-Summary:

• Rationale:

The African continent's governance and integration efforts exhibit distinctive trajectories compared to other global regions. Historically rooted in political unity and sovereignty preservation, African governance has evolved through a complex interplay of normative adoption, adaptation, and indigenous agency. This research seeks to analyze the normative frameworks shaping African governance, critically examining external influences, inherent biases, and the dynamics of African agency in crafting governance norms and institutions.
Africa, with its vast geographical expanse and diverse population, embarked on an ambitious continental integration project aimed at political and economic unification. Unlike the European Union's gradual expansion and economic focus, African integration emphasized political unity to eradicate colonial legacies. Pan-Africanism, epitomized by leaders like Kwame Nkrumah, advocated for a federated "United States of Africa" to counteract the risks of fragmentation and neo-colonialism. However, the Organization of African Unity (OAU) prioritized sovereignty and territorial integrity, navigating competing visions of integration amidst internal and external pressures.
African governance norms reflect both colonial legacies and post-colonial adaptations. Pre-independence colonial federations and regional organizations influenced institutional structures, often resulting in "normative hysteresis," where colonial practices persisted post-independence. For instance, the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) and the CFA franc zone exemplify colonial-era economic frameworks that shaped regional integration. These structures were later transformed through initiatives like the Abuja Treaty (1991), which envisioned a continental common market, and Agenda 2063, which emphasizes Africa's global positioning.
The neoliberal turn in governance norms, influenced by post-Cold War structural adjustment policies, reoriented African integration from political sovereignty to market-driven economic growth. Initiatives like the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD) underscore this shift, aligning governance norms with global liberalization paradigms while integrating external and indigenous perspectives.
Dominant frameworks assessing African governance often reflect Western-centric normative standards, such as "good governance," democracy, and state efficiency. These frameworks risk misrepresenting African dynamics by imposing external criteria on diverse local contexts. For example:
1.    Democracy: The concept has evolved from independence struggles to encompass human rights and participatory governance, reflecting historical and cultural specificities.
2.    Development Metrics: Indicators like the Human Development Index (HDI) emphasize normative constructs rather than contextual realities.
3.    Sovereignty: The linear delimitation of borders contrasts with indigenous spatial governance systems, highlighting the limitations of imported frameworks.
4.    Institutional Evaluations: African states are often labeled as "weak" or "failed" when assessed against decontextualized norms, undermining their unique governance practices.
To address these biases, this research advocates for a contextualized understanding of norms, recognizing the pluralistic and evolving nature of governance in Africa.
African agency, as demonstrated through the African Union (AU) and its African Governance Architecture (AGA), plays a pivotal role in shaping governance norms. The AU's initiatives on climate change, migration, and peacebuilding illustrate its capacity to articulate collective African positions. However, normative power dynamics extend beyond institutional frameworks, encompassing multilateral engagements and localized epistemic communities. This research emphasizes the importance of identifying these actors and their contributions to norm creation.

• Methods:

To study the normative dynamics of African governance, this research employs a multi-level methodological framework:
1.    Global Level: Post-positivist approaches in international relations theory analyze discourses, power dynamics, and normative transfers, challenging Eurocentric assumptions.
2.    Regional Level: Comparative public policy analysis highlights the distinctiveness of African governance within the global system, emphasizing contextual and historical factors.
3.    Local Level: Ethnomethodological studies explore the representations and preferences of local actors, incorporating indigenous knowledge systems into governance analysis.
This integrative methodology seeks to balance the rigor of classical approaches with the inclusivity of localized perspectives, fostering a comprehensive understanding of African governance.
The analyses will be the subject of the publication of a book (Yousra Abourabi, Julien Durand de Sanctis & Jean-Noël Ferrié. African Continental Governance: Normative trends and Agency Challenges), for which a contract has been signed with Palgrave MacMillan Eds, 250 p) and whose publication is scheduled for the end of 2025

• References:

1.    Addaney, Michael, Michael Gyan Nyarko, and Elsabé Boshoff, eds. 2020. Governance, Human Rights, and Political Transformation in Africa. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-27049-0.
2.    Bach, Daniel. 2016. Regionalism in Africa. Genealogies, Institutions and Trans-State Networks. Routledge Studies in African Politics and International Relations. London and New York: Routledge.
3.    Bilgin, Pinar. 2008. “Thinking Past ‘Western’ IR?” Third World Quarterly 29 (1): 5–23.
4.    Diouf, Abdou. 2006. “Afrique: L’intégration Régionale Face à La Mondialisation.” Politique Étrangère, April, 785–97.
5.    Dunn, Kevin C., and Timothy M. Shaw, eds. 2013. Africa’s Challenge to International Relations Theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
6.    Hugon, Philippe. 2003. “Les Théories de La Régionalisation.” In Les Economies En Développement à l’heure de La Mondialisation, edited by Philippe Hugon, 33–79. Paris: Karthala.
7.    Karbo, Tony, and Tim Murithi. 2017. The African Union: Autocracy, Diplomacy and Peacebuilding in Africa. Bloomsbury Publishing.
8.    Makinda, Samuel M., F. Wafula Okumu, and David Mickler. 2015. The African Union: Addressing the Challenges of Peace, Security, and Governance. Routledge.
9.    Nkrumah, Kwame. 2009. Le consciencisme. Paris: Editions Présence Africaine.
10.    Smith, Karen. 2009. “Has Africa Got Anything to Say? African Contributions to the Theoretical Development of International Relations.” The Round Table 98 (402): 269–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/00358530902895378.
11.    Tickner, Arlene B. 2003. “Seeing IR Differently: Notes from the Third World.” Millennium 32 (2): 295–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298030320020301.
12.    Yusuf, Abdulqawi A., and Fatsah Ouguergouz. 2012. The African Union: Legal and Institutional Framework: A Manual on the Pan-African Organization. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.