Researching the Trading Systems in the Asian-Pacific Region – APEC, ASEAN, TPP, CPTPP, RCEP and their Members

By Evelyn Ma

Evelyn Ma is Reference Librarian in Foreign and International law and Lecturer in Legal Research at the Lillian Goldman Law Library, Yale Law School. NOTE: This article is a complete re-write of the previous versions.

Published May/June 2020 (Previously updated by Wilhelmina Randtke in September 2014)

Membership

The following table delineates major trading relations of member states in the region current through April 2020.

Members APEC ASEAN ASEAN +1 FTA Dialog Partners [1] TPP CPTPP (TPP-11) RCEP (ASEAN+6 FTA partners)
AUSTRALIA x x x x x
BANGLADESH
BRUNEI DARUSSALAM x x x x x
CAMBODIA x x
CANADA x x x
CHILE x x x
CHINA (PRC) x x x
CHINESE TAIPEI x
HONG KONG x x x (via PRC)
INDIA x Withdrawn 2019
INDONESIA x x x
JAPAN x x x x x
KOREA, SOUTH x x x
LAOS x x
MALAYSIA x x x x x
MEXICO x x x
MYANMAR x x
NEW ZEALAND x x x x x
PAKISTAN
PAPUA NEW GUINEA x
PERU x x x
PHILIPPINES x x x
RUSSIA x
SINGAPORE x x x x
SRI LANKA
THAILAND x x x
UNITED STATES x Withdrawn 2017
VIETNAM x x x x x

1. Introduction

This research guide provides basic information about the trading alliances in South East Asia, namely the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and the recently formed mega-regional pacts: Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), and their member economies. This is an updated guide with emphasis on resources published from 2015 on.

2. APEC and ASEAN: An Overview

2.1. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)

APEC was established in 1989. The objective of APEC is to eliminate trade and investment barriers in the Asia-Pacific region. Currently, APEC consists of 21 member economies: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, United States, and Vietnam. APEC maintains a Secretariat in Singapore funded by annual contributions from the member economies.

APEC operates on “the basis of non-binding commitments, open dialogue and equal respect for the views of all participating economies.”[2] Unlike other regional economic organizations, APEC does not have a binding treaty that sets forth an institutional framework for economic integration. However, the influence of APEC on the Asia-Pacific region and world economy should not be underestimated. APEC member economies, which cover 2.9 billion people or 38% of the world population, account for approximately 60% of the world Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and 47% of world trade. APEC has greatly contributed to the liberalization of world trade and investment. APEC Member Economies report progress towards achieving free and open trade and investment goals through Individual Action Plans (IAPs) and Collective Action Plans (CAPs). The frequent meetings of the leaders of its members and the exchange of trade information within APEC have facilitated mutual understandings between the least developed nations and the developed nations.[3] Since the September 11th attacks, APEC members have also actively participated in anti-terrorism efforts.[4]

U.S.-China trade disputes and global mass protest movements marked 2019. In spite of the joint statement released by the APEC Ministers Responsible for Trade on May 18 2019 in Viña del Mar, Chile, the annual APEC summit originally scheduled to be held on 16-17 November in Santiago, never came to fruition. On October 30, less than a month before the scheduled summit date, President Sebastian Pinera called off the 2019 summit, out of concern for security amidst increasingly intense mass protests.

Malaysia, host of APEC 2020, emphasized three priorities at its Informal Senior Officials’ Meeting in Langkawi, on December 10 2019. They are as follows:

  • restoring public confidence in multilateralism, investment and trade;
  • fostering innovations that promote sustainability, from renewable energy to waste management and recycling strategies; and
  • encouraging inclusive economic participation through the digital economy.

