José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
1-26
Regional Negotiations from a
Social Constructivist Perspective:
The Case of Angola’s Accession to the
SADC-Free Trade Area
As Negociações Regionais numa
Perspectiva Construtivista Social:
O Caso da Adesão de Angola à Zona
de Comércio Livre da SADC
Las Negociaciones Regionales desde
una Perspectiva Constructivista Social:
El Caso de la Adhesión de Angola a la
Zona de Libre Comercio de la SADC
DOI: 10.21530/ci.v21n2.2026.1649
José Abel Moma
1
Abstract
Regional negotiations involve more than material or rational factors,
as illustrated by Angola’s delayed accession to the Southern African
Development Community Free Trade Area (SADC-FTA) and the
willingness of its regional partners to accommodate Angola’s position.
Drawing on a social constructivist perspective, this paper treats
Angola’s accession as a case study to examine how social interactions
and ideational factors play a constitutive role in shaping states’
interests in regional negotiations. Based on documentary sources
and nine interviews with members of the Angolan government,
1 PhD in International Relations from the University of Lisbon (Portugal) and
a Master’s degree in International Relations from Ohio University (USA).
Professor of National Security, Intelligence, Foreign Policy, and Diplomacy
at the Academy of Social Sciences and Technologies (ACITE, Luanda) and of
Political Science at the Catholic University of Angola (Luanda).
(mjoseabel@yahoo.fr). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4205-4085.
Artigo submetido em 16/11/2025 e aprovado em 30/06/2026.
ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE
RELAÇÕES INTERNACIONAIS
Copyright:
• This is an open-access
article distributed under
the terms of a Creative
Commons Attribution
License, which permits
unrestricted use,
distribution, and
reproduction in any
medium, provided that
the original author and
source are credited.
• Este é um artigo
publicado em acesso aberto
e distribuído sob os termos
da Licença de Atribuição
Creative Commons,
que permite uso irrestrito,
distribuição e reprodução
em qualquer meio, desde
que o autor e a fonte
originais sejam creditados.
ISSN 2526-9038
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
2-26
senior officials from SADC, and representatives of Angolan industrial associations, the study
adopts an analytical and descriptive standpoint. It concludes that Angola’s accession to the
SADC-FTA cannot be explained solely by power politics or the rational calculation of economic
resources; rather, it is embedded within a social structure that shapes the meaning of power
distribution and the dynamics of the negotiation process itself.
Keywords: Regional Negotiations, Constructivism, Social Interaction, Free Trade Area,
Southern Africa.
Resumo
As negociações regionais não se limitam a fatores materiais ou racionais, como demonstra
a adesão tardia de Angola à Zona de Comércio Livre da Comunidade de Desenvolvimento
da África Austral (ZCL-SADC) e a disposição dos seus parceiros regionais em acomodar
a posição angolana. Numa perspectiva construtivista social, este artigo trata a adesão de
Angola como um estudo de caso para examinar como as interações sociais e os fatores
ideacionais desempenham um papel constitutivo na formação dos interesses dos Estados
nas negociações regionais. Com base em fontes documentais e em nove entrevistas, o estudo
adota uma abordagem analítica e descritiva e conclui que a adesão de Angola à ZCL-SADC
não pode ser explicada apenas pela política de regulação do poder ou pela racionalização
dos recursos económicos. Com efeito, a adesão está inserida numa estrutura social que
confere significado à distribuição do poder e aos próprios processos negociais.
Palavras-chave: Negociações Regionais, Construtivismo, Interação Social, Zona de Livre
Comércio, África Austral.
Resumen
Las negociaciones regionales no se limitan a factores materiales o racionales, como lo
demuestra la adhesión tardía de Angola al Área de Libre Comercio de la Comunidad de
Desarrollo de África Austral (ALC-SADC) y la disposición de otros Estados miembros
para acomodar la posición angoleña. Desde una perspectiva constructivista social, este
artículo considera la adhesión de Angola como un estudio de caso para examinar cómo
las interacciones sociales y los factores ideacionales desempeñan un papel constitutivo en
la configuración de los intereses de los Estados. Basado en fuentes documentales y nueve
entrevistas, el estudio adopta un enfoque analítico y descriptivo y concluye que la adhesión
de Angola no puede explicarse únicamente por la política de regulación del poder o por la
racionalización de los recursos económicos. Más bien, se inscribe en una estructura social
que otorga significado a la distribución del poder y a las propias dinámicas de negociación.
Palabras clave: Negociaciones Regionales, Constructivismo, Interacción Social, Área de
Libre Comercio, África Austral.
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
3-26
1. Introduction
Negotiation is widely regarded as an alternative to the use of force (Mautner-
Markhof 1989; Kremenyuk 2002) and, in the context of international trade, plays
a decisive role in leading states to join free trade agreements, as demonstrated by
Hungary’s accession to GATT (Nyerges 1989)2. Accordingly, negotiations remain
a central phenomenon in the study of international relations (Kremenyuk 2002;
Odell 2009; Odell and Tingley 2013), and theoretical approaches to negotiation
have proved particularly valuable (Pely and Shimoni 2019; Olekalns et al. 2020).
Research by Dinar (2000), Niemann (2006), Earnest (2008), Jackson (2009),
Odell (2009), Odell and Tingley (2013), and Faizullaev (2014) reflects a growing
concern with applying international relations theories to understand, explain,
and even predict negotiation processes with an international dimension. Despite
this growing body of work, the ideational foundations of negotiation have not
yet received the same level of systematic treatment as themes such as war,
globalization, international political economy, or international organizations.
Historically, studies on negotiation have relied predominantly on rationalist
perspectives, shaped by the epistemological environment in which they emerged
(Winham 1979; Niemann 2006; Odell 2009). A closer examination of the literature
on international negotiation reveals a notable gap: the lack of systematic studies
that examine negotiation, particularly regional negotiation, through the lens of
social constructivism.
Constructivism, which examines how international norms and identities shape
global relations (Dessler 1989; Wendt 1992, 1999; Poku 1998, 2001; Okafor 2004;
Ngoma 2005; Shannon and Kowert 2012), contributes significantly by highlighting
non-material and ideational factors, thereby addressing the core social-scientific
debate on agency and structure. As a procedural social theory, constructivism
emphasizes that reality, including international relations, is socially constructed
and grounded in ideational rather than material forces (Jackson and Sørensen
2006). This constructed reality inherently encompasses norms, which early
constructivist studies examined through normative behavior, socialization, and
normative emergence (Hoffmann 2010). Siles-Brügge (2014) shows how social
constructions sustain free trade; Heron and Murray-Evans (2017) demonstrate
2 Hungary was one of the first socialist countries in Eastern Europe to join GATT, in 1973, to support its economic
reforms, expand trade with Western economies, secure better access to international markets, and integrate
more deeply into the global trading system while remaining a socialist state.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
4-26
how discourse mediates asymmetrical bargaining; Murray-Evans (2020) challenges
materialist accounts of trade power; Munyi (2013) highlights the normative
foundations of state behavior; and Schimmelfennig and Sedelmeier (2002) explain
EU enlargement through both rationalist and constructivist lenses.
