Hanging together, institutional design, and cooperation in Southeast Asia: AFTA and the ARF

Khong, Yuen Foong; Nesadurai, Helen E. S.

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511491436.002

Cited by 51 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 141 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Perhaps the strongest candidate for an exceptional region is Asia, where ex ante we expect international agreements to be less likely to include strong dispute settlement. A diverse body of scholarship maintains that within Asia there seems to be a longstanding hesitation to adopt formal institutions and legalization (e.g., Acharya 1997;Kahler 2000;Khong and Nesadurai 2007;Luo 2006). Thus international agreements within Asia should have weaker DSMs due to the general preference among states in the region for more informal, and less adversarial, methods of resolving disagreements.…”

Section: Regional Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements

Allee

Elsig

2015

Rev Int Organ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To understand why some international institutions have stronger dispute settlement mechanisms (DSMs) than others, we investigate the dispute settlement provisions of nearly 600 preferential trade agreements (PTAs), which possess several desirable case-selection features and are evoked more than is realized. We broaden the study of dispute settlement design beyond Blegalization^and instead reorient theorizing around a multi-faceted conceptualization of the strength of DSMs. We posit that strong DSMs are first and foremost a rational response to features of agreements that require stronger dispute settlement, such as depth and large memberships. Multivariate empirical tests using a new data set on PTA design confirm these expectations and reveal that depth -the amount of policy change specified in an agreement -is the most powerful and consistent predictor of DSM strength, providing empirical support to a long-posited but controversial conjecture. Yet power also plays a sizeable role, since agreements among asymmetric members are more likely to have strong DSMs due to their mutual appeal, as are those involving the United States. Important regional differences also emerge, as PTAs across the Americas are designed with strong dispute settlement, as are Asian PTAs, which contradicts the conventional wisdom about Asian values and legalization. Our findings demonstrate that rationalism explains much of international institutional design, yet it can be enhanced by also incorporating power-based and regional explanations.

show abstract

Section: Regional Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements

Allee

Elsig

2015

Rev Int Organ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Significantly, it has also been argued that the ARF in fact meets the expectations of participants as regards mutual reassurance (Kawasaki 2006). Those explaining the limited achievements of the ARF and its low-level institutionalization under ASEAN leadership have squarely pointed to the pursuit of regime security by some ARF participants (Khong and Nesadurai 2007), or focused on the effects of domestic coalitions (Solingen 2008). Significantly, irrespective of whether assessments of the ARF are more positive or critical, the research to date generally maintains that the ARF has not been moving forward its cooperative security agenda to extend to concrete and practical security cooperation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The ASEAN Regional Forum: from dialogue to practical security cooperation?

Haacke

2009

Cambridge Review of International Affairs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines to what extent the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum (ARF) has moved beyond dialogue to practical security co-operation. Focusing on terrorism, maritime security and disaster relief as key areas of ARF activities in the past few years, the paper offers four arguments: first, while the ARF primarily remains a forum for regional security dialogues and confidence building, its participants have slowly become prepared to proceed with practical security co-operation, albeit only in limited ways. To the extent that desktop and field exercises take place under ARF auspices, most have been organized in the area of disaster relief. This implies, second, that for the most part ARF participants are still pursuing capacity building and operational security responses outside the Forum. Third, the ARF's cautious embrace of practical co-operation is not the outcome of ASEAN's exercise of diplomatic centrality but the result of initiatives pursued by a small group of ASEAN and some non-ASEAN states. Fourth, at least in the short term, any expectations that participants might organize significantly more demanding practical activities under ARF auspices are premature.

show abstract

“…In particular, maritime security (disaster relief), humanitarian assistance, transnational crime, and terrorism have been valuable starting points for cooperation. Each of these issues has its own ongoing Inter-sessional Support Group (ISGs) or an Inter-sessional Meeting (ISM) and form a prominent part of the ARF's agenda (Khong & Nesadurai, 2007). ARF participants are aware of the coordinative opportunities offered by NTS issues and have discussed 'whether practical cooperation in relation to NTS issues could be a step to moving unambiguously from confidence building to preventive diplomacy' (Haacke, 2009, p. 443 NTS issues are driving the ARF to reorient and re-organise itself to more effectively cope with NTS issues.…”

Section: Non-traditional Security and The Asean Regional Forummentioning

confidence: 99%

Security cooperation in the Indo-Pacific: non-traditional security as a catalyst

Zimmerman

2014

Journal of the Indian Ocean Region

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hanging together, institutional design, and cooperation in Southeast Asia: AFTA and the ARF

Cited by 51 publications

References 141 publications

Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements

Why do some international institutions contain strong dispute settlement provisions? New evidence from preferential trade agreements

The ASEAN Regional Forum: from dialogue to practical security cooperation?

Security cooperation in the Indo-Pacific: non-traditional security as a catalyst

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About