2.2. The Associations of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)

ASEAN was established in 1967 by five nations: Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand. In the 1980’s and 1990’s, five other nations joined ASEAN: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar (Burma), and Vietnam. Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Brunei Darussalam and Vietnam are also members of APEC. The goals of ASEAN are to accelerate regional economic growth, facilitate social and culture development, and pursue regional peace, stability and rule of law.[5]

ASEAN is a treaty-based organization.[6] Compared with APEC, ASEAN is a much smaller and weaker entity.[7] However, in the recent decade, ASEAN played an important role in advocating for the interests of the least developed nations in Southeast Asia, especially after the breakdown of trade talks at the World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference in Seattle in late 1999.[8] By establishing external relations with the developed economies and other regional trade organizations, ASEAN has been active in promoting interregional dialogue and cooperation.[9] As of December 2019, ASEAN has entered into FTAs with Australia-New Zealand (2010-2012), China (2002), India (2003), Japan (2008), South Korea (2005) and Hong Kong, SAR (2018).

Despite being a treaty-based organization, ASEAN is a diverse and informal organization. Under Article 20 of its Charter, decision-making within ASEAN operates on consultation and consensus. Peaceful settlement of disputes and non-interference in the internal affairs of its members are basic principles enshrined in the Charter.[10] The members abide by and refer to these principles with pride as the “ASEAN way.”

By the 2003 Bali Concord II,[11] ASEAN member states committed to greater regional integration and declared the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), formerly under development as the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA), one of the three pillars of the ASEAN Community. The other two pillars are the Political-Security Community and the Socio-Cultural Community. ASEAN leaders have created subsequent regional cooperation agreements to support deeper integration. Some of the constituent frameworks of the AEC include the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement (2010), the ASEAN Framework Agreement on Service (1998) and the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (2012). These agreements are aim at facilitating trade between states, increasing investment volume, expanding production, and improving transparency in commercial exchanges.

To reinforce economic integration, ASEAN’s dispute settlement mechanisms have also changed over the years, particularly those involving trade disputes. Prior to the ASEAN Charter of 2008, disputes involving ASEAN members were resolved by provisions on dispute settlement in the Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in Southeast Asia (TAC). There were, and are, no specific provisions addressing economic and trade disputes in TAC.[12] The Protocol on Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism (EDSM), signed on November 29 2004, has since then evolved as the main mechanism for trade dispute resolution in ASEAN. The 2008 Charter, under Article 25, specifies that TAC should be used to address intra-ASEAN disputes “unrelated” to the interpretation and application of the Charter and ASEAN economic agreements. At the same time, the Charter also expands the scope of applicability of EDSM to include disputes arising from all economic agreements. Under Article 16 of EDSM, arbitration is provided as a mechanism to resolve disputes arising from suspension of concessions.[13]

ASEAN’s regional human rights system has further been elaborated over the last decades from the birth of the ASEAN Charter in 2008 and the establishment of the ASEAN Inter-governmental Commission of Human Rights (AICHR) in 2009, to the adoption of the ASEAN Declaration of Human Rights in 2012. Such significant steps aside, the Commission has been criticized as largely symbolic, operating through consultation and consensus, with each of the 10 member states enjoying veto power. The Commission does not provide for independent observers for adjudications and has yet to address human rights issues or violations involving or affecting its members.[14]

Tangential yet integral to trade, recent geopolitical developments affecting ASEAN include the 2016 South China Sea Arbitration award.[15] The issuance of the award did not conclusively settle maritime territorial disputes between China and the Philippines and other ASEAN members. On August 3 2018, foreign ministers of the 10 member states of ASEAN and their Chinese counterpart signed the ASEAN-China agreement on a Single Draft Negotiating Text for a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea.[16] The document is intended to serve as the basis for the adoption of a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea, to be finalized by 2021. The instrument, nonetheless, is non-binding, with member states reserving their amending powers.[17] On December 12 2019, ASEAN member Malaysia filed a partial submission to the UN Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf (CLCS) for its claim to an extended continental shelf in the northern part of the South China Sea beyond the limit of the 200 nautical mile exclusive economic zone it claims from the baselines along its coast.[18]

Signed June 2019, the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific acknowledges the central role of ASEAN, “ASEAN centrality,” as the underlying principle for promoting cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region.[19] ASEAN-led mechanisms such as the East Asia Summit (EAS) provides platforms for dialogue and cooperation. The document clarifies ASEAN’s growing recognition that the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean countries form a closely integrated and inter-connected region. Vietnam, the host of ASEAN2020, issued the ASEAN Chairman’s Statement on February 14 2020, affirming the regional organization’s determination to forge a more collaborative and cohesive approach in the region’s COVID-19 response. A special virtual summit meeting of ASEAN+3 (China, Japan and the Republic of Korea) on responding to the COVID-19 epidemic was held on April 14, 2020.