Although these perspectives also address trade negotiations and regional
integration, including in Africa, this research focuses specifically on the internal
dimension of regional relations through the lens of economic partnership
agreement negotiations. Accordingly, I adopt a social constructivist approach
to analyze regional negotiations, using Angola’s accession to the Southern
African Development Community Free Trade Area (SADC-FTA) as a case study.
Indeed, understanding why Angola’s regional partners in SADC were willing
to accommodate a non-immediate adherence to the FTA is challenging from a
rationalist or materialist perspective, which makes a constructivist approach
particularly relevant.
Established in 1992, the Southern African Development Community (SADC)
is an organization for political cooperation and economic integration, involving
16 States: Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC),
Eswatini, Mauritius, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia,
Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. Taking into account
that the SADC Treaty provides for the promotion of economic integration, the
member States signed, in 1996, the Protocol on Trade, which came into force in
2000; and approved, in 2003, the Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan
(RISDP). This plan provides for a schedule of actions, including the creation of
a Free Trade Area, launched in 2008. Yet, Angola did not immediately join the
area, having postponed its accession.
Angola’s decision for non-immediate accession and its roadmap were negotiated
within the region’s history of conflict and cooperation. The shared struggle for
independence and liberation from minority rule in Southern Africa has shaped
social interactions in regional relations and continues to influence negotiations.
This context frames regional negotiations as processes shaped by states’ social
and historical interactions, which are endogenous to the negotiation itself.
Considering that a purely rationalist perspective cannot fully account for the
willingness of Angola’s regional partners in SADC to accept its non-immediate
adherence to the terms of the FTA, this research addresses the following question:
What explanatory power does social constructivism offer for understanding
regional negotiations such as Angola’s accession to the SADC-FTA?
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
5-26
Accordingly, this paper aims to achieve the following objectives:
•To examine the applicability of constructivism to the analysis of international
negotiations at the regional level;
•To describe the social and historical interactional dimensions that shaped
Angola’s negotiating position in the context of the SADC-FTA.
Regarding methodology, this study acknowledges the diversity of approaches
available for analyzing negotiations (Carnevale & De Dreu 2006) and adopts
a qualitative, interpretivist paradigm to examine how social meanings shape
negotiating behavior. Designed as a case study, it focuses on Angola’s accession
to the SADC-FTA, enabling an in-depth analysis of negotiation dynamics in a
specific regional context. Primary data were collected through semi-structured
interviews with nine key participants (including Angolan government officials,
SADC Secretariat representatives, and experts from economic associations)
complemented by policy documents, communiqués, and regional trade reports.
The article is structured as follows: first, it explores the relevance of a
constructivist approach to regional negotiations, highlighting how shared norms and
social meanings shape inter-state interactions; second, it details the methodological
procedures; third, it examines Angola’s accession process, emphasizing the social
dimension of negotiations, including identities, beliefs, and practices; fourth, it
reflects on constructivist insights for understanding regional negotiation dynamics;
and finally, it concludes with a synthesis of findings and their implications for
regional negotiations studies.
2. The Relevance of a Constructivist Approach to Regional
Negotiations
Although negotiations are as old as human interaction, their systematic
study dates only to the 1930s (Zartman 2008) and spans disciplines such as Law,
Psychology, Communication, Management, and Political Science (Faure et al.
1998; Kremenyuk 2002; Thompson 2006). In international negotiations, realist
and rationalist approaches have predominated. However, as Zartman (2008) and
Winham (1979) note, realism alone cannot explain key aspects of international
negotiations. Institutions, particularly governments, are not unitary actors but
plural entities, generating multiple negotiation levels across domestic and external
arenas (Fisher 1993a; Lax & Sebenius 1986; Putnam 1988; Kremenyuk 2002).
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
6-26
Within realism, Waltz’s (1979) structural neorealism analyzes how international
structures condition actors, emphasizing power and resource distribution
(Bacharach & Lawler 1981; Fisher 1993b), forming the basis for a structural
approach to negotiation (Schelling 1980; Zartman 1993, 2002). Neoliberal
institutionalism, while acknowledging structures, posits that rational actors can
shape institutions to modify interaction patterns; yet, as Adler (1997) observes,
it similarly views behavior as primarily determined by external, material forces.
Although there is some degree of convergence between liberal institutionalism
and constructivism, particularly in their shared emphasis on ideas, institutions,
non-state actors, and goals that are not reducible to a strictly rationalist logic
of power, the two perspectives offer distinct interpretations of how norms,
institutions, and practices shape state interactions.
From a liberal institutionalist perspective, international institutions play
a central role in facilitating cooperation by providing formal structures, rules,
and procedural frameworks that reduce uncertainty, lower transaction costs,
and enable compliance monitoring (Keohane 1984; Keohane & Nye 1977).
Constructivism, by contrast, argues that both the propensity for cooperation and
the likelihood of conflict are socially constructed: positive patterns of interaction
can generate cooperative systems, whereas negative patterns tend to produce
hostile environments more consistent with realist assumptions (Wendt 1999).
Constructivism directly challenges several realist premises, some of which
are implicitly adopted by liberal institutionalism, by contending that identities,
interests, and behavioral norms are socially constituted rather than determined
by predefined material structures (Finnemore & Sikkink 1998; Wendt 1992;
Perachi & Daldegan 2025). Therefore, while liberal institutionalism recognizes
the influence of social factors, such as trust, shared expectations, and norms of
conduct, it treats them instrumentally, regarding the social sphere as relevant only
insofar as it strengthens the formal institutions that regulate political behavior.
Constructivism, by contrast, views the social sphere as constitutive of the political
sphere itself. Within this framework, identities, beliefs, and shared practices
shape state interests and orient political decision-making. The social dimension
thus operates not merely as a supporting element for institutions, but as the very
source of political legitimacy, meaning, and behavior.
Cognitive rationalist theories provide tools to analyze actors’ interactions
based on choices, contextual conditions, and levels of information and uncertainty.
As Wendt (1992, 392) notes, “rationalism offers a fundamentally behavioral
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
7-26
conception of both process and institutions: they change behavior but not
identities and interests.” From this perspective, structure is decisive, leaving
the formation of identities and interests unexplained. Neorealist and rationalist
approaches have dominated negotiation studies, emphasizing international
structures shaped by resource distribution. Even procedural perspectives, such
as Dupont and Faure (2002), adopt a rationalist framework, treating identities
and interests as exogenous (Winham 1979; Odell 2009). Janusch (2018) similarly
integrates rational and interactional dimensions into a combined theoretical
perspective.
In contrast, constructivism emphasizes non-material and social factors in
international relations. Negotiations, as mechanisms for managing international
relations, are shaped not only by actors’ rational choices or preferences (Adler 1997)
but also by shared knowledge and collective meanings. Studies by Cross (1977),
Niemann (2006), and Faizullaev (2014) illustrate this approach, while Jackson
(2009) highlights its relevance for conflict resolution, showing that constructivism
complements rather than opposes other frameworks. Understanding structure
and process as interaction offers significant explanatory power, particularly in
regional organizations such as SADC, where historical patterns and regional
identity shape negotiation dynamics.
In this article, regional negotiation is operationalized as a process through
which states within the same region, or sharing institutional values, transform
divergent or conflicting positions into agreement through dialogue. In economic
policy harmonization, where identities gain prominence, it is crucial to consider
not only the rational decision-making structures shaping negotiations but also
the social interactions influencing negotiators’ choices (Kesting & Nielsen 2020).
Constructivism considers identities and interests as endogenous to interaction,
since “structure has no existence or causal powers apart from process” (Wendt
1992, 395). This perspective underpins the analysis of negotiations, emphasizing
“the imprecision of parties’ interests in their own minds” (Zartman 1993, 153).
In this sense, negotiated identities and interests are neither pre-existing nor
exogenous; and cooperative or competitive positions (Walton & McKersie 1965;
Lax & Sebenius 1986, 2006; Pruitt 1993, 2002; Lewicki Hiam and Olander 1996)
emerge through the process itself. A state’s negotiating stance reflects not only
power structures but also the perceptions, expectations, and social interactions
that confer meaning.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
8-26
3. Methodological Procedures
This study followed a systematic set of methodological procedures aligned
with a qualitative, interpretivist paradigm, aimed at understanding how social
meanings shape negotiating behavior. The procedures were designed to ensure
rigor, transparency, and reliability of findings.
The study employed a qualitative research design, consistent with a
constructivist perspective. It was structured as a case study, focusing on Angola’s
accession to the SADC-FTA. This approach emphasizes the interpretation of social
phenomena, the construction of meaning, and the contextual understanding of
actors’ behaviors in negotiations (Druckman 2002). By concentrating on a single,
well-defined case, the study allows for an in-depth examination of negotiation
dynamics and the role of social and normative factors shaping outcomes.
Documentary analysis was employed as a primary methodological technique,
drawing on bibliographic sources related to constructivist theory, the literature on
negotiation processes, and materials pertinent to the case under examination. We
triangulated a wide range of official documentary sources concerning Angola’s
accession negotiations to the SADC-FTA, including reports, press releases, official
statements, testimonies, and interviews published by various media outlets. The
documentary analysis emphasized both the substantive content of these materials
and the contextual conditions in which they were produced.
To further elucidate the historical regional context and its influence on
Angola’s accession negotiations, we also applied discourse analysis in the sense
proposed by Putnam (2010). This analytical lens enabled us to examine how
discourse shapes negotiators’ interpretations of identity, interests, and patterns of
interaction. By analyzing official speeches and statements, we sought to identify
the processes through which meanings were constructed around the negotiation,
encompassing its political, technical, and social dimensions.
As the primary data collection instrument for the negotiation under study,
we conducted semi-structured interviews with key participants. This method
was selected to capture the depth and nuance of participants’ perceptions while
allowing for the cross-validation of responses, an approach also recommended
by Winham (1979).
A semi-structured interview guide was developed based on the specific research
questions, the literature on international negotiations and regional relations,
and a preliminary analysis of public statements issued by Angola’s Ministers of
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
9-26
Foreign Affairs and Planning regarding the SADC-FTA accession process over nine
years (2008-2017). These official statements highlighted recurring themes: on
one hand, concerns about entering an uneven competitive environment; on the
other, a deliberate commitment to engage with regional states while maintaining
a cooperative regional framework.
The interviews were designed to explore three overarching dimensions:
strategic vision, structural analysis, and actor interaction. While the study primarily
focuses on interaction, the inclusion of the other three dimensions provides a
comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon. From the same perspective,
Zartman’s framework on international negotiation (1999) had also employed
those dimensions to highlight their pivotal role in analytically approaching
negotiations shaped by cultural identity.
Therefore, although the study primarily focused on interaction, a
comprehensive understanding of the broader context and contours of the negotiation
was deemed essential. Accordingly, the interviews were structured around the
following thematic axes, which contributed to a deeper qualitative understanding
of the case: structure, strategic analysis, process elements, actors, and evaluation.
Table 1: Categories of the Interviews
Category
Code
Sub-code
Objectives
Guiding
Questions /
Topics
Question ID
I. Negotiation structure
St St-RF I.1. Regional Structural Factors.
Describe the structural elements of
power, knowledge, norms and the
positioning of States in the region and
how they have influenced Angola’s
negotiating position.
Which regional structural
elements influenced
Angola’s negotiating
position regarding SADC-
FTA accession?
1
St-GF I.2. Global Structural Factors.
Examine the structural elements of
international politics that condition
Angola’s position.
Which global structural
factors shaped Angola’s
stance?
2
St-IF I.3 Internal Structural Factors.
Analyze internal constraints,
especially power and knowledge,
which limit and enable Angola’s
effective economic integration into
the Southern region.
What internal political,
economic and security
factors influenced Angola’s
position?
3
continua...
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
10-26
Category
Code
Sub-code
Objectives
Guiding
Questions /
Topics
Question ID
II. Negotiation Strategic analysis
SA SA-SW II.1. Strengths and Weaknesses.
Address the first two dimensions of
a strategic analysis, strengths and
weaknesses, as applied to Angola’s
regional policy.
What information was
available and used to
form Angola’s negotiating
position?
4
SA-OT II.2. Opportunities and Threats.
Identify the economic and security
elements that influenced and
informed Angola’s position regarding
its accession to the SADC-FTA.
Which perceptions and
expectations determined
Angola’s position?
5
SA-PC II. 3. Preparatory Internal
Consultations.
Characterize the type of internal
discussion (political consultations
and debates) developed around
Angola’s accession to the SADC-FTA.
How would you characterize
the prior internal
negotiations?
6
III. Negotiation Process
PP-IP III.1. Angola’s initial negotiating
position.
Characterize in detail Angola’s
negotiating position as defined
internally and its presentation within
the context of the Southern region.
What was Angola’s initial
position and objectives?
7
P-EP III.2. Evolution of Angola’s position.
Describe the evolution of Angola’s
position regarding its accession to the
SADC- FTA, specifically the criteria
used to define postponements.
How do you characterize
the evolution of Angola’s
negotiating position?
8
P-RP III.3. Relationships among
Negotiating Parties.
Describe the relationships among the
States from a social and historical
perspective, and the interaction
among their representatives.
How do you characterize
interactions among the
States party to the SADC
Trade Protocol?
9
IV. Negotiation actors
A A-CE IV.1. Actor Characterization and
Expectations.
Reflect on the main identifiable
characteristics of the negotiators and
the expectations they have expressed
about the negotiation process.
How would you describe
the actors involved and the
expectations they expressed?
10
continua...
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
11-26
Category
Code
Sub-code
Objectives
Guiding
Questions /
Topics
Question ID
V. Negotiation evaluation
Ev Ev-DRR V.1. Domestic vs Regional
Negotiation Relationship.
Understand the relationship between
internal negotiation and regional
negotiation in terms of their mutual
influence and the reformulation
of Angola’s position regarding its
accession to the SADC-FTA.
What relationship exists
between domestic
and external (SADC)
negotiations on Angola’s
accession?
11
Ev-SHI V.2. Social and Historical
Interaction among States.
Reflect on the historical elements
and social interactions of the States
and the region’s political elites that
influence the negotiations in the case
under study.
Do historical and social
interactions among States
influence the negotiation?
12
Can SADC’s organizational
structures be considered
elements of regional
socialization?
13
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
Participant selection adhered to the principle of representativeness for relevant
actors. From the Government of Angola, entities associated with Foreign Affairs,
Trade, Planning, Industry, and the national SADC Secretariat were included. From
the SADC Executive Secretariat, officials with direct knowledge of the accession
process were selected.
All interviews were conducted individually, except for one joint interview
requested by two participants from the same ministerial department. One respondent
(I5) preferred to receive the interview questions via email and provided written
responses, while offering to clarify answers if necessary. The average interview
duration was 45 minutes. Most interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed;
three were not recorded at the request of the interviewees and were instead
summarized in detailed memos capturing key statements. Respondents were coded
I1 – I9 in chronological order of the interviews.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
12-26
Table 2: Summary of interviewed participants
Interviewee Relevant public functions Location Date Duration
I1 National Secretary, SADC National Secretary’s
office, Luanda
10.01.2017 50 m
I2 Director, SADC Office, Ministry of
Foreign Affairs (Angola)
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Luanda
07.11.2017 1 h
I3 Minister of Foreign Affairs (Angola) Residence, Luanda 21.03.2018 40 m
I4 Minister of Foreign Affairs (Angola) Hotel Alvalade,
Luanda
15.06.2018 42 m
I5 Director for Industrial Development
and Trade, SADC
SADC Secretariat,
Gaborone
04.09.2018 —
I6 Director, International Exchange
Office, Ministry of Trade
Ministry of Trade,
Luanda
03.08.2018 44 m
I7 National Director, External Trade,
Ministry of Trade
Ministry of Trade,
Luanda
03.08.2018 44 m
I8 President, Business Association Association
headquarters,
Luanda
13.06.2019 23 m
I9 Deputy Secretary, SADC Regional
Integration
Hotel Béu-Mar,
Luanda
30.06.2019 37 m
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
The interview responses were organized into thematic categories for content
analysis, based on five identified dimensions: structure, strategy, actors, process,
and evaluation. In line with current international standards of research transparency,
the study adopted an open-data approach for qualitative materials. The anonymised
interview transcripts were deposited in a secure online data repository (Zenodo),
ensuring both ethical protection and academic accessibility. This practice enhances
the integrity of the research, allows independent verification, and provides a
valuable resource for future comparative studies on regional negotiations and
social constructivism in Africa. These categories were informed by constructivist
themes such as social interaction, identity formation, and norm internalization.
The analysis focused on identifying the co-constitutive relationship between
discourse (ideas, narratives) and institutional design. Quotations from participants
were integrated directly into the analytical narrative to demonstrate how empirical
evidence sustains the theoretical argument.
Thus, the data analysis process privileged content analysis of the interviews,
situating participants’ statements within the contexts provided both by the
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
13-26
interviewees themselves and by the researcher’s reconstruction of historical and
situational indicators specific to the case. Attention was given to the frequency of
accounts and interpretations, as well as to both official and unofficial justifications
offered by interviewees regarding observed or experienced realities.
4. Results, Analysis, and Discussion
Having outlined the analytical framework, we now turn to the empirical
findings on Angola’s accession to the SADC-FTA. This subsection examines the
key factors shaping the country’s negotiating behavior, drawing on interviews
and documentary sources to capture both formal and informal dynamics. Moving
from the general framework to the specific case provides a nuanced understanding
of how material interests, political considerations, and socially constructed
meanings interact in regional negotiations.
This subsection presents the main findings on Angola’s accession to the
SADC-FTA, based on interviews and document analysis. The results show that
Angola’s negotiating behavior was shaped not only by material factors, such as
economic readiness and institutional capacity, but also by social and political
considerations, including regional identities, perceptions of vulnerability, and
the legacy of conflict. These dynamics indicate that Angola’s accession cannot
be explained solely by rationalist cost-benefit calculations, but reflects a complex
interplay of strategic interests, social meanings, and evolving expectations regarding
its role in Southern Africa.
The SADC-FTA, based on the principles of free membership, asymmetry,
win-win, and globality, seeks to eliminate trade restrictions among member
states by removing tariff and non-tariff barriers. Implementation has varied by
product category and each country’s development level. To date, 13 of the 16
SADC members (Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius,
Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe)
are implementing the FTA. Angola formalized its accession on 5 June 2025, while
the DRC and Comoros remain in the accession process.
Angola’s accession negotiations to the SADC-FTA were conducted at two
levels: political and technical. At the political-multilateral level, Heads of State
and Government, along with Ministers of Planning, Trade, and Foreign Affairs,
defined the general principles in line with the SADC Protocol on Trade. At the
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
14-26
technical-bilateral level, specialists from member states — mainly from trade,
finance, and foreign affairs ministries — developed each country’s trade offer,
with the SADC Executive Secretariat facilitating and providing technical support
throughout the process.
Although the accession process was largely peaceful, initial negotiations
revealed some disagreements over SADC-FTA implementation. As one interviewee
noted, “countries like South Africa and Botswana emerged in a brutal way, in
the sense of pulling all the benefits for themselves” (Interviewee I 2). In this
context, Angola clearly signaled no interest in immediate accession. Following
a working visit by the SADC Executive Secretary and Deputy Secretary for
Integration to assess readiness, the delegation did not travel to Luanda at the
Angolan government’s request (Redvers 2013). At the November 2012 SADC
Ministers of Trade meeting in Maputo, Angola reported no progress, citing ongoing
industrial restructuring, but remained open to technical support for preparing
its tariff liberalization offer. Subsequent missions, including one scheduled for
March 2012, were also canceled at Angola’s request, reinforcing its position of
non-immediate integration.
However, throughout the process, Angola actively participated in multilateral
negotiations on the SADC Protocol on Trade and the FTA, consistently requesting
a derogation period to recover infrastructure damaged during nearly three decades
of civil war. Other member states acknowledged these constraints and accepted
the legitimacy of Angola’s delayed accession.
At the political level, Angola consistently reaffirmed its non-immediate
accession in regional meetings, aligning its actions and omissions with this
position while expressing continued solidarity and commitment to regional
integration. Its stance reflected the lack of conditions for immediate accession,
a rationale accepted by other member states under the Protocol’s provisions
for derogations. Consequently, the SADC-FTA was launched in 2008 with a
moratorium allowing states like Angola to join when ready, paving the way for
ongoing technical negotiations.
At the technical level, tariff concession discussions have continued since
2003, when SADC Executive Secretariat experts assessed Angola’s readiness,
leading to the creation of a technical commission coordinated by the Ministry
of Industry and including Finance, Foreign Affairs, Planning, Trade, and the
SADC National Secretariat. The commission was revitalized in 2014 under the
Ministry of Trade and expanded to include Economy, Transport, Agriculture,
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
15-26
Fisheries, and Environment. Within the SADC-FTA technical accession framework,
Angola evaluated the economic feasibility of accession and developed its tariff
liberalization offer, with support from the SADC Executive Secretariat, considering
self-sufficient products, existing zero tariffs, South Africa’s relative economic
development, and the protection of strategic national products.
Angola signed the SADC Protocol on Trade in 1996, ratified it in 2003,
but opted for non-immediate accession to the FTA, with no fixed deadline
(Lourenço 2008). An indicative accession year of 2017 was set with an approved
roadmap, later revised in 2018. The Angolan commercial offer was submitted to
the SADC Secretariat at the end of 2019, presented to member states in March
2020, and reviewed in technical consultations in April 2020. SACU member
states requested clarifications on tariff disarmament, reflecting engagement with
Angola’s liberalization ambition.
At the 59th SADC Trade Negotiation Forum in May 2025, Angola’s final offer
was recommended for adoption by the Committee of Ministers of Trade. On 5
June 2025, at the 34th Committee meeting in Harare, Angola’s tariff offer was
formally adopted (SADC/CMT/34/6/2025.3.1), providing for the progressive
reduction of customs tariffs from October 2025, marking Angola’s technical entry
into the SADC Free Trade Area.
As outlined in the methodology, the interview guide was informed by an
analysis of statements by Foreign Ministers João Bernardo de Miranda (1999
— 2008) and Georges Rebello Chikoti (2010 — 2017) on Angola’s SADC-FTA
accession, drawn from Jornal de Angola and ANGOP between 2008 and 2017.
Key propositions emerged:
João Bernardo de Miranda: ratification of the SADC Trade Protocol as a
goodwill gesture; non-immediate FTA accession; recognition of post-war structural
challenges; emphasis on development asymmetries and South Africa’s economic
dominance; reliance on internal studies to assess accession assumptions.
Georges Rebello Chikoti: acknowledgment of SADC-FTA benefits; reaffirmation
of deferred accession due to infrastructure deficits and industrial destruction;
recognition of uneven benefits among members; need for domestic preparation
including reconstruction, diversification, institutional strengthening, and regional
integration planning; concern over potential trade imbalances; preference for
bilateral trade agreements and facilitation of cross-border mobility.
The propositions above highlight consistent themes: a concern over entering
an uneven competitive environment with the risk of marginalization, alongside a
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
16-26
commitment to engage with regional states and uphold a cooperative platform.
This duality explains both Angola’s repeated expressions of goodwill, such as
signing the Trade Protocol, and the successive postponements of accession,
justified by the need to ensure adequate domestic conditions for integration.
Structured interviews provided insights into Angola’s perceived position in SADC-
FTA negotiations, the key factors shaping its behaviour, the main challenges
identified, and overall negotiation dynamics, summarized in the table below.
Table 3: Synthesized Interview Responses
Interview Structure Strategies Actors Process Evaluation
I1 Structural
vulnerabilities
and limited
institutional
capacity
Cautious,
protective
approach; fear
of premature
liberalisation;
industry
protection
Domestic
institutions
Alignment of
domestic actors
was challenging
Negotiations
shaped by
asymmetries
and defensive
stance
I2 Post-war
recovery; fragile
private sector
Gradual
integration;
prioritising
economic
reconstruction
Government,
SADC
partners
Trust-building;
recognition of
Angola’s specific
context
Process
constrained
by external
pressure
for faster
liberalization
I3 Historical
legacies;
administrative
constraints
Slow but
cooperative
approach
National
institutions,
regional
bodies
Coordination
issues;
miscommunication
Flexibility
required to
accommodate
Angola’s pace
I4 Structural
disadvantage
within SADC
Longer
timelines;
confidence-
building
SADC bodies,
domestic
ministries
Lack of
harmonised
technical
information
Regional
solidarity
important
to accept
Angola’s
conditions
I5 Weak
consultation
mechanisms; low
private-sector
engagement
Complex
negotiations
perceived by
business
Private
sector,
government
Limited firm
awareness;
absence of clear
national strategy
Private sector
inclusion
insufficient,
affecting
coherence
I6 Fragmented
communication;
unclear domestic
priorities
Reactive
negotiation
stance
Government,
business
actors
Lack of dialogue
platforms
Need for more
participatory
processes
continua...
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
17-26
Interview Structure Strategies Actors Process Evaluation
I7 Legacy of
civil conflict;
emerging
industries
Emphasis on
risk mitigation
over
opportunity
maximisation
Domestic
political and
economic
groups
Ambiguity around
long-term vision
Negotiations
shaped by
divergent
expectations
within SADC
I8 Scarcity of
technical
expertise; desire
for legitimacy
Strategic
but cautious
decision-
making
Small core
negotiating
team
Reliance on
narrow group of
negotiators
Highlights
constructivist
relevance
of shared
identities and
perceptions
I9 Domestic
constraints;
reputational
concerns
Balance
domestic
constraints
with regional
commitments
Executive,
Parliament,
civil society,
SADC
Tension between
political
willingness
and economic
feasibility
Negotiations
show interplay
between
material limits
and social
meanings
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
The analysis of Angola’s accession and the interpretation of interviews within
the regional context indicate that the SADC-FTA’s flexible schedule is underpinned
by a shared social understanding. Historical experiences showed that purely
economic calculations had previously fueled regional conflict, particularly under
apartheid and minority rule. In response, institutional and normative frameworks
fostered mutual understanding, creating a common historical experience and
foundations for coordinated economic development.
The SADC Protocol on Trade embodies a social dimension of state interaction,
enabling political commitments, reinforcing cooperation, and promoting regional
integration. Angola’s accession model accommodates structural economic
weaknesses, reflecting the region’s history of conflict and cooperation, and
favoring an approach based on consensus, patience, and shared norms. Regional
cooperation thus carries both political and social significance, grounded in
common experiences and a constitutive vision of integration.
To address the limitations of purely political and technical approaches, Southern
African states adopted a strategy of flexibility, consensus, and differentiation. As
noted by a former SADC Secretariat official, the integration principle of variable
geometry acknowledges asymmetries and differing levels of development. The
absence of punitive measures for delayed accession reflects an interactional,
socially informed approach rather than a strictly results-driven one.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
18-26
Angola’s negotiating position has been shaped by historical interactions
and shared experiences, including the struggle against minority rule, regional
economic liberation efforts, the construction of political cooperation through
the FLS
3
, SADCC
4
, and SADC, and responses to destabilizing apartheid policies.
Identities and interests are socially constructed and endogenous to the negotiation
process, so Angola’s self-definition and recognized position within Southern
African regionalism are relational, legitimized by other states, and continuously
shaped through regional interaction. Material and domestic power factors operate
within this relational structure, underscoring that Angola’s stance is contingent
upon historical processes of regionalism.
Although several SADC member states were influenced by historical, ideational,
and identity-related factors, Angola represents a particularly significant case.
Like the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Comoros, which also delayed
or remained outside the full implementation of the SADC Free Trade Area due
to specific domestic priorities and constraints, Angola postponed its accession
for an extended period. However, in Angola’s case, this delay was shaped by the
interaction of post-conflict reconstruction priorities, state-building objectives,
perceptions of economic asymmetry, and socially constructed understandings of
regional integration. The value of a constructivist approach lies in explaining how
these factors were interpreted and mobilized within Angola’s specific domestic
and regional context.
5. Towards a Constructivist Contribution to the Understanding
of Regional Negotiations
Regional negotiations are often analyzed politically, as conflict management,
or economically, as gain maximization, while the social dimension remains
underexplored. A social constructivist perspective frames negotiations as relational
processes in which structures emerge, evolve, and transform through interaction.
Three key premises guide this approach: ideational alongside material factors
3 The Frontline States (FLS) were a coalition of Southern African countries that supported liberation movements
against colonialism, apartheid, and white minority rule, promoting decolonization and majority rule throughout
the region.
4 The Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC), established in 1980, was the predecessor
of SADC and sought to reduce regional economic dependence on apartheid South Africa while promoting
cooperation and development.
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
19-26
shape state behavior; identities and interests are dynamic; and these identities
and interests are endogenous to the negotiation process.
In Southern Africa, understanding regional negotiations requires moving
beyond material or structural analyses of power. The region’s cooperative order
is rooted in shared struggles for self-determination and collective management
of threats posed by minority rule. Negotiation structures are both material and
social: the meaning of resources (territory, economic capacity, institutional power)
is co-constructed through shared historical experiences (Ben‐Josef Hirsch 2021).
Angola’s SADC-FTA accession illustrates this constructivist insight, as hesitations,
phased integration, and repeated requests for derogations show how structural
factors acquire significance through social interaction.
Angola’s negotiation structure reflects both material and ideational
considerations. The SADC institutional framework (treaties, protocols, and the
Executive Secretariat) provides formal mechanisms, such as derogations and
phased accession, which enable differentiated integration based on domestic
readiness (I1, I2, I4, I5). Interviews show that Angola’s delayed engagement was
not merely a reflection of material limitations but also of socialized norms about
regional cooperation and shared historical experiences. Structural features are
thus endogenous: they exist only through interaction with domestic and regional
actors, and through their embedded meaning.
The Angolan strategy emphasizes gradual engagement and internal preparation,
consistent with constructivist premises. Identities and interests are dynamic,
shaped through interaction with other States and regional institutions (I2, I3, I6,
I8). Angola’s use of successive derogations, internal consultations, and targeted
industrialization plans reflects a deliberate approach that balances domestic
priorities, historical legacies, and regional expectations. Leadership transitions,
notably the rise of President João Lourenço, illustrate how identity and interests
evolve endogenously in response to internal consensus and regional signaling (I9).
The negotiation process itself constitutes a social construction. Sectoral
consultations, internal validations, and facilitation by the SADC Secretariat
are not procedural formalities; they are arenas in which positions, identities,
and expectations are co-constructed (I5, I6, I8). Historical precedents, such as
Angola’s participation in the FLS alliance, provide interpretive frameworks that
guide the meaning attributed to current engagements. Negotiating positions are
therefore emergent, not fixed, shaped by ongoing interaction, social learning,
and collective interpretation of past cooperation and conflicts.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
20-26
The multiplicity of actors involved, including government ministries, the
Presidency, business associations, and other SADC members, demonstrates that
identities and interests are collectively constructed (I8, I9). Actors’ perspectives,
competing priorities, and shared experiences contribute to the evolution of
Angola’s negotiating posture. The interaction among these domestic and regional
actors exemplifies the constructivist insight that positions, interests, and identities
are mutually constituted in negotiation, rather than merely determined by pre-
existing attributes.
The assessment of Angola’s negotiation behavior shows that strategic
hesitations, derogations, and recalibrations are expressions of socially informed
reasoning, rather than mere responses to material constraints (I4, I7, I8). Angola’s
delayed accession, cautious tariff offers, and attention to industrial preparedness
reveal that outcomes are co-shaped by shared norms, historical experiences, and
socialized expectations. Constructivist theory highlights that negotiation results
reflect not only choices informed by structural power but also the inter-subjective
meanings that actors attribute to these structures.
Table 4: Constructivist Mapping on Angola’s SADC FTA Negotiation
Negotiation
Category
Constructivist
Premise Analytical Interpretation / Evidence from Interviews
Negotiation
Structure
Ideational factors
shape meaning of
material structures
Angola’s engagement is influenced by SADC norms,
protocols, and mechanisms like derogations, which acquire
meaning through historical and social interaction (I1, I2, I4,
I5). Structural factors are endogenous to negotiation.
Negotiation
Strategy
Dynamic identities
and interests
Angola’s gradual integration, phased accession, and
industrialization strategy demonstrate that interests are
constructed over time, evolving with leadership, domestic
consensus, and regional signaling (I2, I3, I6, I8, I9).
Negotiation
Process
Positions
emerge through
interaction
Sectoral consultations, internal validation, and Secretariat
facilitation illustrate iterative social construction of positions
(I5, I6, I8). Past experiences (FLS alliance, regional
cooperation) inform interpretation and decision-making.
Negotiation
Actors
Social interactions
shape identities
and interests
Multiple domestic and regional actors contribute to evolving
positions, revealing collective construction of identity and
strategy (I8, I9).
Negotiation
Evaluation
Interests and
identities are
reformulated
Hesitations, derogations, and recalibrations reflect socially
informed choices, shaped by norms, shared history, and
collective expectations (I4, I7, I8).
Source: Author’s own elaboration.
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
21-26
From a constructivist perspective, Angola’s negotiating behavior cannot
be fully explained by material capabilities such as economic size, resource
endowment, or industrial capacity. Instead, ideational factors, historical experiences,
perceptions of regional norms, and political culture, play a central role in shaping
its interactions with other SADC member states.
For example, Interviewees 3 (I3) and 4 (I4) highlight how Angola’s post-conflict
experience and historical engagement in regional institutions influenced its gradual
adhesion to the SADC FTA, reflecting not only economic asymmetries but also
concerns over sovereignty, internal stability, and regional identity. Interviewee
2 (I2) adds that Angola’s strategy draws on lessons from comparative regional
experiences (EU, Mercosur, ECOWAS), underscoring the importance of knowledge
and norms in shaping expectations and policy choices. These insights confirm
that ideational factors, norms, historical experiences, and shared understandings
actively determine negotiation strategies and tactical choices.
Constructivist theory asserts that identities and interests are not fixed; they
are socially constructed and evolve through interaction. The interviews provide
multiple illustrations of this dynamic. Angola’s identity as a founding member of
SADC, combined with its self-perception as a regional economic actor, informs
both its cautious engagement and its strategic use of derogations to balance
regional commitments with national priorities (I4, I7, I5).
Interviewee 9 (I9) highlights how leadership change (President João Lourenço’s
assumption of office) produced a reconfiguration of national interests and
strategic vision, signaling that identities and policy objectives are responsive
to domestic political shifts and social consensus. Similarly, Interviewee 8 (I8)
underscores that domestic economic actors, such as business associations and
trade organizations, contribute to shaping the perceived interests of the state,
suggesting that these interests emerge from a complex negotiation among internal
and external stakeholders. This evidence supports the second premise: Angola’s
negotiating identity and interests are dynamic, shaped continuously by social,
political, and historical interactions rather than predetermined or static.
The third constructivist insight, namely, that negotiating positions are
endogenous to the process itself, finds strong support in the interviews. Angola’s
phased and cautious engagement with the SADC FTA illustrates that the state’s
positions are co-constructed with other actors over time, shaped by feedback,
learning, and ongoing consultations. Interviewee 5 (I5) notes that the drafting
of the FTA roadmap, the preparation of the tariff offer, and its validation
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
22-26
involved multiple internal and regional actors, highlighting a deliberative and
iterative process.
Moreover, the role of the SADC Secretariat as facilitator, and the influence
of other member states, reflects that Angola’s positions are socially situated within
a regional normative framework, rather than externally imposed or solely derived
from domestic capabilities. Interviewees 6 (I6) and 7 (I7) further point to the
adaptive nature of Angola’s strategy, responding to crises, economic shocks, and
evolving regional expectations. These observations exemplify the constructivist
principle that negotiating positions emerge from the interactional process itself,
demonstrating the endogeneity of both interests and strategies.
6. Conclusions
A social constructivist perspective highlights that negotiations are shaped
by both material and ideational factors, with identities, interests, and norms
evolving through social interaction. In Angola’s accession to the SADC Free
Trade Area, shared meanings such as post-conflict solidarity, regional trust, and
awareness of economic asymmetries influenced negotiating positions and decision-
making. The flexible accession approach adopted by SADC members reflects
a collective understanding of regional history, where cooperation, institution-
building, and shared norms have fostered gradual integration and regional
stability.
Angola’s accession to the SADC Free Trade Area demonstrates that state
interests and negotiating positions are socially constructed through historical
experiences, identities, and regional interactions. The case supports the
constructivist view that regional cooperation is shaped not only by material interests
but also by shared meanings and collective understandings. Consequently, the
social dimensions of negotiation are essential for understanding state behavior
and regional integration. The findings do not suggest that ideational factors are
unique to Angola, as similar patterns exist across Southern África. However,
Angola illustrates how historical identities, collective memories, and perceptions
of regional norms interact with domestic political and economic conditions to
shape distinctive negotiation outcomes. This supports the constructivist view
that state interests and negotiating positions are socially constructed through
interaction rather than determined solely by material power and capabilities.
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
23-26
References
Adler, Emanuel. 1997. “Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics.”
European Journal of International Relations 3 (3): 319–363.
Bacharach, Samuel B., and Edward J. Lawler. 1981. Bargaining: Power, Tactics, and
Outcomes. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ben-Josef Hirsch, Michal. 2021. “Historical Acknowledgment as an Early Conflict
Negotiation Strategy: A Feasibility Study of Israel/Palestine.” Negotiation Journal
37 (2): 163–191.
Carnevale, Peter J., and Carsten K. W. De Dreu. 2006. “Methods of Negotiation Research:
Introduction.” In Methods of Negotiation Research, edited by Peter J. Carnevale and
Carsten K. W. De Dreu, 1–3. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff.
Cross, John G. 1977. “Negotiation as a Learning Process.” Journal of Conflict Resolution
21 (4): 581–606.
Dessler, David. 1989. “What’s at Stake in the Agent-Structure Debate?” International
Organization 43 (3): 441–473.
Dinar, Shlomi. 2000. “Negotiations and International Relations: A Framework of
Hydropolitics.” International Negotiations 5 (2): 375-407.
Druckman, Daniel. 2002. “Content Analysis.” In International Negotiation: Analysis,
Approaches, Issues, 2nd ed., edited by Victor A. Kremenyuk, 288–314. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Dupont, Christophe, and Guy Olivier Faure. 2002. “The Negotiation Process.” In
International Negotiation: Analysis, Approaches, Issues, 2nd ed., edited by Victor
A. Kremenyuk, 39–63. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Earnest, David C. 2008. “Coordination in Large Numbers: An Agent-Based Model of
International Negotiations.” International Studies Quarterly 52 (2): 363–382.
Faizullaev, Alisher. 2014. “Diplomatic Interactions and Negotiations.” Negotiation Journal
30 (3): 275–299.
Faure, Guy Olivier, Laurent Mermet, Hubert Touzard, and Christophe Dupont. 1998.
La Négociation: Situations et Problématiques. Paris: Nathan.
Finnemore, Martha, and Kathryn Sikkink. 1998. “International Norm Dynamics and
Political Change.” International Organization 52 (4): 887–917.
Fisher, Roger. 1993a. “Negotiating Inside Out: What Are the Best Ways to Relate
Internal Negotiations with External Ones?” In Negotiation Theory and Practice,
edited by James W. Breslin and Jeffrey Z. Rubin, 71–79. Cambridge, MA: Program
on Negotiation Books.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
24-26
Fisher, Roger. 1993b. “Negotiating Power: Getting and Using Influence.” In Negotiation
Theory and Practice, edited by James W. Breslin and Jeffrey Z. Rubin, 127–140.
Cambridge, MA: Program on Negotiation Books.
Heron, Tony, and Peter Murray-Evans. 2017. “Limits to Market Power: Strategic Discourse
and Institutional Path Dependence in the European Union–African, Caribbean
and Pacific Economic Partnership Agreements.” European Journal of International
Relations 23 (2): 341–364.
Hoffmann, Matthew J. 2010. “Norms and Social Constructivism in International Relations.”
In International Studies Encyclopedia, edited by Robert A. Denemark. Oxford:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Jackson, Richard. 2009. “Constructivism and Conflict Resolution.” In The SAGE Handbook
of Conflict Resolution, edited by Jacob Bercovitch, Victor Kremenyuk, and I. William
Zartman, 172–189. London: SAGE.
Jackson, Robert, and Georg Sørensen. 2006. Introduction to International Relations:
Theories and Approaches. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Janusch, Holger. 2018. “The Interaction Effects of Bargaining Power: The Interplay
Between Veto Power, Asymmetric Interdependence, Reputation, and Audience
Costs.” Negotiation Journal 34 (3): 219–41.
Keohane, Robert O. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political
Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Keohane, Robert O., and Joseph S. Nye Jr. 1977. Power and Interdependence: World
Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown.
Kesting, Peter, and Rasmus K. Nielsen. 2020. “The Meaning of Intuition for the Negotiation
Process and Outcome.” Negotiation Journal 36 (3): 309–329.
Kremenyuk, Victor A. 2002. “The Emerging System of International Negotiation.” In
International Negotiation: Analysis, Approaches, Issues, 2nd ed., edited by Victor
A. Kremenyuk, 22–38. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Lax, David A., and James K. Sebenius. 1986. The Manager as Negotiator: Bargaining
for Cooperation and Competitive Gain. New York: Free Press.
Lax, David A., and James K. Sebenius. 2006. 3-D Negotiation: Powerful Tools to Change
the Game in Your Most Important Deals. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Lewicki, Roy J., Alexander Hiam, and Karen Wise Olander. 1996. Think Before You
Speak. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Mautner-Markhof, Feliks, ed. 1989. “Preface.” In Processes of International Negotiations,
v–vi. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Munyi, Eric N. 2013. Getting to Yes: Belief Convergence and Asymmetrical Normative
Entrapment in EU–ACP EPA Negotiations. SPIRIT PhD Series 43. Aalborg: Aalborg
University.
José Abel Moma
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
25-26
Murray-Evans, Peter. 2020. Power in North-South Trade Negotiations: Making the European
Union’s Economic Partnership Agreements. London: Routledge.
Ngoma, Naison. 2005. Prospects for a Security Community in Southern África: An
Analysis of Regional Security in the Southern African Development Community.
Pretoria: Institute for Security Studies.
Niemann, Arne. 2006. “Beyond Problem-Solving and Bargaining: Genuine Debate in
EU External Trade Negotiations.” International Negotiation 11 (3): 467–497.
Nyerges, János. 1989. “Hungary’s Accession to GATT.” In Processes of International
Negotiations, edited by Feliks Mautner-Markhof, 161–174. Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Odell, John S. 2009. “Breaking Deadlocks in International Negotiations: The WTO,
Seattle, and Doha.” International Studies Quarterly 53 (2): 273–299.
Odell, John S. & Tingley, Dustin. 2013. “Negotiating Agreements in International
Relations.” In Negotiating Agreement in Politics, edited by Jane Mansbridge and
Cathie Jo Martin, 144-182. Washington, DC: American Political Science Association.
Okafor, Obiora Chinedu. 2004. “The African System on Human and Peoples’ Rights,
Quasi-Constructivism, and the Possibility of Peacebuilding within African States.”
International Journal of Human Rights 8 (4): 413–430.
Olekalns, Mara, Donna Shestowsky, Sylvia P. Skratek, and Ann-Sophie De Pauw.
2020. “The Double Helix of Theory and Practice: Celebrating Stephen J. Goldberg
as a Scholar, Practitioner, and Mentor.” Negotiation and Conflict Management
Research 13 (1): 85-97.
Pely, Daniel, and David Shimoni. 2019. “The Culture of Interest: A Proposed Addition
and Revision of the Three-Culture Model.” Negotiation Journal 35 (3): 247–268.
Perachi, Andressa, and William Daldegan. 2025. “Building a BRICS Identity: Analysis
from a Constructivist Perspective.” Carta Internacional 20 (1): 1–24.
Poku, Nana. 1998. “Constructivism and Third World Research.” International Relations
14 (2): 35–45.
Poku, Nana. 2001. Regionalization and Security in Southern África. New York: Palgrave.
Putnam, Robert D. 1988. Diplomacy and Domestic Politics: The Logic of Two-Level
Games. International Organization 42 (3): 427-460.
Putnam, Linda L. 2010. “Negotiation and Discourse Analysis.” Negotiation Journal 26
(2): 145–54.
Pruitt, Dean G. 1993. “Strategic Choice in Negotiation.” In Negotiation Theory and
Practice, edited by James W. Breslin and Jeffrey Z. Rubin, 27–46. Cambridge, MA:
Program on Negotiation Books.
Regional Negotiations from a Social Constructivist Perspective: The Case of Angola’s [...]
Rev. Carta Inter., Belo Horizonte, v. 21, n. 2, e1649, 2026
26-26
Pruitt, Dean G. 2002. “Strategy in Negotiation.” In International Negotiation: Analysis,
Approaches, Issues, 2nd ed., edited by Victor A. Kremenyuk, 85–96. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Redvers, Louise. 2013. Angola, the Reluctant SADC Trader. Occasional Paper 152.
Johannesburg: South African Institute of International Affairs.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1980. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Schimmelfennig, Frank, and Ulrich Sedelmeier. 2002. “Theorizing EU Enlargement:
Research Focus, Hypotheses, and the State of Research.” Journal of European Public
Policy 9 (4): 500–528.
Shannon, Vaughn P., and Paul A. Kowert, eds. 2012. Psychology and Constructivism in
International Relations: An Ideational Alliance. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Siles-Brügge, Gabriel. 2014. “Explaining the Resilience of Free Trade: The Smoot–Hawley
Myth and the Crisis.” Review of International Political Economy 21 (3): 535–574.
Thompson, Leigh L. 2006. “Negotiation: Overview of Theory and Research.” In Negotiation
Theory and Research, edited by Leigh L. Thompson, 1–5. New York: Psychology
Press.
Walton, Richard E., and Robert B. McKersie. 1965. A Behavioral Theory of Labor
Negotiations: An Analysis of a Social Interaction System. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Waltz, Kenneth N. 1979. Theory of International Politics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction
of Power Politics.” International Organization 46 (2): 391–425.
Wendt, Alexander. 1999. Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Winham, Gilbert R. 1979. “Practitioners’ Views of International Negotiation.” World
Politics 32 (1): 111–131.
Zartman, I. William. 1993. “Common Elements in the Analysis of the Negotiation
Process.” In Negotiation Theory and Practice, edited by J. William Breslin and Jeffrey
Z. Rubin, 147–59. Cambridge, MA: Program on Negotiation at Harvard Law School.
Zartman, I. William. 2002. “The Structure of Negotiation.” InInternational Negotiation:
Analysis, Approaches, Issues, edited by Victor Kremenyuk, 71–84. 2nd ed. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Zartman, I. William. 2008. Negotiation and Conflict Management: Essays on Theory
and Practice. New York: Routledge.
