: An Asymmetric Regional Integration
13.1. Introduction
13.2. The region of great spaces
13.3. The three partner states in North America
13.4. What kind of integration is taking place in North America?
13.5. Conclusion: the dilemmas of hyperpower in international competition
13.6. References
14 Latin American Integrations
14.1. Introduction
14.2. Naming a large region to integrate it
14.3. National and regional integrations
14.4. Advances and impasses of contemporary political projects
14.5. True integration by the actors
14.6. Conclusion: the meaning of integration
14.7. References
15 The People’s Republic of China: Regional Pre-eminence as a Mirror of its Global Power
15.1. Introduction
15.2. From regional integration to the construction of its own regional mechanism
15.3. The territories of integration in Asia
15.4. Projection in Asia and regional tensions
15.5. Conclusion: the power of proximity
15.6. References
16 Southeast Asia, a Region?
16.1. Introduction
16.2. Regional integration as a tool for international recognition
16.3. Reconciling regional integration and integration into globalization
16.4. Between risk of dilution and disintegration
16.5. Conclusion: the power of proximity
16.6. References
Conclusion For a More Comparative Geography
C.1. The macro-region remains more of a level than a territory
C.2. Questions to be explored
C.3. Delays and contributions of francophone geography
C.4. Method for a more comparative regional geography
C.5. References
List of Authors
Index
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 4
Table 4.1. World air traffic
Chapter 5
Table 5.1. Domestic and external trade to the world’s major free trade agreeme...
Chapter 11
Table 11.1. The main diplomatic representations in the World.
Table 11.2. Most cited regions of the world in the press news of four French n...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1. Percentage of intraregional migration among all international migr...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1. World air traffic
Figure 4.2. Air traffic in the EU in 2019 (number of passengers, Eurostat data...
Figure 4.3. Integration dynamics of air flows in the EU between 2004 and 2019...
Figure 4.4. Evolution of the share of intraregional trade in world regions
Figure 4.5. From institutional architecture to regional airspace nesting. Synt...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.1. Geographical organization of world trade, 1995–2007–2019...
Figure 5.2. The influence of the world’s major trading powers in 2019
Figure 5.3. Openness rates (% of total trade/GDP) of the world’s major regions...
Figure 5.4. Regional trade agreements
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1. Searching for critical size through regional clusters of exchanges...
Chapter 8
Figure 8.1. Regionalizations of security and insecurity in Sub-Saharan Africa ...
Chapter 9
Figure 9.1. The main regional institutions in Africa.
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1. Terms associated with the word “Europe” in the Eurobroadmap surve...
Figure 10.2. The limits of “Europe” in the Eurobroadmap survey of French under...
Figure 10.3. Surface and population potential maps
Figure 10.4. Division of the world into regions based on trade flows in 1995...
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1. Political “Europe” captured through the titles of IGOs with a Eur...
Figure 11.2. The five dimensions of Turkish foreign policy based on its partic...
Figure 11.3. Most significant world region associations in press news from fou...
Figure 11.4. Most significant country and world region associations in press n...
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1. Number of cross-border passengers, 2019
Guide
Cover Page
Title Page
Copyright Page
Introduction
Table of Contents
Begin Reading
WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Pages
iii
iv
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
SCIENCES
Geography and Demography, Field Director – Denise Pumain
The World in its Divisions: Borders and Discontinuities,Subject Head – Clarisse Didelon-Loiseau
Regionalization of the World
Comparing Regional Integrations
Coordinated by
Pierre Beckouche
Yann Richard
First published 2024 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd 27-37 St George’s Road London SW19 4EU UKwww.iste.co.uk
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street Hoboken, NJ 07030 USA www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2024 The rights of Pierre Beckouche and Yann Richard to be identified as the authors of this work have been asserted by them in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2023943507
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 978-1-78945-158-0
ERC code: SH2 Institutions, Values, Environment and Space SH2_11 Human, economic and social geography
Introduction
Pierre BECKOUCHE1and Yann RICHARD2
1 UMR Ladyss, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France
2 UMR Prodig, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France
Following the global financial crisis that arose from the subprime crisis in the United States (2008), after “America first” witnessed during Trump’s presidency in the United States (2017–2020) and after the Covid-19 pandemic (2020–2022), the globalization paradigm lost its omnipotence. At the economic level, the theme of “deglobalization” advocates the relocation of some activities (Latouche 2019), a priority for local production intended for the national market – especially in the countries of the South – in place of imports (Bello 2002), even protectionism (Sapir 2010), and the regulation of financial activities. At the political level, this takes the form of sovereignty and sometimes a revival of nationalism. When globalization is challenged, it is often in the name of local distribution channels that allow local actors to control their future, preserve their jobs and their environment, and/or in the name of a return to national sovereignty.
We might have thought that these demands for more controlled internationalization would lead to the promotion of a world organized in large international regions, more capable of regulating things than on the scale of the vast world. Nevertheless, the first two decades of the 21st century have not seen the victory of the regions. Instead, we hear more about the local and the return of nationalism. As for globalization, it is far from having surrendered: space is now structured by a planetary connection; the world’s metropolises form a circumterrestrial archipelago animated by flows that never stop; the power of multinationals remains huge.
There are even signs of regional disintegration here and there. This was the case in Europe, at least until the Russian–Ukrainian war that broke out just as this book was being written. All Europeans have suddenly become geographers, asking themselves whether political Europe should stretch as far as Ukraine, whether the Donbass should be part of Western Europe rather than a Russian regional entity, and whether the European Union should integrate militarily. But it should be remembered that before then, the EU project had suffered a dramatic setback with the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (Brexit vote in 2016). Some EU member countries were turning inward and rejecting the community logic. We could speak of populist, Eurosceptic or sovereignist governments, but this also reflected a dislike of the European Union among citizens, the first signs of which were seen in the 1990s. These years also saw the end of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact and the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance, the other great European regional experiment.