3. Recent Developments in Asian Pacific Free Trade Alliances: Mega-Regional Trade Agreements and the Belt-Road Initiative

3.1. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

The TPP is a now-defunct proposed free trade agreement between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam. fThe proposed agreement in late 2015 was the product of years of negotiations. It was touted as a hallmark achievement for President Obama, who had pushed for a United States foreign policy “pivot” to the Pacific Rim.[20] The goal was to “create a fully integrated economic area in the region and establish consistent rules for global investment” [21], such as lower tariffs, while at the same time also safeguard against growing influence of China in the region.[22] The agreement was nonetheless never put to a vote in the U.S. Congress. It met with intense bi-partisan opposition during an election year where trade and employment have become key campaign issues and the benefits of trade agreements were questioned. The agreement, signed on 4 February 2016 by the 12 Pacific Rim nations, was not ratified by the U.S. as required and never took effect. The U.S. withdrew its signature from TPP via an Executive order issued on January 23 2017, the third day of the Trump presidency.

3.2. Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP)

After the demise of the TPP, the remaining eleven nations negotiated a new trade agreement called Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), or TPP-11. CPTPP remains one of the largest free trade agreements in the world, representing nearly 13.5 percent of global gross domestic product (GDP). The agreement links 11 Asia-Pacific economies – Australia, Canada, Chile, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and Peru in the Pacific region – with 4 ASEAN member states – Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam.

11 of the original 12 TPP signatories signed the CPTPP on March 8, 2018, in Santiago, Chile. It entered into force on December 30, 2018. The CPTPP incorporates nearly all of the provisions of the TPP, as signed in 2016 by the original 12 parties (including the United States), except for a handful of provisions that the remaining member countries agreed by consensus to suspend. The final text of the CPTPP Agreement, nearly identical to the original TPP, consists of 30 chapters, with the removal of the suspended provisions.

The remaining major provisions of CPTPP relate to tariff cuts, facilitating customs and trade in goods and services, setting standards and streamlining technical barriers to trade, opening investment sectors and providing for a dispute settlement process, as well as improving intellectual property protections. In addition, there are provisions facilitating e-commerce, regulating the role of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) and government procurement measures, protecting labor, environment, regulatory coherence and transparency.[23]

As of September 2019, of the 11 countries that signed the agreement in March the year before, only 7 (Canada, Australia, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam) have ratified the agreement. Peru, Malaysia, Brunei and Chile have held out.[24]

3.3. Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP)

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is a proposed free trade agreement (FTA) among the 10 ASEAN member states (Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam) and the 6 Asia-Pacific states with which ASEAN has existing free trade agreements (Australia, China, India, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand). The mega-regional FTA involves 16 countries, accounting for about 1/3 of global GDP and almost ½ of the world’s population.

Often perceived as a China-led response to the predominantly US-led initiative TPP which excluded China and India, RCEP was launched in November 2012. The objectives of its founding members were to “achieve a modern, comprehensive, high quality and mutually beneficial economic partnership agreement among the ASEAN Member States and ASEAN’s FTA Partners” that will “cover in trade in goods, trade in services, investment, economic and technical cooperation, intellectual property, competition, dispute settlement and other issues.”[25]

Despite its goal of improving regional trade governance through tariffs standardization and market access improvement, RCEP has been criticized for the absence of provisions setting labor and environmental standards, regulating government procurement processes and ensuring safeguards against corruption, as well as provisions liberalizing state-owned companies.[26]

