Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Latin America Publication Year within 5 Years

51. The Hegemonic Transition in Latin America: To What Extent is China Challenging US’s Hegemony?

Author:
Andoni Maiza-Larrarte and Ricardo Bustillo-Mesanza
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
In this paper, we examine the geopolitical consequences of China’s enhanced engagement in Latin America. China is increasing its economic weight among Latin American countries, reinforcing its external image to counter the perception that the US is a unique relevant ally. In previous research, some authors have supported the idea that China could become a sort of neocolonial power in Latin America, substituting the hegemony of the United States. In this article, we carry out an in-depth review of Western literature and a comprehensive analysis of the bilateral relationship to discuss China’s role in the region. We apply the principles of the hegemonic stability and the power transition theories, and we also include an assessment of “soft power” components. We conclude that China is eroding US power in Latin America but is still far from becoming the new regional hegemon.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Hegemony, Transition, and Regional Politics
Political Geography:
China, Asia, Latin America, and United States of America

52. Informe Iberoamérica 2025: IV Cumbre UE-CELAC en Colombia: retos y promesas

Author:
Maria Victoria Alvarez, Bruno Theodoro Luciano, César Niño, Vicente Palacio, and Lennys Rivera
Publication Date:
04-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Fundación Alternativas
Abstract:
La IVª cumbre Unión Europea-CELAC, que tendrá lugar en Santa Marta (Colombia), los días 9 y 10 de noviembre de 2025, dará continuidad al diálogo político de alto nivel que se recuperó con motivo de la IIIª cumbre celebrada en 2023, y que dejó atrás unas relaciones interregionales paralizadas en esta escala durante más de un lustro. Transcurridos poco más de dos años, la cumbre de 2025 se producirá tras un intenso ciclo electoral tanto en América Latina como en la UE, y tras profundos cambios en el orden internacional que abren interrogantes en torno a las implicaciones que tendrá para las propias relaciones euro-latinoamericanas y caribeñas. Para alimentar los debates previos a este encuentro entre sesenta mandatarios de ambas orillas del Atlántico, el Informe Iberoamérica 2025 de Fundación Alternativas aborda, a lo largo de sus siete capítulos, distintos ángulos (medio ambiente, seguridad, inversión, comercio, cooperación, diálogo político) de una relación birregional de carácter estratégico llamada a relanzarse.
Topic:
Climate Change, Elections, European Union, and Political Science
Political Geography:
Colombia, Latin America, and Spain

53. Upwelling: Fishers Organizing for their Rights and Sustainable Fisheries

Author:
Judy Gearhart and Connor Moynihan
Publication Date:
05-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Fishers face increased risks to their lives and livelihoods. Climate change and overfishing are sending fishers out to sea for longer periods of time or at distances beyond the capacity of their vessels. In response, fishers are pursuing new strategies to organize, build power, and defend their rights. This paper presents lessons from fisher organizing in diverse sectors. It aligns with the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention 188 (C 188) on Work in Fishing, which defines fishers as all those working in marine capture, from artisanal fisherfolk to workers on the distant water fleet (DWF). The research reviews organizing trends in six countries and identifies common challenges and factors contributing to fisher organizing. In all six countries—Ecuador, Ghana, Indonesia, Mexico, Taiwan, and Thailand—new organizing initiatives have recently emerged. This research considers a range of dynamics that affect fisher organizing and their ability to access information, seek remedy, and influence policy outcomes. It provides insights from interviews with organizers and other fishery experts. The findings highlight areas where more work and strategizing are needed to build stronger and more influential fisher organizations.
Topic:
Climate Change, Sustainability, Labor Rights, and Fisheries
Political Geography:
Africa, Indonesia, Taiwan, Asia, Latin America, Mexico, Thailand, Ghana, and Ecuador

54. Ten Dimensions of Network Strengthening: Lessons from Health Rights Advocates in Guatemala, Mexico, and the Philippines