Regional uncertainties are not unique to Europe. In the Americas, MERCOSUR and UNASUR are stalled by recurrent economic and political crises, a structural lack of trust among some member countries and inadequate infrastructure. Venezuela’s exclusion from MERCOSUR is a sign of a Latin American regionalism that seems to accumulate institutions without coherence. In East Asia, the disputes between China, Taiwan, Japan, North Korea and other countries in the region remain immense. In Africa, large regions are having difficulty driving development. We wonder whether the very idea of a large region is not simply being swept away by a Sino-American bipolarization of world space, shaking up the logic of proximity through international mega-treaties and Belt and Road initiatives.
However, the long-term trends are obstinate. States are giving more and more importance to relations with their neighbors. This is reflected in the spectacular increase in the number of regional agreements (“regionalism”) for trade in goods and services. Today, 450 such agreements, notified to the WTO, are active. In 2021, the free trade area of the 44 members of the African Union came into force (African Continental Free Trade Area, AfCFTA). In January 2022, the world’s largest free trade area, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RECP), involving East and Southeast Asian countries, came into effect as China’s response to the US attempts to create a trans-Pacific treaty. For the past 20 years, Russia has been trying to strengthen ties with its neighbors – former Soviet republics – through the Eurasian Economic Union and the Collective Security Treaty Organization, the influence of the Runet and, more recently, through arms. The Covid-19 pandemic and the rise of the importance of the environment and increased climate change to the top of the political agenda are prompting many actors to seek solutions at the scale of their regional neighborhood.
This regionalism is based on a major trend that globalization had masked: the regionalization of trade. For the past 50 years, many interactions have been concentrated in clusters of neighboring countries, whether in trade, investment, international mobility or the joint management of transboundary environmental public goods. These trends have long been observed by specialists from different disciplines who are interested in the effects of geographical proximity or in the comparative advantages and disadvantages of multi-state regionalism. Looking at the existing bibliography, economists and political scientists have dominated the debate for several decades. Geographers are also interested in the subject, looking at objects as diverse as the relations between metropolises, North/South regionalism, European, Latin American or East Asian integration, mobilities or international migrations.
Several recent events have revived thinking about the European region. Firstly, Brexit is proving more difficult than was envisaged by British Eurosceptics. Undoing ties that have been built over decades is a daunting exercise. Along the way, we realize that there is much to lose and that signing a separation agreement does not instantly sweep away the functional integration that has been built on the ground. Secondly, several countries are still knocking on the door of the European Union (recently Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine). Thirdly, Brexit does not seem to set a precedent, as there are no further requests to leave the European Union. Fourthly, European institutions and member countries continue to build the EU on a day-to-day basis. Research shows that regionalism is still very much in vogue, because it echoes major economic (construction of large markets, regulation of trade), political (international regulation of globalization, co-construction of norms and standards) and geopolitical (pacification of relations between neighboring states and structuring of a multipolar world, not to mention the work that will be devoted to the new European geopolitics which arose on February 24, 2022) challenges.
On the world map, despite the headwinds, the major regional groupings are there and there they are indeed. They have gradually imposed themselves, with varying degrees of success and following different trajectories. The first objective of this book is to answer the following question: have the regions become an additional level in the spatial deployment of numerous actors (political actors, firms, social groups, cultural organizations)? They could thus come to be inserted between the national and the global levels: the continuous enlargement of the scales of exchange, environmental problems, migratory routes, energy distribution, construction of major infrastructures. All of this goes beyond national limits and leads to regional cooperation. A second hypothesis: as more than just levels, these large entities become real territories, appropriated by the societies that constitute them, subject to shared representations, steered by powers that are increasingly defined and even increasingly competent on this macro-regional scale. In this hypothesis, which corresponds to what economists call “deep” regional integration, growing integration at the economic, institutional, legal and normative, political, cultural and identity levels make the region a landmark that makes sense, takes root in representations and models what could become a regional society.
The second objective of this book is to show that geographers are equipped to test these hypotheses and to better understand these large regions, even though they have long remained discreet in this field of research dominated by economics, political science and international law. Their legitimacy in the study of regions, scales, territories and spatial integration is not in doubt. They are aware of the contributions of other disciplines in order to shed light on their own research, even though these studies still too often lack the necessary generalization to go beyond the stage of regional monographs.
The first chapter of this book lays francophone geography’s historical and theoretical contribution to the large regional issue.
Chapters 2–8 are thematic approaches to regional geography. The aim is to observe and even measure the regional concentration of certain practices and to see whether it combines with or opposes globalization. It is also a question of seeing whether this scale is not the most relevant for dealing with certain issues, in fields such as security, energy, planning, transport and even finance, since cooperation on a regional scale is easier when neighboring societies share certain collective preferences and are linked by strong interdependencies.
– Chapter 2 studies international migration and mobility. Camille Schmoll shows that migration routes, although increasingly global, retain a predominantly regional dimension.
– In Chapter 3, Angélique Palle looks at regional energy integration, which she observes in different parts of the world. She explains that the promoters of such integration – with its technical, political and economic components – are wondering what would be the optimal geographical scale for the construction of energy systems, particularly in the perspective of the transition to less carbon-intensive economies. Are large multi-state entities the optimal scale?
– In Chapter 4, Antoine Beyer describes the strong mutual links between regional integration and the dynamics of transport networks, by observing the flows, infrastructures and institutions that frame them. According to him, transport networks are markers of the interdependencies built up between neighboring countries.
– In Chapter 5, Gilles Van Hamme takes stock of the global dynamics of international trade in order to examine the regional fact. He hypothesizes that globalization and regionalization are not incompatible. Rather, they are concomitant and interrelated.