On November 4, 2019, following the conclusion of the third RCEP Summit, held on the sidelines of the ASEAN Summit in Thailand, a Joint Leaders Statement was issued.[27] 15 of the original 16 Asian countries participating in RCEP “have concluded text-based negotiations for all 20 chapters and essentially all their market access issues; and tasked legal scrubbing by them to commence for signing in 2020.”[28] India, the primary holdout in recent negotiations, announced its withdrawal from the agreement at the last minute while at the same time signaled it would not rule out possibility of re-joining. The remaining RCEP members indicated that they are aiming to conclude the negotiations in 2020 and would continue to work with India to resolve “outstanding issues”.[29] 3.4. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) As of March 2020, all 10 ASEAN members have signed cooperative documents with China, as partners to the China-initiated One Belt One Road Initiative, a plan to promote infrastructure development across Africa, Asia, and Europe with Chinese financing.[30]

4. Resources on APEC and ASEAN

4.1. APEC

APEC Members: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China, Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, Thailand, United States, and Vietnam Important Documents

Online Resources Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC’s) official website is the updated website with improved functionality and includes comprehensive information about the institutional history and organizational framework of the forum, as well as economies of member countries. Of particular interest to trade is the work of the Committee on Trade and Investment (CTI), established in November 1993 by the Declaration of an APEC Trade and Investment Framework, and reinforced by the Osaka Action Agenda in 1995. The CTI provides a forum for APEC’s 21 member economies to deliberate trade and policy issues, with the objective of helping APEC economies achieve free and open trade and investment.

Monitoring Reports, Completion Reports and other documents related to projects from 2006 onwards are searchable in the APEC Projects Database. The Meeting Document Database allows retrieval of documents such as leaders’ declarations, ministerial statements, and summary records. The publications search platform includes reports, directories, manuals, proceedings, translations, multimedia and official brochures. Of particular interest to trade is the APEC Trade Repository, which includes links to tariffs, rules of origin and domestic trade-related legislation of each APEC member. Information is provided and maintained by each member state.

Additionally, the APEC comparative tool database on FTA/RTAs provide a platform to systematically compare treaty provisions and the functionality to output search results in Excel spreadsheets. APEC Study Centers (ASCC) links to the universities in the Asian-Pacific region, focusing on academic research on APEC. The ASCC also holds an annual conference and makes material available via its website. US Office of the Trade Representative: APEC includes U.S.-APEC trade facts, U.S. tariff rates, and preferential rules of origin. See also the Rand Corporation Reports on APEC.

4.2. ASEAN

ASEAN Members: Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam

Important Documents

Official Websites

  • The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN’s) official website offers:
    • Statistics with data on migration, FDI, trade in services and trade in goods, transport and employment relating to ASEAN member countries
    • ASEAN 2025 connectivity provides information about intra-ASEAN connectivity infrastructure investment projects
  • ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA) Council. The ASEAN Member Countries have made significant progress in the lowering of intra-regional tariffs through the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT). The Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia (ERIA) handed-over the Non-Tariff Measures (NTM) Database to ASEAN on 10 September 2019 during the 51st of ASEAN Economic Ministers Meeting. The database, a collaboration with United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), includes data from the 10 ASEAN members and 6 East Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, India).
  • ASEANstats Data Portal – ASEANstats is a division under the ASEAN Economic Community Department of the ASEAN Secretariat in charge of providing statistical services to the ASEAN Secretariat, ASEAN bodies and ASEAN stakeholders. The portal includes a data visualization tool.
  • Australia Government. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade – the comprehensive website includes texts of free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded by Australia with ASEAN and individually with ASEAN member states, documents relating to negotiation histories and meeting records.
  • EU and ASEAN – the webpage lists status of bilateral agreements concluded and in progress between ASEAN member states and the EU with links to comprehensive analytical and statistical information about member states with active trade relations with EU. The EU has concluded negotiations for free trade agreements (FTAs) with Singapore and Vietnam and is negotiating FTAs with Indonesia. Negotiations with the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand are on hold.
  • Mission of the European Union to ASEAN lists projects the EU is engaged in with ASEAN and includes related documents.
  • Thailand: The Secretariat of the Senate of Thailand. ASEAN Legal Database – The website includes ASEAN legal instruments, constitutions of member countries and implementation of domestic laws of member countries, mostly in vernacular and some in English.
  • US-ASEAN Business Council’s objective is to improve the business environment for American companies and expand the U.S. competitive position in the Southeast Asian region. This site provides general information on US trade relations with ASEAN member countries
  • US Office of the Trade Representative: ASEAN

