Conclusion: Rising to the Occasion: Coordinating Tumult

Abstract

What do the chapters in this book say about the relations between, and relevance of, the various levels of policymaking? Obviously, the topics dealt with in the 11 chapters were subjectively chosen, and analyzing them, as attempted through table 13.1, confirms this. Yet, some meaningful objective light is also shed by the chapters, individually and collectively: Regionalism cannot alone speak for North American dynamics; yet, no significant case is made that North American regionalism should be modified, replaced, or eliminated. A very cursory dichotomous appraisal (whether the four levels of analysis are relevant or not) is tabulated in terms of degrees (relevant, very relevant, or very, very relevant): While the degrees may be subjectively drawn, whether they are relevant or not is a more objective statement. Three broad pictures (outcomes) emerge: (1) In only one area is the North American region at least as relevant as the other levels, if not more—NAFTA’s investment arrangements; (2) the state proves to be the most compelling level of policymaking analysis in two areas—North America’s increasing border “thickness” and China’s North American engagements; and (3) subnational or global forces prove relatively more significant than other levels of policymaking in the remaining seven areas—with local forces being at least as important, if not more, than global forces in all of them.