– In Chapter 6, Maude Sainteville analyzes financial exchanges, which are essentially dematerialized and globalized. In a counter-intuitive way, she shows that there is a regional dimension to the organization and practices of stock market activity, by focusing on three themes: the listing of securities, the construction of stock market groups and high-frequency trading.
– Kevin Limonier opens Chapter 7 with the obvious: digital flows are by nature ubiquitous and globalized. But by adopting a geopolitical perspective through the example of the Runet – i.e. all the networks, digital services and platforms where the Russian language is used to communicate – he indicates that these flows do not escape regionalization either.
– Chapter 8, written by Emmanuel Chauvin, focuses on cross-border security issues, an essential component of today’s regions. He observes both the regional construction of security and the regional concentration of insecurity in regional conflict complexes. In his view, the “regional” scale must be considered with finesse: regional security architectures are often macro-regional in size, while the geography of violence is often concentrated in smaller aggregates of neighboring countries.
– Chapters 9–16 approach regional integration in different parts of the world: Europe, Africa, East and Southeast Asia, North and South America, and the Arctic. The authors answer two questions in each chapter. What are the regional stakes in various large groups, can we speak of increasing intraregional flows (“regionalization”) in all parts of the world? Is the awareness of these facts sufficiently shared to lead to real policies of regional integration (“regionalism”)?
– Chapter 9 provides a picture of the uneven success of regional integration in Africa. Géraud Magrin and Olivier Ninot analyze the tensions between recent integrations driven by official institutions, and older functional cross-border integrations “from below”. Given the fragility of the states concerned, they ask to what extent regional integration can be detrimental to state-building and hence to development.
– By adopting a critical approach, the authors of Chapter 10 reflect on the possible definitions of “Europe”. Etienne Toureille, Antoine Laporte and Claude Grasland show that the concern for its limits is part of a general tendency to divide up the world into regions, which is tinged with an already long-standing – and very European – concern about a possible decline of Europe.
– In order to leave the framework of classical regional geography, the same authors continue their reflection in Chapter 11 by presenting three empirical illustrations of “Europe”: the position of European states in diplomatic networks; the membership of Turkey, a state in an interface position, to different supranational entities; the regional theme in French press articles. The latter is a methodology of great significance to follow the development of regional representations and therefore the possible passage from a simple level to an appropriate territory.
– Chapter 12 is dedicated to the Arctic. In this chapter, Frédéric Lasserre and Camille Escudé invite the reader to observe a macro-region in the making. Through the cooperation between riparian states, the action of regional institutions and the various interactions between the local, national, global and macro-regional levels, this framework plays an increasingly important role politically. In a space where regional issues have become clear to all, can regionalism precede the regionalization of trade?
– In Chapter 13, Christian Girault analyzes the role of NAFTA in the structuring of North America, which increasingly includes the Caribbean and Central American peripheries. This vast functional whole, devoid of powerful institutional governance, abused by various actors and challenged by former President Trump, ultimately proves to be solid.
– In Chapter 14, Sébastien Velut offers a critical approach to Latin America. Although the term has become part of everyday language and the discourse of international institutions, he shows that Latin America is hardly integrated and analyzes the obstacles to regional integration in this part of the world.
– In Chapter 15, Thierry Sanjuan and Karine Henriot recall that China’s emergence is based, among other things, on a program of hegemonic domination of its neighbors. It is, in fact, a powerful factor of macro-regional integration. Beijing’s action underwent reorientations in the 2000s: it now involves the construction of security cooperation networks in East and Southeast Asia. This regional undertaking can be seen as a basis for China to better position itself as a global actor.
– In Chapter 16, Nathalie Fau presents the situation in Southeast Asia. She shows the complex role of both Chinese hegemony and American power. Another difficulty with regional integration is the shift from functional integration, driven by transnational firms, to integration that is more formalized through free trade agreements, but complicated by the rise of authoritarian regimes in the region. In this context, ASEAN is having difficulty playing a leading role. Therefore, the author questions the capacity of civil societies to feed regional dynamics.
The concluding section summarizes the theoretical and empirical issues highlighted in this book and outlines what could be, in the future, a more visible francophone contribution to the comparison of regional integrations in the world.
References
Bello, W. (2021). Démondialisation, un paradigme à revendiquer. In
Démondialisation ?
, Polet, F. (ed.). Éditions Syllepses, Louvain-la-Neuve.
Latouche, S. (2019).
La décroissance
. PUF, Paris.
Sapir, J. (2010).
Le protectionnisme
. PUF, Paris.
1From Regional Geography to the Geography of Regionalization
Pierre BECKOUCHE1and Yann RICHARD2
1 UMR Ladyss, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France
2 UMR Prodig, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, France
1.1. Introduction
In the 19th century, academic geography emerged in Europe, particularly in France. In the wake of the work of Paul Vidal de la Blache, French geographers paid attention to sub-state regional divisions, in a monographic approach. However, from the beginning of the 20th century and during the interwar period, some observed what was already called globalization. They proposed a regionalization of the world, based on the geographical distribution of power centers and the observation of exchanges. After the war and until the 1970s, the themes of the regionalization of the world and regional integration on a macroscale (the construction of large multi-state groups) reappeared in France in a scattered manner. With their expertise on the notion of region, geographers, using their tools, took possession of this theme again, based in part on more advanced work from other disciplines.