Think Tanks, Academic Centers and NGOs

Other Online Resources

Journals

Current Awareness

5. Online Resources on Mega-Regional Trade Pacts: TPP, CPTPP and RCEP

Government Websites

Other Online Resources

Current Awareness

  • AsiaTimes covers geopolitical, political, economic and business issues in the Asian-Pacific region.
  • The Diplomat is a subscription-based international current-affairs magazine for the Asia-Pacific region. The online magazine has ASEAN Beat blog, collocating posts relating to ASEAN member states.
  • East Asia Forum is based in The Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University, the Forum is a joint initiative of two academic research networks: The East Asian Bureau of Economic Research (EABER) and the South Asian Bureau of Economic Research (SABER). Two publications are available online in the website: East Asia Forum, an online publication, with daily blog posts, weekly lead articles and digests; East Asia Forum Quarterly, a quarterly magazine
  • South China Morning Post is the Hong Kong based newspaper has a topical page on ASEAN news
  • Strait Times is the Singapore based newspaper website has archived news on South East Asian economic integration searchable by tag

6. Online Resources on Belt and Road Initiative

7. Select Bibliography of Print Publications on ASEAN, APEC, Mega-Regional Trade Alliances and Economic Integration of the Asian-Pacific Region (2015- )

7.1. Books

2020

  • Arner, Douglas W., et al. (ed.) Research Handbook on Asian Financial Law (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2020)
  • Wang, Guiguo, Lee, Yuk Lun &Leung, Mei-Fun. Dispute Resolution Mechanism for the Belt and Road Initiative (Springer, 2020)
  • Zou, Keyuan. The Belt and Road Initiative and the Law of the Sea (Brill Nijhoff, 2020)

2019

  • Chirathivat, Suthiphand, et al. (ed.) China’s Rise in Mainland ASEAN: New Dynamics and Changing Landscape (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing, 2019)
  • Deinla, Imelda. The Development of the Rule of Law in ASEAN: The State and Regional Integration (Cambridge University Press, 2019)
  • Duxbury, Alison & Tan Hsien-Li. Can ASEAN Take Human Rights Seriously? (Cambridge University Press, 2019)
  • Hsieh, Pasha L. & Bryan Mercurio (ed.) ASEAN law in the New Regional Economic Order: Global Trends and Shifting Paradigms. (Cambridge University Press, 2019).
  • Lang, Michael &Jeffrey Owens (ed.) Removing Tax Barriers to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (Wolters Kluwer, 2019)
  • Mendoza, Ronald U. et al. (ed.) Building Inclusive Democracies in ASEAN (World Scientific Publishing, 2019)
  • Nasu, Hitoshi et al. The Legal Authority of ASEAN as a Security Institution (Cambridge University Press, 2019)
  • Ong, Burton. The Regionalisation of Competition Law and Policy within the ASEAN Economic Community (Cambridge University Press, 2019).
  • Permanent Forum of China Construction Law. The Belt and Road Initiative: Legal Risks and Opportunities Facing Chinese Engineering Contractors Operating Overseas (Wolters Kluwer, 2019)
  • Reyes, Anselmo (ed.). Recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters (Hart Publishing, 2019)
  • Suthiphand, Chirathivat et al. (ed.) China’s Rise in Mainland ASEAN: New Dyamics and Changing Landscape. (Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2019

