The regionality of the Nordic-Baltic Six: navigating between Brexit and the increasing Russian aggression

Abstract

The thesis tackles the issue of regionalism from the perspective of regionality. Previously, there has been an "ontological disagreement over what constitutes a region" (Mansfield et al., 2010: 146) and how regions are scientifically analyzed. Therefore, the author adds a new way to the research puzzle of explaining the development and construction of a region as well as the norms and practices that accompany it (cp. Hopf, 1998: 192). Using a constructivist approach and the theoretical framework by Ghica (2013), the author offers a multilevel explanation of the construction of one of the subregions in the European Union: The Nordic-Baltic Six. The main findings consist of, first, the confirmation of a solid regional awareness among the six countries. Therefore, the research clarifies previously existing divisions in research. Second, the research determines policy areas where one can expect a coherent regional voice: Foreign Affairs, Telecommunications, Internal Market and Consumer Affairs, Energy, Development, Institutional, Environment, Defense, and Security. Third, the research determines the following policy areas where one can expect an incoherent regional voice: Social Policy, Employment, and Enlargement. Fourth, several country-specific tendencies and characteristics could be confirmed. For example, the research contradicts previous research by confirming that the Baltics are more coherent than the Nordics. For developments after Brexit, the research confirmed the expected outcome by previous research that there was an increase in regional cohesiveness since 2019. Besides the main findings, the research also offers other intriguing tendencies and characteristics of the region for future research. Furthermore, the research is the first study using the concept of regionality for the Nordic-Baltic Six, adding a glimpse of development after Brexit to the literature.