Meanwhile European studies and other social sciences focused enormously on the topic of integration, scientists paid little or no attention to elaborate general models, to explain and to bridge the well known and various forms of disintegration. In the ambiance of the failed states spread all over the globe, economic globalization, and welfare nationalism are the hallmarks of a fragmented era. After the post-cold war optimism faded away for a 'new world order', fragmentation became the great narrative of social sciences and the media. The second main purpose of the paper is to reduce the several fragmentation theories to the best manageable few models. As a result the author found that the several articles written on the topic belong to one of four models, based on social change, homeostatic equilibrium, human will, or resource management. He thinks the usefulness of model formation exceeds the benefits of scientific systematization. It will surely contribute to the future dialogue of these many theories of a nascent literature. Discontented with the apparent incommensurability of the four basic models, the main purpose was to find a single theory which is able to bridge the gap between short and long term forms and event-based or macro sociological perspectives of fragmentation. At the moment he found that it is the structuration theory and constructivism that offer the best way for such a synthesis. The principal message of his paper is that the new meaning of fragmentation, aiming at social change, or even emancipation, goes far beyond the traditional interpretations which portrayed this issue derogatory as an irreversible organic decomposition, chaos, retrogression.