Pre-2018

  • Howse, Robert et al. (ed.) The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals (Cambridge University Press, 2018)
  • Poomintr Sooksripaisarnkit, Poomintr &Sai Ramani Garimella (ed.) China’s One Belt One Road initiative and Private International Law (Routledge, 2018)
  • Zhao, Yun (ed.) International governance and the Rule of Law in China under the Belt and Road Initiative (Cambridge University Press, 2018)
  • Chaisse, Julien et al. (ed.) Paradigm Shift in International Economic Law Rule-Making: TPP as a New Model For Trade Agreements? (Springer Nature, 2017)
  • Ng, Elizabeth Siew-Kuan &Graeme W. Austin. International intellectual property and the ASEAN Way: Pathways to Interoperability (Cambridge University Press, 2017)
  • Rensmann, Thilo (ed.) Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in International Economic Law (Oxford University Press, 2017).
  • Chaisse, Julien. The ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement: The Regionalization of Laws and Policy on Foreign Investment (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017)
  • Davidson, Paul J. Trading Arrangements in the Pacific Rim: ASEAN and APEC. Thomson Reuters Publications, 2011-. V. <1-5> (looseleaf).

7.2. Monographic Series on ASEAN, East Asian Integration And International Economic Law (2015- )

  • Integration Through Law: The Role of Law and the Rule of Law in ASEAN Integration Series. Series editors: J. H. H. Weiler, European University Institute, and Hsien-Li Tan, National University of Singapore (Cambridge University, 2015- )
  • Nottage, Luke, et al. Consumer Law Harmonisation and Cooperation: Achievements and Challenges (2019)
  • Neo, Dora. Services Trade in ASEAN: The Road Taken and the Journey Ahead (2019)
  • Duxbury, Alison & Hsien-Li Tan. Can ASEAN Take Human Rights Seriously? (2019)
  • Nasu, Hitoshi, et al. The Legal Authority of ASEAN as a Security Institution (2019)
  • Closa, Carlos &Lorenzo Casini. Comparative Regional Integration: Governance and Legal Models (2016)
  • Venzke, Ingo &Li-ann Thio. The Internal Effects of ASEAN External Relations (2016)
  • Beckman, Robert, et al. Promoting Compliance: The Role of Dispute Settlement and Monitoring Mechanisms in ASEAN Instruments (2016)
  • Kheng-Lian, Koh, et al. ASEAN Environmental Legal Integration: Sustainable Goals? (2016)
  • Pelkmans, Jacques. The ASEAN Economic Community: a Conceptual Approach (2016)
  • Quah, Jon S. T. The Role of the Public Bureaucracy in Policy Implementation in Five ASEAN Countries (2016)
  • Nguitragool, Paruedee &Jűrgen Rűland. ASEAN as an Actor in International Fora: Reality, Potential and Constraints (2015)
  • Inama, Stefano &Edmund W. Sim. Rules of Origin in ASEAN: a Way Forward (2015)
  • Piris, Jean-Claude &Walter Woon. Towards a Rules-Based Community: an ASEAN Legal Service (2015)
  • Inama, Stefano &Edmund W. Sim. The Foundation of the ASEAN Economic Community: an Institutional and Legal Profile (2015)
  • Kuijper, Pieter Jan &James H. Mathis. From Treaty-Making to Treaty-Breaking Models for ASEAN External Trade Agreements (2015)
  • Chia, Siow Yue &Michael G. Plummer ASEAN Economic Cooperation and Integration: Progress, Challenges and Future Directions (2015)
  • Chesterman, Simon. From Community to Compliance? The Evolution of Monitoring Obligations in ASEAN (2015)
  • Cremona, Marise, et al. ASEAN’s External Agreements: Law, Practice and the Quest for Collective Action (2015)
  • Routledge-ERIA Studies in Development Economies Series Editors: Shujiro Urata, Waseda University, Japan, and Fukunari Kimura, Keio University, Japan (Routledge/ERIA)
  • Chen, Lurong, et al., Developing the Digital Economy (2019)
  • Chen, Lurong, et al., Emerging Global Trade Governance: Mega Free Trade Agreements and Implications for ASEAN (2019)
  • Ing, Lili Yan, et al. (Ed.), East Asian Integration: Goods, Services and Investment (2019)
  • Ing, Lili Yan, et al., The Indonesian Economy: Trade and Industrial Policies (2017)
  • Kobayashi, Kiyoshi, et al. (Ed.), Economic Integration and Regional Development: The ASEAN Economic Community (2017)
  • Findlay, Christopher, ASEAN and Regional Free Trade Agreements (2015)
  • Harvie, Charles, et al. Economic Integration in East Asia: Production networks and small and medium enterprise (2015)
  • Studies in International Trade and Investment Law, Series Editors: Tomer Broude, et al. (Hart Publishing)
  • Anna G. Tevini, Regional Economic Integration and Dispute Settlement In East Asia (2019)
  • Colin Picker, et al. (Ed.), The China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, a 21st Century Model (2017)