1.2. 19th and 20th centuries: the hesitant paths of regionalization between intra-state regions and continents
1.2.1. The legacy of the 18th century
To regionalize is to divide the surface of the Earth in order to classify knowledge about the known space. With the improvement of cartography and statistics, in the 18th century, regional descriptions became more precise: based on the political-administrative divisions, in states with an administration that produced figures. Whether on a global or national scale, the starting point was a naturalistic or even deterministic division. The emphasis was on climates, mountains, rivers and seas. Some works were based on watersheds (Philippe Buache and then Maxime Auguste Denaix), on altitude and climate (Abbé Giraud-Soulavie) and on geological outcrops (Omalius d’Halloy at the beginning of the 19th century, who planned to produce a rational division of the globe based on geology) (Claval 1999). This division played a central role in the French-speaking geographical vision in the 19th century, in the context of the exploration of the interior of the continents, the improvement of cartographic coverage and the census of reliefs and landscapes.
1.2.2. Vidal and the vidalians: lifestyles, cities and circulation
At the end of the 19th century, regional geography was defined in France by Paul Vidal de la Blache, who was influenced by German authors. Carl Ritter formalized the idea of regional differentiation by dividing the world according to a hierarchical model: the world, the continents and the parts of continents (mainly based on the observation of relief and climate) themselves divided into smaller regions. He divided Europe into regions according to several criteria: topography, atmospheric and hydrological data, population distribution, location of resources and distribution of fauna and flora. For him, the regions owe their personality to the particular relations which are established between the human societies and nature; their boundaries do not have any relationship with the political network.
Vidal de la Blache in turn laid the foundations of a regional approach that used concepts such as the “physiognomy” of regions, “ways of life”, environments and landscapes, and that would mark the French school of geography until the 1940s. His region is a homogeneous whole defined by the singular interaction between a natural environment and the action of a social group. He later integrated other elements into his thinking: the role of cities (he already spoke of “nodal regions”), the exchange of goods and circulation in general. This prefigured the idea of functional regions and led him to reduce the importance of the principle of homogeneity when defining regional boundaries.
Vidal de la Blache contributed to the necessity of a monographic approach, but at the same time, following in the footsteps of F. Ratzel in Germany, posed some important questions about the regional fact at all scales. Are the combinations described unique or recurrent? Can we identify major types of regions from the examples described? What relationships are established between the identified regions? What role does regional differentiation play in the construction of the state? Not all the promises of Vidal de la Blache’s work were fulfilled. Often written by his students, the great regional theses of the interwar period have some weaknesses. They were oriented towards the agricultural world, neglecting urbanization and industrialization; they forgot the new countries and the developing world; they favored small- or medium-sized territories, whereas long-distance exchanges existed and were increasing; the French regional approach remained at the intrastate level (see Vidal de la Blache (1903)), in a context that was nonetheless marked by internationalization.
Continents, regions and divisions of world space at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries: Universal Geographies
Universal geographies (Géographies Universelles) reflected the orientations of French regional geography at that time. The criteria for regionalization were never explicit, but they were obviously influenced by the continental divisions inherited from the tradition since at least the Renaissance and taken at face value (Grataloup 2009). The divisions could have also been influenced by editorial contingencies, such as the desire to publish volumes of equivalent size. Between the 19th century and the middle of the 20th century, the most famous universal geographies were those of Conrad Malte-Brun (Précis de géographie universelle, then Géographie universelle ancienne et moderne, mathématique, physique, statistique, politique et historique des cinq parties du monde), Elisée Reclus (Nouvelle géographie universelle : la terre des hommes), Paul Vidal de la Blache and Lucien Gallois (Géographie universelle).
In his Précis de géographie universel, published between 1810 and 1829, Malte-Brun exposes an encyclopedic knowledge and his taste for a geography of discovery, a descriptive geography that does not propose any method of regionalization. He combines a continental division of the world with sub-continental regional divisions and a description of states and certain sub-state geographical entities (cantons, cities, provinces, etc.), without justifying his choices. In the Nouvelle géographie universelle, published in 1876 and 1894, Reclus does not propose a regionalization method of the world either, even though he questions what we would today call discontinuities, for example, within the Eurasian group (Bruneau 2018). His divisions were made a priori and its volumes were distributed by continental masses. Europe and Asia each have four volumes, Africa has five and Oceania has one. In each volume, he describes nested geographical entities: pieces of continents, states, pieces of states, river basins, etc. For example, Russia is divided between a European volume and a volume devoted to “Russian Asia”, which surprises today’s reader. The Mediterranean disappears as a region, split between “Southern Europe”, “Northern Africa” and “Anterior Asia”. It is not surprising that Reclus began his description of the limits of Europe by referring to an antiquity that is more than 2000 years old: “From their first expeditions of war or trade, the inhabitants of the eastern shores of the Mediterranean had to learn to distinguish the three continents that meet there” (Nouvelle géographie universelle, Volume 1, L’Europe méridionale, p. 9, author’s translation). In the Géographie universelle by Vidal de la Blache and Gallois, the continental division of the world also prevails. The authors describe geographical entities of all sizes, according to a sequence whose meaning is not obvious. Olivier Orain recalls, for example, that the tome written by Raoul Blanchard on Western Asia “is divided into seven regional chapters, which draw an itinerary in the form of a spiral (Caucasia, separately; then Asia Minor, Armenia [in the broad sense], Iran, Arabia, Syria, and finally Mesopotamia)” (Orain 2000, author’s translation). Each chapter is divided into sub-regions. Frequently, these sub-regions are in turn subdivided, either thematically, regionally or in a hybrid manner. At the end of the 20th century, Géographie universelle, edited by Roger Brunet and Olivier Dollfus, paid more attention to globalization. But the distribution of volumes remains influenced by the classical continental division of the world.
1.3. 20th century: an early but timid emergence of the world
1.3.1. The world as a chessboard
Although French geographers were marked by the Vidalian tradition in the first half of the 20th century, some were already paying attention to the effects of the internationalization of exchanges regarding the organization of space. Even before World War II, they observed the improvement of means of communication and the extension of colonial empires. As Jean-Baptiste Arrault showed, they concluded that the world had already existed in the 19th century, that it was a scale of geography and an object whose regional organization had to be understood. Although this research remained secondary in the production of French geographers at that time, it gave rise to regular publications that were sometimes strikingly clear-sighted.
