EU-LDC Network conference 2002
|
Improving Global Governance for Development: Issues
and Instruments - 7-10 December, Chiang Mai
Session 1.3 - Regional approaches to economic
integration - Summary
For issues which need to be solved at a level higher than the national
level, regional co-operation offers opportunities to tackle these
issues, as schemes at the higher, global level are often more difficult
to attain. The first speaker started with a presentation of the
New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). Africa has several
regional integration schemes: there are currently 14 regional arrangements
in Africa with differences in subject coverage, geographical scope
and level of supra-nationality. Many of the schemes overlap each
other. NEPAD, which is initiated by the African Union - formerly
known as Organisation of African Unity (OAU) - aims to promote regional
co-operation at the level of the African continent. NEPAD seeks
to redevelop Africa through three goals:
Africa’s performance in governance has in general been poor since
decolonisation. NEPAD’s declaration on democratic, political, economic
and corporate governance issues aims to improve governance in Africa.
Eight codes of conduct have been approved to support this declaration.
The so-called African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) intends to promote
the fulfilment of these codes of conduct. The APRM should contribute
to political stability and sustainable development in Africa.
The success of NEPAD will furthermore depend on the degree to which
it can promote local ownership of the country programmes, the credibility
of NEPAD in terms of professionalism and institutional capacity,
and relations among NEPAD members.
One of the challenges for NEPAD is to overcome the difficulties
which Africa is facing in its attempts to promote regionalism. In
the past, there have been conflicts of national versus regional
interests, implementation problems of regional treaties at the domestic
level, and poor institutions for development at the regional level.
Other challenges identified by the speaker include the need to involve
all stakeholders and make sure that NEPAD is an initiative driven
by the members themselves, not by donors. There is also a need to
develop institutions and capacity, which support integration in
the globalisation process. Finally, it is necessary that African
countries adjust to the realities of the current, open world.
The second speaker discussed multilateralism and regionalism from
a Southeast Asian perspective. The Association of South-East Asian
Nations (ASEAN) has been the main vehicle for regionalism in this
part of the world. In 1992 the ASEAN leaders decided to establish
the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) by 2008. However, it still is uncertain
whether AFTA will be achieved. Since the founding of ASEAN the institutions
of the association have been strengthened, but the organisation
is still facing a number of weaknesses. The institutional machinery
is still loosely organised. Furthermore, decision making within
ASEAN is characterised by consensus, which makes decision making
processes very long. Also, there seems to be a lack of political
commitment by the member countries as national interests are often
prevailing over regional interests. Finally, the extra-regional
economic linkages are stronger than the intra-regional linkages,
in particular in trade and investment. The problems facing ASEAN
as an organisation make the realisation of AFTA difficult. A number
of member countries are now concluding bilateral free trade agreements
which might undermine initiatives at a regional level.
Despite the difficulties in the functioning of ASEAN, there are
several factors which put pressure on the association to improve
governance within the region. China is becoming a rising power,
offering both opportunities and threats for ASEAN. The financial
crisis in 1997 and its effects also remain an important factor in
the region. In addition, Southeast Asia needs to find ways on how
to deal with international terrorism. The speaker concluded that
ASEAN is not a sunset organisation. Nevertheless, the association
has to overcome the challenges within the current global economic
and political environment in the near future in order to contribute
to the development of Southeast Asia.
The last speaker of the session continued the discussion on ASEAN
through a comparison of governance and economic integration between
the case of ASEAN and the EU. The quality of governance differs
in the two regions. The differences between ASEAN and the EU can
partly be attributed to the regional disparity in aspects such as
average standards of living, micro-economic competitiveness and
intra-regional trade. In general, disparity of this kind of aspects
is much greater among ASEAN countries than among EU countries. However,
the differences among countries in Asia also imply complementarity
between different countries in the region, which allows for an intra-regional
transfer of national “best” governance practices.
EU experience shows that there is a need for ASEAN to improve the
functioning of its institutions. There is furthermore a need to
overcome incoherence of policies among the different ASEAN members
on several issues which weakens ASEAN’s current position in the
regional and global economy.
In
the discussion several issues related to regional integration were
highlighted. Among others, attention was paid to ASEAN: the benefits
of Thailand joining ASEAN and the undermining activities of Singapore
in stimulating bilateral free trade agreements with other countries.
In addition, one participant pointed at the differences between
the incentives to sign agreements for regional integration and the
incentives not to implement them in reality. This has for example
been a problem in co-operation between ACP countries.
Session 1.3 - Speakers
Chair: Hassan Kartadjoemena
Speakers: Ephraim Kaunga and Hamis Saidi Nassoro
(MEFMI), Teofilo C. Daquila (National University of Singapore),
Robert Owen (University of Nantes)
Back to Conference 2002 index
|