8. Research Guides

Research resources on domestic legal systems of member states in the region:

Understanding international trade and Investment related legal regimes and issues:

Understanding US policy on trade and investment in the Asian Pacific region and its involvement with regional alliances – Congressional Research Services (CRS) Reports

9. Conclusion

Trade agreements of Southeast Asian countries, particularly ASEAN member states, are often likened to a “living noodle bowl.”[32] It is important for researchers to sort through treaty commitments of individual states, who may be parties to multiple mega-regional trade agreements, some of which are still under negotiation. These nations may, at the same time, be signatories of bilateral FTAs with individual countries and international organizations within, or outside of, the Asia-Pacific region. One should note that a handful of developing economies of the region, such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh, have yet to become members of existing mega-regional trade alliances in the region, even though they may have signed, or begun negotiations for, bilateral FTAs or regional agreements with individual member countries.[33] Researchers interested in the treaty terms, and practices, as well as enforcement and compliance by their member countries would benefit from secondary sources that track and analyze the evolution of the interconnections among the different trade regimes.[34]  

[1] ASEAN Free Trade Agreements with Dialogue Partner.

[2] APEC’s official website.

[3] Thomas C. Fischer. A commentary on regional institutions in the Pacific Rim: do APEC and ASEAN still mater? 13 Duke J. of Comp. & Int’l Law, 337, at 363 (2003).

[4] See Amr Gohar. APEC: Terrorism takes over economics agenda.

[5] ASEAN’s official website.

[6] Id.

[7] See George Siors, Fostering a proper ASEAN perspective.

[8] For a summary of the failure of the Seattle WTO trade talks, see Robert G. Kaiser & John Burgess, A Seattle Primer: How Not to Hold WTO Talks, Washington Post, December 12 1999 (last viewed April 14, 2020)

[9] See, Supra note iv.

[10] Article 2 (d) and (e) of ASEAN Charter.

[11] 2003 Declaration of ASEAN Concord II (last viewed April 14, 2020)

[12] Michael Ewing-Chow & Ranyta Yusran, The ASEAN Trade Dispute Settlement Mechanism, in The Legitimacy of International Trade Courts and Tribunals 365, at 365 (Robert Howse et al. eds., 2018).

[13] Id., at 365-403, for an analytical study of the history and effectiveness of the ASEAN trade dispute settlement mechanism.

[14] Ben Dolven, The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), CRS In Focus, updated May 22 2019. See also Hien Bui, The ASEAN Human Rights System: a Critical Analysis, 11 Asian J. of Comp. L, 111. (2016).

[15] In re Arbitration Between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China, PCA Case No. 2013-19, Jurisdiction and Admissibility (Oct. 29, 2015); In re Arbitration Between the Republic of the Philippines and the People’s Republic of China, PCA Case No. 2013-19, Award (July 12, 2016), (last viewed April 14, 2020)

16 ASEAN Chairman’s statement of the 22nd ASEAN-China Summit, Bangkok/Nonthaburi, 3 November 2019 (last viewed January 2 2020).