René Crozet, Albert Demangeon, André Siegfried and Maurice Zimmermann were interested in the opening of the great international canals (Panama and Suez). They wanted to show that it divided the world economy into new economic areas (Arrault 2007). The opening of the Suez strengthened the interaction between the center (industrialized Europe) and a vast periphery (the Orient, India and Australia). The canal was perceived as a European route (Vergez-Tricom 1920) and Panama as a route that reinforced what we would today call American regional integration (Zimmermann 1916). In an approach that could be described as geo-economic, Siegfried saw the “respective zones of Suez and Panama” as a competition between the main economic powers of the inter-war period (Japan and the United States), at the expense of Europe (Siegfried 1940).
Politically, the world was perceived as a chessboard: the emerging geopolitics now influenced geography. Outside of France, Mahan (1890), Ratzel (1903) and Mackinder (1904) questioned the factors of power: the balance of power was between land and sea powers. Mackinder (2004) proposed a formal regionalization of the world, which would become a milestone. Intended for policy makers, their work mixed scientific posture, ideological bias and political prescriptions. This is a thread that authors such as Haushofer (1931) and Schmitt (2003 [originally published in 1950]) then followed, with an even more ideological content. These approaches were denounced by French geographers who, in a form of critical geopolitics before its time, saw in German Geopolitik a propagandistic discourse at the antipodes of science (Demangeon 1932a; Ancel 1936a). As a counterpoint, they proposed their geopolitics of areas of influence. Thus, Vidal de la Blache described the clash of Russian and British imperialism in central Asia (Vidal de la Blache 1889) and Zimmermann the ambitions of Japan “in the East of Asia on a vast portion of the world chessboard” (Zimmermann 1908, author’s translation).
1.3.2. The inter-war period: decline of Europe, the European region, Triad
In Le déclin de l’Europe, Demangeon distinguishes what would later be called the Triad: “the division is between Europe, North America and the Japanese Archipelago […] There are now several centers of high humanity instead of one. Since the great discoveries, the world had become Europeanized; under the influence of continents and peoples younger in progress, it tends to become regionalized” (Demangeon 1920a, author’s translation). Even before World War I, Vidal de la Blache described (in his Principes de géographie humaine) what we now call the world system, structured by these three poles and their exchanges.
The Pacific became a region of the world for geographers who were interested in the intensification of relations between its shores, the rise in power of the United States and Japanese migratory pressure (Arrault 2007). For Zimmermann (1897, 1899), the Pacific was the space where we had to gain a foothold if we hoped to count in international competition; the “Pacific question” was linked to the increase in links between its shores. In his course at the Collège de France, Brunhes was interested in the Pacific, which he saw as a space as such. Finally, Demangeon (1920b) spoke of the advent of the Pacific, which “tends to become a great economic unit”.
French geographers became aware of the need for Europe to unite in order to resist this new global competition. A European regional problem was born. Demangeon (1913) said that Western Europe was a “commercial city” in the face of America. So, the union of Europe was envisaged in academic debates. With an impressive foresight, Demangeon (1929) believed that the European idea offered a perspective for dealing with the economic crisis by specializing “in quality production” and developing international agreements through industrial cartels. Like Jacques Ancel, he criticized the political fragmentation of Europe as a major cause of economic problems and promoted “regional agreements”. Echoing these works, Siegfried (1929) gave a history of European sentiment, which had grown stronger since the war. He also considered the possible rapprochement of European states “as a prospect of salvation for a group of powers that are experiencing decline” (Siegfried 1935). For all these geographers, although it was no longer the master, Europe was then represented as a region of the world; it was therefore necessary to think about it and organize it. In the eyes of Vidal de la Blache and Siegfried, it was a civilization that, before being a continent, shared values: humanism, individualism, invention and freedom of the mind. This revived the classical discussion on its geographical boundaries and inaugurated a vein that structured the debates of the 20th century on a cultural definition of the regions. Demangeon hesitated: he excluded Russia from the political point of view (with the Bolshevik regime being incompatible with democracy), but considered that its presence in Europe was necessary for the economic balance of the continent. For Ancel, on the other hand, the physical and human geography of Russia distanced it from Europe (Demangeon 1932b; Ancel 1936b; Arrault 2007).
1.3.3. After World War II: global regions at last?
After World War II, regional geography went beyond the first Vidalian tradition, i.e. the relations considered too simple between human groups and environments, the rural tropism, and especially the monographic approach. From the 1960s onwards, regional monographs took a back seat. The notion of spatial organization became central; it encompassed what was happening within the region and the relations with other regions. Some geographers refer to this as the “system region” (Dumolard 1975). In the wake of Walter Christaller’s economic theories and the theoretical contributions of economists such as François Perroux, the region was considered less in its homogeneity and more through the idea of functional integration. Regionalization then consisted of observing the spatial limits of economic channels and identifying nodes (cities) that dominated surfaces. We find this idea in Juillard (1962). The young regional science seeks laws of geographic space and studies the forces that organize it according to repeating patterns (Isard 1975). To understand regions, it is necessary to analyze networks, economies of scale, inter-scale relationships, production relationships and center–periphery relationships. This is what Marxist-inspired radical geography does. Moreover, spatially sensitive economists, such as Lipietz (1977), push geographers to seek principles of spatial division of labor valid at the intra-national level, as well as the international level.
