ASEAN as network governance: An alternative lens to evaluate policymaking and performance
Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s) Pushpanathan Sundram, Chiang Mai University
Version: View help for Version V1
| Name | File Type | Size | Last Modified |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
image/tiff | 33.2 MB | 07/13/2023 11:16:PM |
|
|
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet | 44.6 KB | 08/09/2023 08:35:PM |
Project Citation:
Sundram, Pushpanathan. ASEAN as network governance: An alternative lens to evaluate policymaking and performance. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2023-08-10. https://doi.org/10.3886/E193214V1
Project Description
Summary:
View help for Summary
This project offers a new perspective of ASEAN as network governance (NG) at its core, with a hierarchical organisational structure as its front (hybrid organisation). The works on network forms of organisation and policy network theory (PNT) were used for the analysis.
Scope of Project
Subject Terms:
View help for Subject Terms
ASEAN;
Network Governance;
Policy Networks
Geographic Coverage:
View help for Geographic Coverage
Southeast Asia
Time Period(s):
View help for Time Period(s)
6/2020 – 6/2022
Data Type(s):
View help for Data Type(s)
images: photographs, drawings, graphical representations;
text
Collection Notes:
View help for Collection Notes
This is bibliographic data showing the sources where the information was derived for the articles and provides links to ASEAN and other sources should researchers be interested to use the data for their work.
Methodology
Data Source:
View help for Data Source
Content analysisThe primary data used for the content analysis was ASEAN reports, documents, and research articles, besides analysis of studies and research papers on NG, policy networks, and ASEAN processes. They provided an understanding of the policy process phases and their varying degrees of success in the individual ASEAN communities. This study's search strategy for documents and sources involved a comprehensive approach. A systematic literature review was conducted using online academic databases such as Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, and ASEAN Secretariat and ASEAN member states websites. The search terms included keywords related to ASEAN, network governance, hybrid organisations, policy network theory, and related concepts. The search was conducted between June 2019 to March 2021, covering a wide range of scholarly articles, books, reports, and policy documents as part of the author’s doctoral research. The author conducted further searches between January to June 2023 in developing this article.Data collation involved a two-step process. First, relevant literature was gathered through the systematic literature review. The selected documents were then subjected to content analysis to identify key themes and concepts related to ASEAN’s network governance, resource dependence theory and organisational structure. The variables included in the analysis focused on understanding the structure, functioning, and effectiveness of ASEAN as a hybrid organisation with network governance at its core. These variables encompassed aspects such as organisational legitimacy, decision-making processes, policy implementation, and the role of member states in shaping ASEAN’s performance.The methods of analysis employed in this study were qualitative. Content analysis was used to examine the gathered literature and identify recurring themes, patterns, and theoretical frameworks related to network governance and hybrid organisations. The findings from the literature analysis were synthesised and interpreted to provide a comprehensive understanding of ASEAN’s hybrid structure and its implications for the organisation’s legitimacy and pursuit of centrality.Two case studies, one from AEC and another from APSC covering two policy networks each, were utilised to study the presence and workings of NG in ASEAN alongside the resource dependence among member states that impacted policymaking. The selection of AFTA as a case study within the ASEAN Economic Policy Subsystem (AEPS) is a deliberate choice, as the AFTA was established before the AEC itself. Moreover, with its long and substantive history, AFTA is a significant policy network to examine the performance of AEPS. Its significance is pertinent because AFTA’s framework-agreement approach was used to launch negotiations for the AEC and establish other regional free trade arrangements. Besides, the ASEAN Single Window (ASW), a core component of AFTA, was selected as it is a relevant micro case study on the operations of NG in AFTA, where custom cooperation and trade facilitation are forged across the region. Likewise, the ARF was identified as a case study since it is recognised as a venue for multilateral and bilateral dialogue and consultations and the establishment of effective principles for dialogue and cooperation, where a myriad of political and security issues is discussed. On the other hand, the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC) policy network was chosen as a contrast to ARF, where the focus on non-traditional security has often relied on the partnerships and cooperation of non-state actors (NSAs), which points to some acceptance of them in the APSS and at the discretion of member states. Figure 1 depicts the policy universe of the ASEAN Community with the two communities (AEC and APSC) and the policy networks (AFTA, ASW, ARF and AMMTC).
Related Publications
Published Versions
Report a Problem
Found a serious problem with the data, such as disclosure risk or copyrighted content? Let us know.
This material is distributed exactly as it arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the investigator(s) if further information is desired.