Author:
Julia Fischer-Mackey, Joy Aceron, Hilda Argüello Avendaño, Benilda Batzín, Francisco Gómez Guillén, and Rosaura Medina
Publication Date:
10-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Accountability Research Center (ARC), American University
Abstract:
Maintaining and strengthening networks of volunteers is central to the health rights advocacy work of four civil society organizations (CSOs) in Guatemala, Mexico, and the Philippines who have worked through networks to improve reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent healthcare (RMNCAH) services for marginalized communities. Their experience shows that networks of volunteers that represent marginalized populations and have the skills to engage with public authorities at different levels of government can confront the political and policy issues necessary to improve RMNCAH care. This Accountability Note captures the reflections of these CSOs on ten dimensions of network strengthening that they consider critical to their efforts to strengthen volunteer networks.
Topic:
Civil Society, Advocacy, Public Health, Marginalization, and Volunteers
Political Geography:
Asia, Philippines, Latin America, Mexico, and Guatemala

55. Mexico: A Pivotal State on the Global Stage

Author:
Ryan C. Berg, Rubi Biedsoe, and Michael Ferguson
Publication Date:
12-2025
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)
Abstract:
In his 1867 Manifesto to the Nation, Benito Juárez famously stated: “Among individuals, as among nations, respect for the rights of others is peace.”1 Spoken by Mexico’s first indigenous president, Juárez’s quote demonstrates Mexico’s view of the global order—that countries should promote national sovereignty, security, and prosperity through collaboration and dialogue rather than through intervention. Mexico effectively operates with one foot in the door of the Global North, via its position in North America, and one foot in the door of the Global South, as one of the leading economies and cultural powerhouses of Latin America. This hybrid role, characterized by some as a “pivotal state,” has created both opportunities for leverage and areas of tension with other countries, particularly with regards to its close but complicated relationship with its northern neighbor.2 A key player and beneficiary of a global economy underpinned by a U.S.-led order, Mexico has found itself in a state of “autonomy within limits,” by which U.S. interests oftentimes circumscribe Mexico’s range of potential actions.3 Being the United States’ southern neighbor both grants Mexico unmatched economic benefits and presents it with a delicate balancing act: In pursuing autonomy within limits, Mexico must maximize its benefits from the Western-led order while asserting its sovereignty and reducing its dependence on the order’s biggest players, especially the United States. This tension influences Mexico’s policy positions as its presidents balance nationalistic rhetoric at home and trying to assuage U.S. concerns. Mexico’s balancing act also exacerbates divisions between the country’s pro–Global North elites and its disadvantaged populations who have not received the benefits of global economic integration, which has led to the success of the social welfare and populist-oriented Morena party. Mexico’s effort to maintain relations with its neighbor to the north consumes most of its foreign policy energy. But Mexico’s foreign policy DNA, often described as noninterventionism or the Estrada Doctrine (after Foreign Affairs Minister Genaro Estrada), can sometimes undercut its desire to play a leadership role on the global stage. Mexico firmly believes that nonintervention in the internal affairs of other countries can earn it a seat at the tables that matter, allowing it to negotiate or mediate conflicts. In practice, however, Mexico has demonstrated little global leadership of late, preferring to stay on the sidelines (and under President Lopez Obrador, to focus on his project of domestic transformation). Mexico’s ultimate goal is to exert full sovereignty over its domestic affairs; it has also used its political capital on the global stage to openly criticize the role of U.S. sanctions and containment policies against Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela for contributing the region’s security and migration crises. Further, Mexico does not see the world through the West’s post–Cold War lens, but rather as a group of politically equal states. China and Russia are treated as normal states in the international system the same way Algeria, Ethiopia, or Thailand might be.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Geopolitics, and Strategic Competition
Political Geography:
Latin America, North America, and Mexico