From the end of World War II to the 1980s, however, regional francophone geographies of the world remained scattered. They were the work of a few prominent authors who developed different approaches, without creating a school of thought, with the publication of numerous works or articles devoted to this or that country (geography of Japan, France, Brazil, etc.) or to this or that part of the world1. Despite the path opened up by Fernand Braudel’s Mediterranean, reflection on regionalism and regional integration on a macroscale remained marginal in France, both among geographers (including Dollfus, who was nevertheless receptive to Braudel’s work) and historians. Braudel’s intuitions were instead extended by economists and sociologists (Wallerstein, Arrighi and Amin). According to Grataloup (2018), this discretion is understandable if we place it in the intellectual context of post-modernity, which was not very favorable to the historical study of large regional areas. Talking about the East, Chinese, African, Amerindian and Oceanian worlds was difficult in the face of the rise of postcolonial criticism, the deconstruction of western subjectivity and the representations associated with it. The global scale was taking over the macro-regional scale; with the rise of global history, little attention was paid to regional divisions.
This is why works on large regional groups remained rare among geographers. Claval (1968), however, is an exception. He took up the idea of international trade organized around three major poles. But his analysis of “large territorial groupings” was mainly economic and left aside the work of political scientists specializing in international relations who were working on theories of regional integration at the time (Haas in particular). We should also mention the geographers specializing in the Soviet Union, who necessarily took a macro-regional perspective given the size of the area they studied: a space of more than 22 million square kilometers, made up of 15 republics (George 1962; Blanc and Chambre 1971; Maurel 1982; Radvanyi 1982; Carrière 1984). They showed how planning allowed the establishment of social, economic and political links between these republics, which made the Soviet Union function as an integrated whole for several decades. However, the Soviet case remained ambiguous: should we consider that the USSR was a state, or a group of neighboring states engaged in regional integration?
1.3.4. The 1980s: the world as a system
Systemic approaches to the world revived francophone geography from the 1980s onwards. In his research on spatial justice, Reynaud (1981) was influenced by the work of Amin (1973) on dependence, and analyzed the center–periphery model at all scales. This led him to propose a regionalization of the world based on the relations between centers and peripheries, following the example of Immanuel Wallerstein who observed the dynamics of capitalism in the world system.
In his work on globalization, Dollfus (1984) further developed the idea of the “world system”. The world is no longer just a framework, it is a geographical object per se, a system of interlocking and connected socio-economic systems, a kind of large multipolarized region. In the 1990s, he even proposed a regionalization of the world, but emphasized other entities in this regionalization, such as cities and what he called the “global megalopolitan archipelago” (Dollfus 1994). In his work, he showed above all that a few major state powers and a few hundred global economic and financial groups dominated and organized the world system, with “driving spaces”, “polarized spaces” and “spaces in the process of destructuring”.
1.4. The turn of the 20th/21st century: relations between geographers and other disciplines are almost one way
Three changes mark the francophone regional geography at the turn of the two centuries.
1.4.1. Economics reformulates the regional equation
Geographers first take into account the rapid pace of globalization and the intensification of the technological content of production. These aspects become decisive in regional analysis, because the acceleration of the mobility revolution, particularly that of information, make physical criteria less relevant for dividing up regions. This leads them to increasingly take into account the work of economists on regional integration. Based on the theory of optimal currency zones (Robert Mundell) and the stages of economic regionalism (Bela Balassa), they broaden their work on regional integration by comparing intraregional dynamics with the growth of liberalized trade on a global scale. The pioneering analyses of the economists of the 1960s and 1970s on European integration are continued by a systematic reading of regional economic integration in the world based on three indicators:
– The convergence or divergence of national economies belonging to the same regional grouping: on this theme, economists propose analyses that geographers would not disavow (Hugon 2003; Deblock and Regnault 2006). With the new economic geography, they launch a challenge that stimulates the latter (Krugman 2000).
– The geography of flows, in order to see whether exchanges are increasingly, or less and less, intraregional (Chaponnière 2004).
– The nominal objectives of regional trade agreements, where a region is considered to be in the process of economic integration if its specific objectives are translated into reality (Baldwin 1997). By distinguishing between superficial regional integration (simple free trade objectives) and deep integration (regionalization of value chains and shared standard objectives), economists provide essential concepts useful for understanding regions.
1.4.2. Trendy regionalism and multidisciplinary necessity
The second change in the landscape comes from international law and political scientists who have been studying the trend, since the mid-1990s, for regional intergovernmental agreements, including Regional Trade Agreements (Dieter 2006; De Lombaerde et al. 2010), or post-Soviet agreements that aim to maintain Russia’s area of influence over its peripheries by building new regional organizations (Commonwealth of Independent States, Eurasian Economic Union, Collective Security Treaty Organization). French-speaking geographers become accustomed to drawing on economic and political approaches, whether to understand regional integration or disintegration, or to compare the institutional regions drawn by the RTAs with the functional realities of the territories. This has led to a renewal of the analysis of world regions (Mareï and Richard 2018) conducted by geographers, often in multidisciplinary teams (Gemdev 1994; Azuelos et al. 2004; Taillard 2004; Radvanyi and Laruelle 2016).
In this inevitable interdisciplinarity, the contribution of geographers is multiform. We can mention five fields.
They analyze functional territories and, in particular, the constitution of international networks whose cross-border actors are migrants or informal traders rather than the firms and states that dominate economic or political analyses. In this field, geographers mobilize the work of sociologists working on informal networks (Tarrius 2002), co-creating with them an approach to regionalization “from below” (Vignal 2020).
They measure the regionalization of flows: to do so, they use various indicators (trade, investment, migration and mobility, tourism, ship movements, etc.) to map flows and networks (Grasland and Didelon 2006; Zdanowska 2020) and measure spatial interactions.
