Abstract

The traditional role of national boundaries is undergoing significant change as countries become increasingly interdependent. Efforts to reconcile exclusionary border security practices with the economic imperatives of globalisation and regional integration challenge policy-makers in the development of effective border control strategies. As a result, the policy discourse related to borders has evolved to the level of "high politics". Using a process tracing methodology applied to Canada-US border management in the period following NAFTA and ending with the signature of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America , the main purpose of this essay is to determine the factors explaining the degree of integration of border management policies between both countries. The theoretical basis of the analysis relies on neofunctionalism, liberal intergovernmentalism, transgovernmentalism and realism. These theories are used to identify the key variables of interest and to serve as alternate explanations. The findings suggest that the evolutionary process of Canada-US border policies does not precisely follow any theoretical framework. Rather, the factors influencing the level of integration of border management are driven by international security threats, international economic threats, and the interplay of powerful economic interest groups. However, in response to an economic threat, the process predicted by liberal intergovernmentalism occurs, while in the particular case of a security-related threat, realism provides accurate insight. When both types of threat exist simultaneously, the threat considered dominant by the more powerful country drives the final policy outcome. Consequently, a continued focus by the US on "homeland security" favours a realist interpretation