The Norm‐Diffusion Capacity of ASEAN: Evidence and Challenges

Allison-Reumann, Laura

doi:10.1111/pafo.12089

Cited by 15 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The outcome of ASEAN's cybersecurity consensus must be noninterventionist, respect the principle of sovereignty, and be non-confrontational [54] [26]. Furthermore, the ASEAN Way is being implemented in the context of cybersecurity cooperation not only within ASEAN countries, but also among the organization's strategic partners outside the Southeast Asian region [34].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The ASEAN organization's policy formulation mechanism is unmistakably distinct from that of other organizations such as the European Union. The European Union, for example, has a policy formulation strategy that focuses on policy instrument adaptation, strategic bargaining, dialogue, argumentation, institutionalization, and capitalization [34]. This is unmistakably distinct from ASEAN's character, which is heavily influenced by Eastern culture.…”

Section: Consensusmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

ASEAN Consensus and Forming Cybersecurity Regulation in Southeast Asia

Ramadhan¹

2022

Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Contemporary Risk Studies, ICONIC-RS 2022, 31 March-1 April 2022, South Jaka

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Southeast Asia has emerged as one of the world's economic development zones. The advancement of information technology is undeniably driving economic growth in this region by the digital economy. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member countries reap the benefits of the region's digital economy development. However, ASEAN itself still has significant problems related to cyber security regulations. Unlike other non-traditional security organizations, ASEAN already has a cooperation framework in place to combat security threats such as drugs, terrorism, and human trafficking. In reality, ASEAN does not yet have a framework for cooperation or regulation in dealing with cyber threats. This region is heavily reliant on the expansion of the digital economy. This scientific article will examine how ASEAN can maximize the organization's consensus mechanism in order to reach an agreement on cyber security regulations in the Southeast Asian region. The author analyzes cyber security issues using qualitative methods. As a data collection technique, the author employs a case study approach and secondary data such as literature studies. According to the author's discussion, a cybersecurity cooperation framework can be achieved through consensus if ASEAN can maximize the functions of the general secretariat and critical regional forums. As a result, the role of ASEAN sub organ will be very important in order to foster cybersecurity consensus in the Southeast Asian region.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consensusmentioning

confidence: 99%

ASEAN Consensus and Forming Cybersecurity Regulation in Southeast Asia

Ramadhan¹

2022

Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Contemporary Risk Studies, ICONIC-RS 2022, 31 March-1 April 2022, South Jaka

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With this context in mind, the Quad's organizational existence poses not only some degree of threat to ASEAN's elevated hub status, but it also illuminates the Southeast Asian organization's perceived deficiencies of privileging ‘process not results’ (Beeson, 2017; Koga, 2023; Manning, 2016; Stubbs, 2019), and in doing so, form and function are intertwined. ASEAN places the priority on enmeshing China (Allison‐Reumann, 2017; Goh, 2014; Thayer, 2011: 333; Weissmann, 2014), for example, while the Quad views China's hegemonic attempts as a direct threat. From this perspective, Southeast Asia's leaders and people, with their difficult and complex relations with China, see the Quad as potentially disruptive via the quartet's attempts to ‘step on China's toes’ (Laksmana, 2020: 107–108).…”

Section: Institutional Informality In Asean and The Quadmentioning

confidence: 99%

Contested informality in regional institutional design: A comparative analysis of ASEAN and the Quad

Cooper,

Cannon

2024

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In terms of institutional positioning, the quartet of Indo‐Pacific states – Australia, India, Japan, and the United States – firmly endorse ASEAN. ‘ASEAN centrality’ is clearly highlighted in all Quad statements. Yet, the Quad presents an organizational and substantive challenge to the core institutional model of ASEAN. This competitive dynamic, with respect to style of associational methods (the how) as opposed to organizational purpose (the why), has not received the scholarly attention it deserves. If the literature does focus on the comparative approaches of ASEAN and the Quad, the prism is for the most part targeted on the differences with respect to the engagement with China. Our analysis is different and emphasizes the contrast between two types of institutional informality exhibited by ASEAN and the Quad. By situating our analysis in the context of contested informality, we point out that both ASEAN and the Quad are signposts showing that the foundational privilege of formal international organizations is under stress, albeit from a wide range of institutional designs. Only by detailing and evaluating the critical divergence in modes of informality can an appreciation of the nature and impact of the contest between ASEAN and the Quad be fully understood.

show abstract

“…Second, the Special Issue contributes to the norms literature by focusing on mediators as a new actor in the norms literature. Current research on agency has focused on different actors as norm entrepreneurs, including individuals (Alford 2008; Bratberg 2011; Budabin 2015), diaspora communities (Antwi‐Boateng 2011), regions and regional institutions (Allison‐Reumann 2017; Checkel 2005; Ingebritsen 2002), Transnational Advocacy Networks (TANs) (Acharya 2013b; Keck and Sikkink 1998; Price 2003; Risse et al 1999), states (Sandholtz 2008), and business groups (Flohr 2010; Hurel and Lobato 2018; Sjöström 2010). Mediators constitute a yet unexplored actor in the norms literature.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Norms Matter in Mediation: An Introduction

Hellmüller

Pring

Richmond

2020

Swiss Political Sci Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International mediators are often tasked to promote liberal norms. However, dilemmas created in diffusing these norms, influenced by the mediators' interaction with the conflict parties and a decline of the liberal international order, have fueled debates about how norms are diffused through mediation, whether mediators should and can promote norms, and what norms they promote. The IR literature provides rich theoretical frameworks on norms, which could help navigate these questions. Yet, mediation scholars have not systematically integrated ideational aspects in their analyses. This Special Issue fills this gap by providing the first comprehensive analysis of how norms matter in mediation. It thereby not only shares novel analytical insights on norms in mediation, but also enriches the conceptualizations of three central notions in the norms literature: the norm diffusion process, the agency of actors, and the nature of the diffused norms.

show abstract

The Norm‐Diffusion Capacity of ASEAN: Evidence and Challenges

Cited by 15 publications

References 35 publications

ASEAN Consensus and Forming Cybersecurity Regulation in Southeast Asia

ASEAN Consensus and Forming Cybersecurity Regulation in Southeast Asia

Contested informality in regional institutional design: A comparative analysis of ASEAN and the Quad

How Norms Matter in Mediation: An Introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About