They describe concrete territories, in particular because they are used to dealing with interactions between all scales. In doing so, they make a useful contribution to the paradigm that has become established in the spatial reading of the international economy, that of an archipelago economy (Veltz 1996). They give importance to the proximity of kilometers (Dollfus 1994) in the face of economists and political scientists who often tend to reduce the actors to planetary-scale strategists. The approach of geographers is not necessarily statocentric; their analyses are not built on national bricks alone. They remind us of the importance of the long term, which establishes tribal solidarities here or commercial solidarities there, and which organizes international urban networks that cross historical periods. They recall the particular reasons why a given regional territory does not really verify the general economic laws of regional integration, or follow the guidelines and perimeter of an intergovernmental treaty as we would expect, which leads them to question the links between regionalism and regional integration (Van Hamme 2014). They compare representations and discourses (Beauguitte et al. 2012) with the realities on the ground. They analyze the territorial consequences of regionalism: concrete effects of the European Union’s regional policy and cohesion policy (decrease or increase in territorial inequalities, realities of multi-level governance, etc.), the Infrastructure Integration Initiative of the South American region, corridors in ASEAN or in African regional organizations (Elissalde and Santamaria 2008; Baudelle and Jean 2009; Boulineau 2017; Santamaria 2017).
In particular, they analyze the functioning of borders, whose permeabilization is the basis of international regions. One of their contributions has been to show the change in the status of the neighbor: they used to be the hereditary rival for access to passageways and essential resources such as people, minerals, arable land or water. In the era of the knowledge economy, where the vast majority of resources are produced and no longer taken, the neighbor becomes the privileged partner for the co-production of resources and the cooperative expansion of market areas (Drevet 2008; Beckouche 2008; Beckouche et al. 2016). Their contribution is notable in the observation of border regions that become places of more or less in-depth cooperation, because regional integration consists precisely of reducing the barrier effects of political limits as much as possible. From this point of view, European cross-border and transnational cooperation is the focus of most research (Hamez 2001; Reitel and Wassenberg 2020), but French geographers are working on other parts of the world, notably Latin America (Medina 2009; Medina and Diallo 2020).
Finally, they take into account the environmental dimension of regionalization. Natural environments, which had somewhat disappeared from the geography of the Trente Glorieuses2, made a strong comeback at the beginning of the 21st century. Through the notion of transnational public goods, environmental issues are even becoming essential objects of regional geography: common regional regulation against marine pollution, transboundary management of water resources and “hydrodiplomacy”, coordinated management of natural disasters and crises, coordination in the field of nuclear safety or energy transition. But it is essentially as a result of the powerful anthropic marking of territories that the environment is becoming an issue of regional geography, instead of the role of the territorial determinant that the founders of the regional division had once given to natural environments. This avoids the excessive naturalization of regional groupings that led to their a priori definition (on the critical approach to regional divisions, see Grataloup (2011), Capdepuy (2012) and Didelon Loiseau (2013)), and better illustrates the consensus that sees every region as a social construction.
1.4.3. Contributions and aporias of the civilizational paradigm
The third change has come from sociologists and political scientists working on the notions of “civilization” and culture. In particular, today’s regional geographers can hardly ignore the “cultural” paradigm propelled to the top of the agenda by Samuel Huntington in the 1990s. Despite the growing importance of the cultural theme in the contemporary regional equation, their joint work with anthropologists and sociologists, and their contribution to a better understanding of tribal realities (Balanche 2012) in regions that westerners tended to analyze through their own cultural lenses too much, it is not clear that geographers have, on the whole, provided a consistently convincing response to the powerful reductionism of culture to religion, and of religion to simplism that has made Huntington’s followers so successful. Critical studies of the civilizational division of the world by geographers remain rare (Didelon Loiseau and Richard 2020).
Three final points conclude this quick overview of the recent francophone regional geography. These works are, on the whole, not sufficiently known by other disciplines. Perhaps, the influence of monographic approaches is still too great. And, although most of these works use convergent approaches, it must be recognized that the methodological coordination of geographers is still perfectible if the rise in generality of the new regional geographies is to become readable by the other disciplines. Finally, there is still no consensus on the meaning of words, which makes comparisons difficult (Richard 2014; Mareï and Richard 2020). Nevertheless, the contribution of geographers is notable. This book, we hope, is a testament to that.
1.5. References
Amin, S. (1973).
Le développement inégal
. Les Editions de Minuit, Paris.
Ancel, J. (1936a).
Géopolitique
. Delagrave, Paris.
Ancel, J. (1936b).
Affaires étrangères : aide-mémoire de la politique étrangère française (1789–1936)
. Delagrave, Paris.
Arrault, J.-B. (2007). Penser à l’échelle du Monde. Histoire conceptuelle de la mondialisation en géographie (fin du XIXe siècle/entre-deux-guerres). Geography PhD Thesis, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne.
Azuelos, M., Cosio-Zavala, M.-E., Lacroix, J.-M. (2004)
. Intégration dans les Amériques. Dix ans d’Alena
. Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle, Paris.
Balanche, F. (2012).
Atlas du Proche-Orient arabe
. Presses Sorbonne Université, Paris.
Baldwin, R. (1997). The causes of regionalism.
The World Economy
, 20(7), 865–888.
Baudelle, G. and Jean, Y. (eds) (2009).
L’Europe. Aménager les territoires
. Armand Colin, Paris.
Beauguitte, L., Didelon, C., Grasland, C. (2012). The EuroBroadMap project: Visions of Europe around the world.
Politique européenne
, 37(2).
Beckouche, P. (2008).
Les régions Nord-Sud
. Belin, Paris.
Beckouche, P., Besnard, P., Pecout, H. (eds) (2016).
Atlas of Challenges and Opportunities in European Neighbourhoods
. Springer Open, Heidelberg.
Blanc, A. and Chambre, H. (1971).
