| Annotation |
In the second half of the XX century the researches have started to perceive regions both as a level of governance and as actors in the political process (I. Duhachek, M. Keating, etc.). A distinctive feature of the modern period is the active involvement of unitary subnational regions in political activity, which is especially evident in the example of the European Union. The objective of the research is to consider the external relations of the subnational regions of the unitary EU member-states as an element of the political architecture of this integration entity. A systematic and structural-functional approach is used to analyze the reasons for the development of external relations at the subnational level within the framework of integration unification, systematize these relations by groups and consider the degree of their embeddedness in the political architecture. The entire complex of external relations of subnational-level regions is divided into four groups depending on the number and level of actors. The analysis of these reasons, taking into account the groups of external relations, allowed us to confirm the hypothesis that the external relations of subnational regions of unitary countries (both asymmetric and symmetrical) within the EU can be considered as part of the EU political architecture. The embeddedness analysis of these links in the EU decision-making process allowed us to conclude that the external relations of the subnational regions of the unitary EU member-states have become part of the EU political architecture. |
| References |
1. Arteyev S. P. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo univeriteta (Bulletin of the Tomsk State University), 2017, no. 419, pp. 93–98.
2. Blagodatskikh V. G., Kerimov A. A. Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Istoricheskiye nauki (Bulletin of the Omsk University. Historical Sciences), 2018, no. 1, рр. 158–166.
3. Eremina N. V. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnyye otnosheniya (World economy and international relations), 2012, no. 6, рр. 42–51.
4. Kolykhalov M. I. Regionologiya (Regionalology), 2019, no. 2, рр. 270–289.
5. Loshkarev I. D. Pravo i upravleniye XXI vek (Law and management of the XXI century), 2018, no. 3, рр. 99–106.
6. Mikhaylenko Ye. B., Verbitskaya T. V. Voprosy upravleniya (Management issues), 2018, no. 2, рр. 14–20.
7. Cornago N. The encyclopedia of diplomacy (The encyclopedia of diplomacy), 2018, рр. 1–8.
8. Donas T., Beyersy J, Fraussen B. Out of Many, One? The Policy Portfolio of Brussels’ Based Regional Interests (Out of Many, One? The Policy Portfolio of Brussels’ Based Regional Interests). Belgium: University of Antwerp, 2014, рр. 2‒25.
9. Duchacek I. Federalism and International relations (Federalism and International relations). Oxford. 1990. P. 3–18.
10. Fricke C. European Urban and Regional Studies (European Urban and Regional Studies), 2021, no. 28 (3), рр. 316–329.
11. Hunt J., Minto R. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations (The British Journal of Politics and International Relations), 2017, no. 19 (4), рр. 647–662.
12. Jackson T. Geography Compass (Geography Compass), 2018, no. 12 (2), рр. 12357.
13. Keating M. Paradiplomacy in action Aldecoa F. and Keating M. (Paradiplomacy in action Aldecoa F. and Keating M.). Routledge, 2013, рр. 1–16.
14. Lecours A. International Negotiation (International Negotiation), 2002, no. 7 (1), рр. 91–114.
15. Martínez-Sáez J., Chavez M., Almerich S. Traits and Patterns of Paradiplomacy to Legitimise Catalonia Independence: The Case of DiploCat (Traits and Patterns of Paradiplomacy to Legitimise Catalonia Independence: The Case of DiploCat). 2021. P. 177–198.
16. Soldatos P. Federalism and international relations (Federalism and international relations). Oxford, 1990, рр. 34–53.
17. Tatham M. Comparative Political Studies (Comparative Political Studies), 2012, no. 46 (1), рр. 63–94.
|