56. Academic Year 2025–26 Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment

Author:
US Army War College
Publication Date:
07-2025
Content Type:
Book
Institution:
The Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College
Abstract:
Maintaining strategic advantage demands professional discourse from across the force. The Academic Year 2025–26 Annual Estimate of the Strategic Security Environment provides a framework for those aspiring to tackle the Department of Defense’s most pressing challenges. This year’s authors highlight trending challenges and identify potential tension points across 15 sections organized into four enduring themes. This survey of regional, domestic, and institutional challenges represents the collective expertise of the US Army War College. The narrative is supplemented by a tailored list of 100 command-sponsored questions from 43 different Army and Joint organizations from across the Department of Defense. Combined, the distinct yet complementary narrative and question list offer unique insights into the vital matters impacting defense organizations and provide aspiring researchers with a necessary starting point.
Topic:
NATO, Arms Control and Proliferation, Natural Resources, Budget, Deterrence, Artificial Intelligence, Xi Jinping, Strategic Competition, Defense Spending, People's Liberation Army (PLA), and Strategic Security
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Europe, Eurasia, Ukraine, Middle East, Asia, Latin America, and Indo-Pacific

57. Faith and gender: Evidence-building for GBV prevention in Africa and Latin America. SVRI Community of Practice – Working Group 1 on Evidence-Building

Author:
Rafael Cazarin and Sinethemba Makanya
Publication Date:
01-2025
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
The Sexual Violence Research Initiative (SVRI)
Abstract:
The Working Group 1 on Evidence-Building was initially created in October 2024 by an executive research team: Rafael Cazarin, Sinethemba Makanya, Nobantu Shabangu and Leonardo Andrade. Led by the intention to build a Community of Practise that would speak back to the ideals of the Sexual Violence Research Initiative, the CoP was informed by the main goal to connect practise-based narrative evidence from experts to inform policies on gender-based violence (GBV) prevention with faith actors and religious communities in the Global South. In the months following the CoP inception about 150 members joined the Working Group 1 CoP on LinkedIn. Members from various organisations contributed to building empirical evidence for GBV prevention in faith and religion contexts through a series of monthly online activities, including roundtable discussions, focus groups, a virtual learning webinar and a special blog series for the SVRI blog page. This report presents key findings from five focus groups with members of Working Group 1 (WG1), focused on gender-based violence (GBV) prevention in faith-based and religious settings. The discussions pursued two main goals: first, to identify region-specific challenges and methodological gaps across the Global South, while also highlighting opportunities and sustainable practises at the intersection of faith and GBV prevention; and second, to explore critical themes—such as SOGIESC, youth and masculinities, and local cultural and religious dynamics—to support the development of more inclusive and context-sensitive policies and practises.
Topic:
Religion, Gender Based Violence, Sexual Violence, Faith, and Violence Prevention
Political Geography:
Africa and Latin America