L’URSS
. PUF, Paris.
Boulineau, E. (2017). Les macrorégions en Europe, une nouvelle régionalisation pour renforcer la cohésion territoriale. In
Les Régions et la politique de cohésion de l’Union européenne
, Baudelle, G. and Charles-Le Bihan, D. (eds). PUR, Rennes.
Bruneau, M. (2018). L’Eurasie, un impensé de la géographie : continent, empire, idéologie ou projet ?
L’Espace Géographique
, 47(1), 1–18.
Brunet, R. (eds) (1990–1996).
Géographie universelle
, 10 volumes. Hachette, Belin-Reclus, Paris.
Capdepuy, V. (2012). Un espace : l’Eufrasie.
M@ppemonde
, 104 [Online]. Available at:
http://mappemonde.mgm.fr/num32/articles/art11403
.
Carrière, P. (1984).
L’économie de l’URSS
. Masson, Paris.
Chaponnière, J.-R. (2004). L’électronique en Asie orientale, division internationale du travail et intensification des échanges. In
Intégrations régionales en Asie orientale
, Christian, T. (ed.). Les Indes savantes, Paris.
Claval, P. (1968).
Régions, nations, grands espaces. Géographie générale des ensembles territoriaux
. Marie-Thérèse Génin, Paris.
Claval, P. (1999).
Introduction à la géographie régionale
. Nathan, Paris.
De Lombaerde, P., Söderbaum, F., Van Langenhove, L., Baert, F. (2010). The problem of comparison in comparative regionalism.
Review of International Studies
, 36(3), 731–753.
Deblock, C. and Regnault, H. (2006).
Nord-Sud : la reconnexion périphérique
. Athéna, Montreal.
Demangeon, A. (1913). Les relations de la France du nord avec l’Amérique.
Annales de Géographie
, 22(123), 227–244.
Demangeon, A. (1920a).
Le déclin de l’Europe
. Payot, Paris.
Demangeon, A. (1920b). Les relations économiques de l’Australasie.
Annales de Géographie
, 157, 75–78.
Demangeon, A. (1929). Les aspects actuels de l’économie internationale.
Annales de Géographie
, 211, 10–25.
Demangeon, A. (1932a). Géographie politique.
Annales de géographie
, 41(229), 22–31.
Demangeon, A. (1932b). Les conditions géographiques d’une union européenne. Fédération européenne ou ententes régionales ?
Annales d’histoire économique et sociale
, 17, 433–451.
Didelon Loiseau, C. (2013). Le Monde comme territoire, pour une approche renouvelée du Monde en géographie. HDR, Université de Rouen.
Didelon Loiseau, C. and Richard, Y. (2020). La géographie à la recherche des civilisations de Huntington. Analyse des représentations du monde.
Bulletin de la Société Géographique de Liège
, 74, 5–22.
Dieter, H. (ed.) (2006). Report on east Asian integration opportunities and obstacles for enhanced economic cooperation.
Notre Europe
, Studies & Research, 47.
Dollfus, O. (1984). Le système Monde. Proposition pour une étude de géographie.
Actes du Géopoint 1984
,
Systèmes et localisations,
Groupe Dupont, Université d’Avignon, 231–240.
Dollfus, O. (1994).
L’Espace-Monde
. Economica, Paris.
Drevet, J.-F. (2008). L’Union européenne et ses périphéries : faisabilité du scénario des dominos.
Strates
, 15, 25–36.
Dumolard, P. (1975). Région et régionalisation.
L’Espace Géographique
, 4(2), 93–111.
Élissalde, B. and Santamaria, F. (2008).
Lexique de l’aménagement du territoire européen
. Lavoisier, Paris.
Gemdev (1994).
L’Intégration régionale dans le Monde
. Karthala, Paris.
George, P. (1962).
L’URSS
. PUF, Paris.
Grasland, C. and Didelon, C. (2006). Europe in the World. Final report, ESPON Project 3.4.1, UMS Riate, Paris.
Grataloup, C. (2009).
L’invention des continents : comment l’Europe a découpé le monde
. Larousse, Paris.
Grataloup, C. (2011).
Faut-il penser autrement l’histoire du monde ?
Armand Colin, Paris.
Grataloup, C. (2018). Histoire. In
Dictionnaire de la régionalisation du monde
, Mareï, N. and Richard, Y. (eds). Atlande, Neuilly.
Hamez, G. (2001). Du transfrontalier au transnational : approche géographique : l’exemple de la frontière franco-belge. Geography PhD Thesis, Université Paris 1.
Hauser, H. (1926). Qu’est-ce que l’Europe ?
Le Monde nouveau : revue mensuelle internationale
, 6–7, 681–688.
Haushofer, K. (1931).
Geopolitik der Pan-Ideen
. Zentral-Verlag, Berlin.
Hugon, P. (2003).
Les économies en développement à l’heure de la régionalisation
. Karthala, Paris.
Isard, W. (1975).
Introduction to Regional Science
. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
Juillard, E. (1962). La région : essai de définition.
Annales de géographie
, 386, 483–499.
Krugman, P. (2000). Where is the world in the new economic geography? In
Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography
, Clark, G., Feldman, M., Gertler, M. (eds). Oxford University Press.
Lipietz, A. (1977).
Le capital et son espace
. Maspero, Paris.
Mackinder, H.J. (1904). The geographical pivot of history.
The Geographical Journal
, 170(4), 298–321.
Notes
1
. Braudel’s “civilizational areas” are related to what may be called a multi-monographic approach, in which the deep invariants of a region prevail over its external interactions. The idea of civilizational area – reappropriated and reinterpreted – is found in Pierre Gourou’s work, who explores the Braudelian idea of the civilization of rice.
2
. Thirty years following the end of World War II in France.