[17] Mark J. Valencia, The Draft Code of Conduct for the South China Sea Has Significant Political Ramifications for ASEAN, ASEAN Today, September 24, 2018 (last viewed January 2 2020); Carl Thayer, A Closer Look at the ASEAN-China Single Draft South China Sea Code of Conduct, The Diplomat, August 3 2018, (last viewed January 2 2020); Nguyen Minh Quang, Negotiating an Effective China–ASEAN South China Sea Code of Conduct, East Asian Forum, July 31, 2019 (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[18] For recent development of the disputes, see Robert Beckman, South China Sea Disputes Rise Again, the Strait Times, January 6th 2020; Sean Quirk, Water Wars: Stare Decisis in the South China Sea, Lawfare, January 6 2020 (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[19] Under Article 1(15) of the ASEAN Charter: “To maintain the centrality and proactive role of ASEAN as the primary driving force in its relations and cooperation with its external partners in a regional architecture that is open, transparent and inclusive.” Additionally, under Article 2(2)(m) of the ASEAN Charter: “ASEAN and its Member States shall act in accordance with the following Principles:… (m) the centrality of ASEAN in external political, economic, social and cultural relations while remaining actively engaged, outward-looking, inclusive and non-discriminatory; and …” (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[20] Kevin Granville, What Is TPP? Behind the Trade Deal That Died, New York Times, updated January 23, 2017 (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[21] James McBride & Andrew Chatzky. CFR Backgrounder: What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)? Last updated January 4, 2019 (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[22] Id. See above for an analysis of the formation and development of TPP.

[23] For a succinct summary of key provisions of CTPPP, see Christopher F. Corr, Francisco de Rosenzweig, William Moran, Samuel David Scoles, Matt Solomon, The CPTPP Enters into Force: What Does it Mean for Global Trade? (January 21 2019, last visited April 14, 2020). For a summary of its transition from TPP, see James McBride & Andrew Chatzky, Council of Foreign Relations Backgrounder: What Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)? (Last updated January 4, 2019, last viewed April 14, 2020).

[24] Matthew P. Goodman, From TPP to CPTPP, March 8 2018, Center for Strategic & International Studies; Jack Caporal, The CPTPP: (Almost) One Year Later, November 5 2019 (last viewed April 14, 2020)

[25] Preamble to the “Guiding Principles and Objectives for Negotiating the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership” (last viewed April 14 2020).

[26] Explained: Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), South China Morning Post, February 19 2019 (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[27] Joint Leaders’ Statement on the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) 4 November 2019, Bangkok, Thailand (last viewed April 14, 2020).

[28] Id.

[29] Harsh V. Pant & Nandini Sarma, Modi Was Right. India Isn’t Ready for Free Trade. November 19, 2019, Foreign Policy (last viewed April 14, 2020)

[30] The official Chinese OBI website Yidaiyilu, at https://www.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/ (last viewed May 12, 2020) includes information of countries which have signed cooperative documents with China.

[31] Id.

[32] See also an earlier article discussing the fragility of regionalism, Richard E. Baldwin, Managing the Noodle Bowl: The Fragility of East Asian Regionalism, ADB Working Paper Series on Regional Economic Integration, No. 7, February 2007, and a more recent analysis in the context of mega-regional trade pacts: Jeffrey D. Wilson, Mega-Regional Trade Deals in the Asia-Pacific: Choosing Between the TPP and RCEP, 45 J. of Contemporary Asia 345, at 347-348 (2015)

[33] Mayaz Alam. South Asian Countries Overlook Regional Economic Integration at Their Own Risk. The Diplomat. August 16, 2019 (last viewed April 14, 2020)

[34] A recent example: Deborah Elms & Minh Hue Nguyen, Understanding ASEAN Integration and Trade, in Research Handbook of Asian Financial Law (Douglas W. Arner et al. eds., 2019).