The Definition of Nearshore

(Excerpted from the book, Nearshoring to Latin America - An Executive Guide) 
There is enough x-sourcing and x-shoring terminology floating around to build a paper ark big enough to hold the high dollar consultants who invent the terms.  So, to establish a common ground, we need to apply a reasonable definition to the term nearshoring - one which can better frame the rest of this discussion. 
We all agree nearshoring should be just that… near.  It should be reasonably close to your primary base of operation, but not within your national boundary.  The suffix used, shore, clearly indicates another country is involved, although a body of water might not be crossed.  A broader view, at least for U.S. customers, asserts that nearshoring is the provision of professional services from places like Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, and other North and Central American locations.  Aside from the Asia-Pacific regions, the Latin American geographies are the number one area for new IT services expansion for the Global 2000.  These locations are within a few hours of major U.S. hub airport and fall within U.S. time zones. 
South American locations are also within U.S. time zones and therefore argue hard for a nearshore designation, but they are not as easily reached within a few hours.   Remember the default requirement of being “near”?   

I have a different approach to the debate. Here is how I chose to answer the question of what is and is not defined as nearshore; a nearshore location should provide its customers with the ability to fly in for a delivery team meeting and return home within a day or two without inflicting jetlag or more than one connecting flight on your travelling executive. Put another way, if I have to take three flights each way or stay longer than three days to get anything done… it’s not nearshore.

That’s just my opinion.