58. Governance Compared: Autocracy and Democracy in Latin America

Author:
Sarah Yerkes, Natalie Triche, and Amr Hamzawy
Publication Date:
11-2025
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Abstract:
The past several years have witnessed a dramatic democratic decline around the world. In both established democracies and hybrid regimes, anti-democratic and populist forces have challenged the notion that democracies are better for their citizens.1 Leaving aside values-driven arguments, authoritarian and populist leaders have touted the narrative that they are better at delivering to their citizens’ needs than democratic leaders. They then use such arguments to justify rolling back the rule of law and eroding checks and balances where they exist, while preventing either from taking root where they are not already present.2 While this narrative may hold weight with some citizens, its legitimacy has not been tested.3 That is, we do not know who is better at governing—autocrats or democrats. Repression and chilling environments for free expression, often found in autocracies, contribute to a lack of critical appraisals of governance deliverables. Thus, comparisons with democratic societies that permit vocal disdain for governance performance can be difficult.4 Additionally, lack of free access to information and limited pluralist deliberations about government policy enable autocracies to mystify their governance performance and hide their failings, thus manipulating the constrained political discussions that do occur among citizens.5 To critically evaluate claims that autocratic states are better at governance than democratic states, especially in the Global South, we designed a project comparing governance outputs in four regions of the world: the Middle East and North Africa; eastern, western, and southern Africa; Southeast Asia; and Latin America. To examine the diversity of governance models and the variance in performance across these regions, we focus on four country case studies from each region. The cases represent both democratic and authoritarian governments, and vary in terms of governance performance—ranging from high to low—in economic, social, and political outputs. In this article, we evaluate the Latin American cases—Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, and Uruguay—to test whether autocracies or democracies in the region are better at delivering on governance for their citizens. Ultimately, we argue that democracies in Latin America outperform autocracies on governance metrics. To assess how well countries in the Global South are delivering on governance outcomes, we defined four categories of governance indicators. The first includes socioeconomic indicators such as employment, poverty, income disparities, and access to services such as education, healthcare, and subsidies. An important aspect of this type of indicator is exclusion, meaning how access to services is distributed by gender, political group, social group, urban-rural location, and socioeconomic position. A second category describes another important aspect of governance: access to information. This includes variables such as transparency, academic freedom, arrests for free speech and political content, social media use by the public and elites, government internet filtering capacity and practice, government capacity to regulate online content, and government involvement in the dissemination of false information. A third category covers traditional political indicators including rule of law, separation of powers, checks and balances, and control of corruption. This also includes political equality measures like educational equality, health equality, and power distribution by gender, sexual orientation, social group, and socioeconomic position. The fourth category encompasses one of the more intangible aspects of governance—civil liberties, including access to justice, equality before the law, freedom of expression and association, freedom of domestic movement, freedom of foreign movement, freedom of religion, and property rights. In Latin America, we selected two more democratic governments that differ significantly in governance outcomes: Uruguay, which demonstrates high performance, and Colombia, which continues to face economic and social shortcomings and is confronted with political challenges that threaten social cohesion and democratic stability. We also selected two more autocratic governments: Bolivia, which exhibits relatively coherent economic and social performance (when compared to other authoritarian countries in the region), and Cuba, where governance crises are persistent and unresolved. In all four governance categories discussed in this article, both democracies project stronger performance than both autocracies. Importantly, many countries do not neatly fall into one regime type category. Rather, some of our cases (most notably Bolivia in the Latin American context) represent a hybrid model between democracy and autocracy. The 2025 elections in Bolivia are one example. The Movement for Socialism (MAS) candidate—whose party had held power in Bolivia for nearly twenty years—did not advance to the second round of the presidential elections, and the party lost almost all its seats in the legislature, but MAS made clear that it would accept the final election results. These four cases (Bolivia, Colombia, Cuba, and Uruguay) were selected for their individual characteristics as well as their applicability to the wider region. In addition to their different regime types and governance outcomes, we selected the cases to ensure variety. The cases span the region, with a Caribbean case (Cuba) and northern (Colombia), central (Bolivia), and southern (Uruguay) South American cases. They represent large and small countries, in both population and land mass. They include some of the wealthiest (Uruguay) and poorest (Bolivia) in the region. They represent countries that have been ravaged by civil conflict and weak institution-building processes, and those that have experienced a more peaceful history and built strong institutions. Furthermore, they are countries that are underrepresented in the literature.
Topic:
Governance, Reform, Democracy, Domestic Politics, Autocracy, and Democratic Backsliding
Political Geography:
Colombia, Uruguay, Cuba, Latin America, and Bolivia

59. The Militarization of Commercial Activity in Mexico

Author:
Irene Wang
Publication Date:
08-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
After building the Tren Maya, Mexico’s military has expanded its commercial reach in the Yucatán, with no regard for transparency or accountability.
Topic:
Accountability, Transparency, Militarization, and Commercialization
Political Geography:
Latin America and Mexico

60. Panama’s President Cracks Down on Unions

Author:
Corey Kane
Publication Date:
09-2025
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
The North American Congress on Latin America (NACLA)
Abstract:
Amidst protests, President José Raúl Mulino holds firm to social security reform while suspending habeas corpus and attacking unions and striking workers.
Topic:
Labor Issues, Reform, Unions, and Social Security
Political Geography:
Latin America and Panama