What are the main characteristics of Latin American regional integration’s institutional arrangements? Are they the product of an initial fully planned construction? Do they derive from successive functional adaptations? Are the operating modes of regional integration reflections of national political institutions’ way of functioning? This chapter intends to answer these questions by examining a series of hypotheses concerning the process of institution building.


Institutional Arrangement State Parti Regional Integration Free Trade Agreement Dispute Settlement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    See, for instance, Miles Kahler, International Institutions and the Political Economy of Integration, Washington, DC, Brookings Institution, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    James McCall Smith, “The Politics of Dispute Settlement Design: Explaining Legalism in Regional Trade Pacts,” International Organization 54(1), Winter 2000, pp. 137–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 8.
    Francesco Duina, The Social Construction of Free Trade. The European Union, NAFTA and MERCOSUR, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
  4. 11.
    Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell, “The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organization Fields,” American Sociological Preview 48(2), April 1983, pp. 147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 13.
    Gary Wynia, Politics and Planners. Economic Development Policy in Central America, Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  6. 15.
    Maurice Croisat, Jean-Louis Quermonne, L’Europe et le Fédéralisme. Contribution à l’Émergence d’un Fédéralisme Intergouvememental, Paris, Montchrestien, 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 17.
    Philippe Schmitter, “A Revised Theory of Regional Integration,” International Organization 24(4), Autumn 1970, p. 862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 18.
    Albert Hirschman, Journeys toward Progress. Studies of Economic Policy-making in Latin America, Boulder, CO, Westview Press, 1993.Google Scholar
  9. 20.
    William Avery and James Cochrane, “Subregional Integration in Latin America: The Andean Common Market,” Journal of Common Market Studies 11(2), December 1972, pp. 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 21.
    Richard Adkisson, “The Andean Group: Institutional Evolution, Intraregional Trade, and Economic Development,” Journal of Economic Issues 37(2), June 2003, p. 378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 30.
    On this issue, see Deisy Ventura and Alejandro Perotti, El Proceso Legislativo del Mercosur, Montevideo, Fundación Konrad Adenauer, 2004.Google Scholar
  12. 33.
    Roberto Bouzas and Hernán Soltz, “Institutions and Regional Integration: the Case of MERCOSUR,” in Victor Buhner-Thomas (ed.), Regional Integration in Latin America and the Caribbean: The Political Economy of Open Regionalism, London, Institute of Latin American Studies, 2001, pp. 104–105.Google Scholar
  13. 51.
    For a wonderful analysis of the complex relations between institutional mimetism, domestic dynamics and international constraints in MERCOSUR, see Marcelo de A. Medeiros, Pa Genèse du Mercosud, Paris, L’Harmattan, 2000.Google Scholar
  14. 52.
    See, for instance, Juan Linz and Arturo Valenzuela (eds.), The Failure of Presidential Democracy. The Case of Latin America Vol.2, Baltimore, MD, and London, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  15. 53.
    Juan Linz, “Presidential or Parliamentary Democracy: Does It Make a Difference?” in Linz and Valenzuela, The Failure of Presidential Democracy Vol. 2, p. 36.Google Scholar
  16. 54.
    Andres Malamud, “Presidentialism and Mercosur: A Hidden Cause for a Successful Experience,” in Comparative Regional Integration. Theoretical Perspectives, edited by Finn Laursen, London, Ashgate, 2003, p. 64.Google Scholar
  17. 55.
    Gabriel Negretto, “Government Capacities and Policy Making by Decree in Latin America. The Cases of Argentina and Brazil,” Comparative Political Studies 37(5), 2004, pp. 551–562.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 60.
    Sérgio Henrique Abranches, “O Presidencialismo de Coalizdo: O Dilema Institucional Brasileiro,” Dados 31(1), 1988.Google Scholar
  19. 61.
    Jorge Lanzaro (ed.), Tipos de Presidencialismo y Coaliciones Politicas en América Latina, Buenos Aires, CLACSO, 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Olivier Dabène 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Olivier Dabène

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations