Introduction

This article deals with the process of establishing the Espacio Latinoamericano y Caribeño de Educación Superior-ENLACES (Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education). It is the result of a doctoral-level research project that analyzed the obstacles and advances in the development of ENLACES.

The proposal for the establishment of ENLACES was introduced at the II Conferencia Regional de Educación Superior en América Latina y el Caribe (II Regional Conference on Higher Education for Latin America and the Caribbean), held in Colombia in 2008. This proposal is part of a set of initiatives aimed at converging higher education at the regional level.

As stated in the Declaración de la Conferencia Regional de Educación Superior-^{CRES (2008)} (Declaration of the Regional Conference on Higher Education), Latin American and Caribbean academic integration is an indispensable achievement and an essential action for the future of the continent. In the globalized world where knowledge, science, and technology play a pivotal role, strengthening higher education is considered an essential part of the region’s development. In this regard, ^{Gacel-Ávila (2018)} emphasizes the fundamental importance of building a Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education, which should be established based on regional criteria.

^{Motter and Gandin (2016)} point out that universities’ commitment to the regional integration process has gained prominence in the last two decades. There is a recent trend of building networks among Latin American universities, which can be seen as a potent endogenous driving force for regional integration. In this context, according to ^{Fernández Lamarra (2010)}, processes and actions of cooperation and regional integration in higher education in Latin America become relevant².

^{Robertson and Dale (2018)} highlight the upward performance of the higher education sector in regional projects, also stating that one way to view this process is to understand it as a form of higher education regionalism.

In the mid-1990s, a distinct situation emerged in Latin America, which, according to ^{Motter and Gandin (2016)}, ushered in democratic experiences. Among the political novelties, this allowed for the emergence of a new regionalism.

Thus, in the context of advancing regional integration and the dissemination of regional projects globally, it is possible to identify a different form of regionalism, which, as per ^{Hettne (2002)}, can be characterized as new regionalism.

New regionalism becomes an extremely relevant perspective in understanding the regional academic integration process since, as conceived by Azevedo (2018a), higher education plays an essential role in the regionalization process and in shaping regional identity.

For ENLACES, the challenge lies in coordinating the convergence of higher education systems in the region. It is assessed that to achieve this convergence, there must be a development of a regional identity, which can be understood, based on ^{Hettne (2005)}, as regionality, pointing towards regional cohesion.

In this regard, the analysis presented here was conducted through the lens of the new regionalism proposed by Björn Hettne and Fredrik Söderbaum, which provides important insights for reflecting on regional integration processes in the globalized world. Furthermore, the research followed a qualitative approach and used content analysis techniques to explore the data. Moreover, it included conducting 13 semi-structured interviews with individuals involved in the ENLACES construction process. Of these, 12 are included in this text, with four of them referred to by pseudonyms (Rodrigues, García, Ramos, and Molina) to protect their identities.

Based on this background, it was possible to consider what kind of common space for higher education is being proposed and formulate the following categories of analysis to understand this process: a) obstacles and progress in the ENLACES process; and b) directions for the consolidation of ENLACES. These categories are addressed throughout the text.

The Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education (ENLACES)

The foundations for the establishment of the Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education-ENLACES were laid in 2008 at the Conferencia Regional de Educación Superior-CRES held in June 2008 in Colombia. It was stated through the Conference’s Declaration that the construction of a Latin American and Caribbean Higher Education Meeting Space-ENLACES is fundamental (^{CRES, 2008}). It is further highlighted in this document that this would be a fundamental initiative to achieve regional integration in its essential aspects.

Within the framework of CRES, ^{Carvalho (2010)} asserts that it calls upon all institutions related to higher education, not just the States and their ministries, to participate in the establishment process of ENLACES and proposes a strategy directly linked to these institutions-since they form the foundation of national systems of higher education.

Nevertheless, when examining the documents resulting from ^{CRES 2008}, namely the Action Plan and the Declaration, it is possible to consider that among those responsible for implementing ENLACES, the specific realms of higher education, such as universities and other higher education institutions, are not directly named. Instead, this responsibility is attributed to governments and multilateral organizations. However, it was the universities and university organizations that committed to the process of creating this Space (^{CANZANI, 2019}).

From its gestational beginnings in 2008 up to the present moment, more than a decade has been dedicated to the formation of this Space, as can be observed below.

Process of ENLACES establishment: obstacles and advances

To understand whether ENLACES has achieved any relevance and contributed to academic integration in the region, it is necessary to highlight both the advances that has occurred in this process and to point out the obstacles. Examining these obstacles in some way helps to understand the areas that need refinement for this process to develop. The perspective of those who have participated or are currently involved with ENLACES sheds light on latent aspects of this process and reinforces evident factors linked to the attempt at academic integration in the Latin American and Caribbean region.

Among the obstacles, we have: lack of funding, disagreements regarding ENLACES management, some not fully grasping the importance of this space, corporate and ideological issues, heterogeneity among countries and educational systems, IESALC’s distance in this construction process, power struggles, among others. As for the advances, we have: the establishment of regulations, understanding and the establishment of commitment and university social responsibility policies, awareness that progress was necessary, cooperation among regional associations, partnership with the Programa de Intercambio Académico Latinoamericano-PILA (Latin American Academic Exchange Program), and the political nature of ENLACES.

In general, Meneghel (2021) points out that the moments following the launch of ENLACES were not favorable. According to her, the time when the Space was proposed was opportune because “Ana Lúcia [a Brazilian, former rector of UFMG] was leading IESALC and other rectors and association presidents and councils were encouraging and favoring regional integration and prioritizing this type of debate,” however, “in recent years, this has ceased to happen. Not only in Brazil, but in several other countries.”

As ENLACES participants, interviewees Ramos and Molina (2021) cite the lack of funding as one of the central elements. Molina (2021) believes it is difficult to reach an agreement among countries to finance a Latin American program, specifically here ENLACES. He also highlights that one possible solution would be for universities themselves to allocate funds for this purpose. Interviewee Jorge (2021) reflects, “If universities could implement ENLACES, I am sure they would have enough influence to prompt funding agencies to open a funding line in this direction.”

It should be noted that funding is an important point in the path toward consolidation, as it would promote the feasibility of actions. According to Fiorentini (2021), the issue of who funds is fundamental. The existence of a public fund administered by the ENLACES council or executive secretariat, from which Space’s plans are managed, is essential. The interviewee emphasizes that “there must be a public fund; each university or government contributes a little money to this fund.” However, he also points out that some actors associated with ENLACES advocate for funding through consortiums with private banks. This has also generated conflicts in the process.

A financing fund is one of the indicative strategies mentioned in the Action Plan of CRES 2018, which suggests that a fund should be designed and included for the proper development of ENLACES (PLAN DE ACCIÓN 2018-2028). Both the Action Plan and Fiorentini (2021) explicitly state the need for this procedure for the progress of the Space. However, the Plan does not clarify the type of fund it should be. In this process, as ^{Canzani and Araújo Filho (2018)} argue, it is essential to create:

[...] an environment of greater political and financial support from the government sectors in the region, which, along with the experience accumulated through the work of regional and national higher education networks in Latin America and the Caribbean, and their expertise, will advance the Space in achieving its objectives (^{CANZANI; ARAÚJO FILHO, 2018}, p. 178).

In the same vein, García (2021) also highlights funding as one of the fundamental issues affecting the development of ENLACES. The other, which the interviewee considers the main one, is that the process of this Space is not being managed by universities but by organizations, namely, councils of rectors and academic networks.

According to Jorge (2021), a major obstacle is to create understanding within and among universities that it makes sense to have this space, in addition to corporate and ideological issues. The interviewee believes that one way for ENLACES to progress is to carry out actions in which universities share the importance of consolidating the Space for the region. In his view, it is necessary to continue raising awareness among people and universities about this process until a more intensive movement is generated that leads to its consolidation. In his opinion, there is “no chance of something like ENLACES happening through government policy decisions in Latin America.”

Speller (2021), in turn, does not see differences and the diversity of political and strategic positions as a major obstacle. For the interviewee, the challenge lies in creating a structure that can accommodate this diversity, in addition to the operational difficulties due to the region’s high level of fragmentation.

There is a need in the region, according to Oppermann (2021), for a greater culture of integration than what currently exists. Furthermore, according to interviewee Meneghel (2021), there is no culture of internationalization in the region, and resources are becoming increasingly scarce. In this regard, Molina (2021) emphasizes that there is no integrationist vision in the region; the interviewee points this out within the institutional context by stating:

I believe that a significant part of the responsibility for the lack of progress in the process lies with university authorities, primarily rectors, because they act and prioritize their own institutional needs, looking inward, without a firm integrative vision. Also, rectors change rapidly, and that is another weakness in our region. Each new arrival in a leadership position is like starting the story all over again (MOLINA, 2021).

In this way, it is also possible to consider that the turnover of individuals in the institutions that support the development of ENLACES seems to promote, to some extent, a discontinuity in the process. If a leader of a higher education institution has a connection with ENLACES and supports its development, they will bring knowledge of the Space and involve the actors present within their institution, allowing it to gain strength in that context. However, if that leader leaves and is replaced by someone who has no connection with ENLACES, the proposal for the Space may lose relevance in that environment. It should also be noted that the lack of awareness among actors within universities about this Space can be a factor influencing its progress. This was to some extent what happened during the tenure of former rector Jorge, as he reported:

I coordinated ENLACES within UDUAL and was also a university rector at the same time, so I involved the university [...]. We had several meetings, the issue was disseminated within the university, it was well-discussed, [...], the matter was present, the undergraduate pro-rector’s office was involved, course coordinators [...], everyone knew about the discussion, etc. [...] My term ended, I left, and it was over, the issue did not persist (JORGE, 2021).

According to Maillard (2021), heterogeneity among countries, among the higher education systems of each country, and even within large countries, such as among various universities, is a hindrance. For the interviewee, the case of postgraduate education in the region is an example. Brazil stands out in this regard, “even when compared to the strong countries” in the region; and, with regard to smaller countries, “postgraduate education is almost non-existent.” In view of this, interviewee Meneghel (2021) reinforces that Brazil has “the most structured postgraduate system in Latin America,” being the “broadest, most structured,” and the “largest producer of internationally acclaimed papers.”

In this sense, Maillard (2021) points out that this factor, as well as others, influences when it comes to defining programs, as what is a priority for one system is not necessarily a priority for another.

There are also barriers that have emerged in the course of this process related to aspects such as: 1) the distancing of IESALC in this path of building the Space; 2) power struggles or, as ^{Forero (2019)} described it, the “owner syndrome”; and 3) the lack of a presidency of the Board of Directors until November 2021⁶.

Another aspect that can be pointed out as an obstacle to the process of this Space is related to the non-realization-due to the coronavirus pandemic-of the second Ordinary Conference of ENLACES, which was scheduled to take place in March 2020⁷. There was an expectation that, with this conference, new steps would be taken, as it was hoped that this occasion would provide greater institutionalization to the Space.

Considering the 2018 CRES, ^{Perrotta and Del Valle (2018)} pointed out unresolved issues regarding the 2008 CRES declaration. Among them is “the inability to develop and complete a work program to achieve ENLACES” (p. 54). From this perspective, interviewee Jorge (2021) states that ENLACES has not shown significant progress in terms of its impact on integration, as he views the Space as still very embryonic and unable to produce results in that regard. For García (2021), evolution within ENLACES is practically non-existent. What has been achieved is the Programa de Intercambio Académico Latinoamericano-PILA, which involves some students. However, according to the interviewee, ENLACES has not achieved anything beyond discussing and making political statements.

In terms of higher education integration, according to Molina (2021), in “Latin America, we talk a lot and do little.” Integration in the region is widely discussed, but “no country is willing to yield power in favor of such a supranational organization”; furthermore, “there is always a leadership dispute that tends to be very detrimental to an integration process.” In the interviewee’s view, ENLACES has worked in part because it is being coordinated to a large extent from Uruguay (by AUGM)⁸, a smaller country, thus not generating major disputes.

Thus, ENLACES is going through a construction process and is still in the process of establishing its full institutionalization. However, it is considered that this organization, in its pursuit of realizing ENLACES, as well as the awareness of the actors involved in this process regarding the relevance of this Space, can be seen to some extent as progress.

Regarding the advancements, the consensus reached for the institutionalization of the space is considered as the first step in this process, which resulted in the foundational document Líneas de Desarrolo Estratégico del Espacio Latinoamericano y Caribeño de Educación Superior (Strategic Development Lines of the Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education), released in 2015. This document, according to ^{Canzani and Araújo Filho (2018)}, allowed for the initial institutionalization of ENLACES, with the support of 19 higher education bodies in the region: national bodies from 13 countries, four international networks, and Organización Continental Latinoamericana y Caribeña de Estudiantes-OCLAE (Continental Organization of Latin American and Caribbean Students).

The production of a Statute can also be considered progress for ENLACES, as the Space now has regulations for its operation, expressing fundamental principles and objectives. In this regard, interviewee Rodrigues (2021) analyzes that progress has been made towards the creation of a “landmark”, a Statute.

This regulation presents the principles of the Space. In this perspective, considering the analysis of other documents of the Space, as well as the statements of the interviewees, it is understood that these principles, as it appears, are directly related to a Space that seeks to meet the region’s development needs through regional academic integration in a solidarity manner, and follows a bottom-up logic in the construction process. The principles that education is a public good, a right for all, and the responsibility of the State also remain a priority.

Since ENLACES is based on these principles, it is considered that the Space is being formed for society, as this process, according to the Documento Base (2015), is characterized by this conception, as well as by “an idea of a university committed to seeking solutions to emerging problems in society.” In view of this, the Córdoba Charter states that the formation of ENLACES constitutes an open, organized, inclusive, and supportive Space, that is, a Space for everyone and by everyone (^{CARTA DE CÓRDOBA, 2018}). The question that can be raised in light of this is whether a space based on these principles tends to persist in the global scenario in which higher education is inserted.

It should be considered, according to ^{Macedo (2019)}, that there has been significant progress in the establishment and understanding of commitment and university social responsibility policies. He points out that ENLACES has made a great contribution in this regard. It is important to note that this may not necessarily represent a structural advancement in the process, but rather ENLACES’ contribution to the development of higher education policies.

In the view of Maillard (2021), what can be highlighted as progress is precisely the awareness, starting from 2017, that there were no significant advancements and that universities needed to take action. According to the interviewee, the context of modernization and globalization growth prompted universities to realize that it would not be possible to tackle this scenario individually, and the reaction at the national level is timid in the face of this reality.

One of the key aspects that unlocked ENLACES, according to Oppermann (2021), “was the cooperation between regional associations such as ANUIES, AUGM, and UDUAL, which allowed these associations and their structures to work in favor of ENLACES.” The interviewee emphasizes that there is progress in the Space because, according to him:

Today, we have a distribution of responsibilities within ENLACES for each of these associations. I believe this provides us with the necessary bureaucratic structure for ENLACES’ activities to continue. In addition, we have the mobilization of students, technical staff, and faculty members who understand or have participated in ENLACES precisely in the pursuit of consensus for the demands that each of these categories has at the regional level (OPPERMANN, 2021).

It is emphasized that the diversity of actors in this process is at the heart of the new regionalism, which focuses on this variety of actors and goes beyond a state-centric approach, as the actors involved in regional projects are not only states but also a wide range of different types of institutions, organizations, movements, and non-state actors (HETTNE, 2000, 2003).

It is important to keep in mind that ENLACES, through its individual actors, has made efforts to strengthen the principle of education as a public good, a right for all, and the responsibility of the state. By positioning itself as a facilitator of higher education in the region, it has promoted discussions with the aim of finding pathways for regional academic integration in solidarity. A recent initiative related to this, as well as addressing the COVID-19 pandemic and the pursuit of ENLACES’ institutionalization, is the Campaña Continental en Defensa de la Universidad y la Ciencia (Continental Campaign in Defense of University and Science), launched in October 2020.

This campaign, which consists of a series of activities in defense of universities and science, is part of ENLACES’ engagement in the region. According to interviewee Canzani (2021), this action by ENLACES has strengthened the process, which is an important point to highlight.

In this path, there is a need for caution to ensure that ENLACES does not remain solely in the realm of demands, but rather, promotes actions and demonstrates to society that there is the capacity for collective autonomy (^{FORERO, 2019}), to support the development of the region. In concrete terms, according to Fiorentini (2021), ENLACES should first unlock the academic mobility plan, which, in the interviewee’s view, is the catalyst for the advancement of the Space, with the support of other actions as well.

Another aspect related to the Space’s activities, which to some extent represents a significant step in this process, was, according to interviewee Canzani (2021), the invitation from the IESALC management for ENLACES to work together on the III Conferencia Mundial de Educación Superior-CMES. This demonstrates recognition by IESALC of the role ENLACES plays in the region as a representative entity.

The political nature of the Space is a point to highlight, as according to ^{Macedo (2019)}, ENLACES has played a very important role in political terms by promoting “higher education as a fundamental human right, advocating for the respect that the State should give to higher education, and endorsing and emphasizing autonomy,” understood as “the freedom of each higher education institution to self-regulate.”

This political character in defense of public higher education, according to Oppermann (2021), is a notable aspect in the face of the ongoing privatization trend, which has different nuances. ENLACES “cannot and should not exclude these nuances from its discussions.” However, “it is important to remember that higher education has a definition: its public character, and ENLACES must defend such a public character.”

However, the interviewee points out that some private organizations also understand the importance of public higher education. “It is necessary to differentiate [...] even within private networks [...] what is for-profit private and what is non-profit private,” as there are “several non-profit private networks that provide quality higher education” (OPPERMANN, 2021).

It should be noted, as previously mentioned, that ENLACES has the Consejo de Rectores de Universidades Privadas-CRUP from Argentina as one of its full members, the only member of the Space that is private in nature. This is a complex issue since the private sector also presents peculiarities in each country of the region. Private higher education institutions are a point of discussion within ENLACES, and this, to some extent, also influences the progress of the Space. According to Oppermann (2021), this discussion “has not been resolved yet, and it is not easily resolved.” According to interviewee Fiorentini (2021), there are strong tensions between CRUP and the representation of the student movement.

Interviewee Oppermann (2021) states that he is among those who advocate that ENLACES should not have restrictions on access and participation. This means that having CRUP within ENLACES is absolutely important, also for the legitimation of the process, as there is a need for dialogue among different institutions. “The whole issue is how to establish this dialogue.”

When analyzing the process and the testimonies of those interviewed who have been and are involved with ENLACES, it is possible to observe that the perception of whether there has been progress or not in the Space is somewhat subjective, as what is considered an advancement for one may not be the same for another. For Gazzola and Speller (2021), there have been advances, but they are relatively small. However, Speller suggests that these advances are small. For García (2021), they are virtually non-existent, as mentioned earlier.

In general, two points can be observed in the progress of ENLACES: 1) there have been advances, but these are still in the realm of formulations and awareness-raising; and 2) the Space has hardly evolved, and what has been achieved so far is largely a theorization of the Space. It is worth considering that some individuals engage with great hope in this process and have expectations, while others have a more pessimistic view, even to the point of disregarding a possible realization of the Space.

According to ^{Azevedo (2018b)}, it is not possible to initially point out significant results in the area of regional integration, as well as in the realization of ENLACES, a Space considered fundamental for regional academic integration and the internationalization of higher education.

In this regard, when examining regional academic integration, it is noted that ENLACES has not presented concrete actions within its own scope that, in some way, impact this integration. Regarding student mobility, as ^{Azevedo (2018b}, p. 7) points out, “indeed, the axes of this regional policy have not changed.” However, it should be noted that the PILA program, mentioned by interviewee García (2021), can be considered a step for ENLACES, although it did not originate within the Space.

Consolidation of ENLACES: What is the path?

Given the scenario presented and considering some potential pathways for the development of this process, including the financing strategy, the resolution of internal conflicts, and the emergence of undisputed leadership-as previously mentioned-the question of what is the path to the consolidation of ENLACES becomes relevant, even though it may be considered ambiguous by some of those involved in ENLACES, as the Space, as mentioned, is referred to as a process and, in this sense, should be in constant development. Interviewee Gazzola (2021) emphasizes, “ENLACES is and is becoming-these are two interrelated movements,” meaning “ENLACES is already a reality, and the consolidation process is ongoing.”

Most interviewees see ENLACES as on a path to strengthening, despite the obstacles. This perspective is based, to some extent, on an initial institutionalization that has been achieved and on the activities being carried out to get the Space off the ground.

Canzani (2021) envisions further development for ENLACES due to a changing landscape in its operation. He highlights the recent commitment of members of the Space who were previously inactive and the interest of other organizations in becoming members of ENLACES. Therefore, a path to strengthening the Space, according to the interviewee, is to continue incorporating members. Additionally, two other aspects are considered fundamental: 1) strengthening institutionalization-this involves the creation of an academic council; 2) greater work in the academic-scientific area, which would strengthen the Space in the academic sphere as proposed, not just in the political sphere.

There are other factors that are pointed out as a path forward. In the view of interviewee Oppermann (2021), the consolidation of the Space is linked to two key points: 1) time, as it is essential to keep ENLACES operational, requiring a period for the maturation of the Space since “time is important for an institution as comprehensive and ambitious as ENLACES”; 2) representation-since ENLACES is an open space for higher education, the presence of ENLACES in different instances where decisions about higher education are made becomes essential for those who wish to participate.

Among the actions to be taken to strengthen this process, according to ^{Veiravé (2019)}, is the active defense of the importance of consolidating a common space for higher education in the region in conjunction with other actors such as states, social organizations, and public policy bodies.

Furthermore, the author states that, to continue in this process of building/strengthening the Space, it is necessary to take into account elements of the regional context that she considers fundamental. These include: 1) The regional scenario with profound social differences. This is a relevant aspect when considering that universities and higher education systems have a social responsibility to reduce inequalities in all their dimensions, including educational inequalities. 2) Consider from which conception and practice internationalization is being constructed. Based on CRES 2018, internationalization policies must respond to a conception of regional convergence.

The participation of Brazil is also a point to be highlighted in this process. When looking at Latin America, Oppermann (2021) emphasizes that Brazil has enormous relative importance. “The number of universities in Brazil is almost the total number of universities in other countries. The number of university students in Brazil exceeds that of most Latin American countries.” However, the interviewee observes that “our presence in Latin America is still very small.”

This scenario began to change when three Brazilian associations-Associação Nacional dos Dirigentes das Instituições Federais de Ensino Superior-Andifes (National Association of Presidents of Federal Institutions of Higher Education), Associação Brasileira dos Reitores das Universidades Estaduais e Municipais-Abruem (Brazilian Association of Rectors of State and Municipal Universities), and Conselho Nacional das Instituições da Rede Federal de Educação Profissional, Científica e Tecnológica-Conif (National Council of Institutions of the Federal Network of Professional, Scientific, and Technological Education)-met in April 2018 and produced a single document that made a significant contribution to the declaration of CRES 2018. According to interviewee Oppermann (2021), most of the points in this document were respected, and Brazil began to be seen as a partner of the Regional Conference, something that did not happen before due to a lack of representation.

The three associations met again at the Post-CRES-2018 seminar, where a document was produced reaffirming the commitment of these associations “to the principles stated in the Declaration of CRES 2018” and also expressing deep concern for the “commitment to the consolidation of the Latin American and Caribbean Space for Higher Education (ENLACES) as a critical and proactive space,” as one of the essential recommendations (CARTA DE BRASÍLIA-ANDIFES, ABRUEM, CONIF, 2019).

Therefore, a path to the consolidation of ENLACES is, to some extent, linked to barriers that need to be overcome and that have been pointed out throughout the text. Among them, three that have been consistently mentioned by most of the interviewees are highlighted here: internal conflicts, lack of government support, and lack of funding. García (2021) states, “If we had the support of governments, I believe we could make progress.” However, he also warns that “governments want to dictate things, and universities say, ‘I am autonomous, I will not do what you tell me.’ Then there is no way out, no solution; governments want to impose, and universities resist.” For Ramos (2021), without government support, the consolidation of ENLACES becomes difficult, and he considers that with such support, university autonomy would not be affected because the defense of autonomy is very strong.

What can be observed in the statements of the interviewees is the advocacy for a process that should be managed by actors in higher education but where the support of governments is needed. However, although most of the interviewees do not explicitly state that this government support should happen without interference in the process-as García and Ramos made explicit-their statements imply the defense of university autonomy.

Collaboration, cooperation, and commitment from the higher education community in the development of ENLACES appear as a path since the European trajectory of the Bologna Process is not compatible with the reality imposed in the Latin American and Caribbean region, at least in the conception of most of those involved in the ENLACES process. However, the lack of agreement among the organizations involved in this process reveals, in a way, the difficulty of relinquishing individual interests in favor of a larger (collective) cause that would benefit the entire region.

In this way, the construction of ENLACES is carried out through actors within higher education itself, but this does not prevent obstacles that hinder the consolidation of this Space, since regional projects, as observed based on ^{Söderbaum (2004)}, are susceptible to failure, which may even be generated by the very forces that build them.

In view of this, in the process of constructing ENLACES, it is considered that there have been more obstacles than advancements in this process. The pandemic situation also influenced to some extent, as there was hope for a boost of the Space after the 2018 CRES. Despite this scenario, as seen earlier, the interviewees pointed out some possible paths for the development and consolidation of ENLACES.

Conclusion

In view of what has been presented in this article, it is possible to evaluate that ENLACES, in its first phase, took timid steps in its constitution process, as it is considered a phase with few advances or almost no advances. The second phase can be seen as distinct from the first, as fundamental documents were released for ENLACES, and the Space began to be led by actors in higher education. In this phase, there were movements in an attempt to institutionalize ENLACES. Progress in the second phase of ENLACES, at least as detected so far, is more related to the institutionalization of the Space. In this sense, academic networks, as well as councils of rectors, played a leading role in the formation of a self-convened ENLACES.

In this process of constructing ENLACES over more than a decade, the majority of the interviewees see more obstacles than advancements, but there are also those who do not see any progress. Has the initiative to create this space stagnated or simply gone to ruin? Is ENLACES proof of an unsuccessful experience, demonstrating to the more pessimistic that it is truly unfeasible to build a common space for higher education in the region?

Despite such a somewhat disheartening scenario regarding the consolidation of this Space, ^{Hettne and Söderbaum (2000)} point out that, in general, social, cultural, and economic networks appear to be developing more rapidly than formal political cooperation at the regional level.

In this perspective, in addition to the steps presented in this text by the interviewees as a route, a possible path for the development of ENLACES would be for this project to become a large network encompassing all academic networks and other academic cooperation initiatives in the region. This path is somewhat related to the first focus of the new regionalism perspective, which, according to ^{Hettne (2003)}, is the diversity of actors that goes beyond a state-centered approach.