Regional

Integration
in ASEAN
 Objectives

Find what makes ASEAN is long-lived and expanding

Examining the ASEANs development and design as international
institution
Early Establishment

Founded in 1967, Asean is the oldest and most developed form of

integration in the region, its membership is limited to the countries that
are geographically located in Southeast Asia.

Founding members : Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore,

and Thailand

Aims: International cooperation

Economic growth Cultural Mutual benefit

Social Technology Agricultural Science Administration

Regional stability R&D

The ASEAN Way
Served as identity of ASEAN, formed by the shared norms and values overtime.

Concern for strong sovereignty and narrow self-interests among member states

Based on mutual respect and cooperation without coercion

Decision Making Process:

- Consultation
- Concencus
- Non-interferences internal affairs
- Informality
- Aversion to intitutionalization
Hypotheses
ASEAN regionalism will continue relatively weak
It will continue toward deeper integration at a slow
incremental pace
Intergovernmentalism most accurately capture the
institutional development of ASEAN
Approaches
Constructivism
Integration process in SEA are based on norms and values that
are formed and further create regional identity overtime.
Known as ASEAN Way

ASEAN had experienced shared story of colonialization. Causing the need for
regional unity and self-determination from outside parties.
However.
it is perceived powerless and tend to sidesteep conflict of interests
potentials.
Approaches
Rationalism
Based on rational economic reason. Integration as a process
of pursuing mutual interests of the number states. In ASEAN
case, on the basis of demand and supply factors. (Mattli,
1999)

However..
Demands: Industries are not complementary
Supply: Integration process will be uneasy because of lacks of regional
leader role and unwillingness to create regional institutions.
Type of Agreements

Declaration Ministerial Principal

soft law Statement Agreement
publicize common legally binding
understanding
Treaty

Arrangements

Memorandum of
Understanding

Protocols

Supplementary of
Protocols
 Bali Concord II
Institutionalization 21 Principal agreements
18 Protocols 2000s
of Agreements AEC, ASC, ASCC

Dispute Settlement Mechanism

1997 - 1st
Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar joined!
46 agreements discovered

9 Principal agreements
12 protocols
1990s
AIP, AIC, AIJV Singapore Summit
1980s 5-6th ASEAN Summit
14 Principal agreements
15 Protocols
Cambodia joined! Framework Agreement, CEPT

1976
Bali Summit
8 Principal agreements
ASEAN Concord, TAC, ASEAN
Secretariat
Bangkok Declaration
3 Principal agreements
largely normative, 1967
little institutional obligation Founded : Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Tha
 Sectors of
Agreements
Industrial
Projects
12%
etc
32% Energy
11%

Transportation
11%

Telecommunicati Scientific
ons 9%
5% Agriculture
5% Tourism
Environment Education
5% 4% 6%
Types of Compliance Sanctions
Enhancement 3%
Mechanism

Monitoring
23%

Dispute
Settlement
50%

Transparecy
24%
Types of Security
Issues in
Agreement
Food
14%

Interstate war Natural

14% Resources
43%

Nuclear weapons
29%
Intergovernmentalism Approach
Concept
Integration process that is largely determined by bargaining
among heads of states.

3 Essentials Components:
1. Assumption of rational behavior of states
2. Individual state preference emerge from domestical political
interactions.
3. Framework for interstate negotiation is established based
upon the key role of the government and structured around
the relative bargaining positions of participating states.
Approach
Key difference between constructivism, rationalism, and
intergovernmentalism is the emphasis on institutionalization.
Conclusions
1. Intergovernmentalization fits ASEANs institutionalization
form.
2. The relationship between ASEAN members reflects the desire
for mutually cooperative benefits with limited delegation to
regional authorities.
3. Realist/liberal version of intergovernmentalism provides more
accurate image of integration
4. ASEAN will be continue to exist and deepen integration
through incremental process.
Conclusions
5. ASEAN agreements will continue to perform low delegation of
authority.
6. European Model will not fit ASEAN institution. The EU and its
highly rationalized bureaucracies, on the other hand, are well
equipped to deal with public law and formal institutions. ASEAN
prefer to act according to the principle of non-interference in
internal affairs of its Member States. This principle, significantly
limiting the associations influence on Member States
policymaking
7. The dynamics of political process will limit ASEANs effect on
economic growth
Point of view
Intergovernmentalism is the besy way to describe ASEANs
integration.
Using ASEAN to create equal competitiveness of the members
towards the world.
Agree that ASEAN has different shared norms other than EU. The
Soft Integration method is perceived fits ASEAN Way best.
ASEAN doesnt seem aggressive in making expansions towards the
other region. In conjunction of that, the members tend to have
their own partnership with the other countries/coorperation.
The clear disparity of development, GDP, etc of each members
affect this act.
How about the implementation of single currency?