The Case of Regional Disaster Management Cooperation in ASEAN: A Constructivist Approach to Understanding How International Norms Travel

IF 0.4 Q3 AREA STUDIES
M. Rum
{"title":"The Case of Regional Disaster Management Cooperation in ASEAN: A Constructivist Approach to Understanding How International Norms Travel","authors":"M. Rum","doi":"10.20495/SEAS.5.3_491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I IntroductionI-1 BackgroundThe 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) started cooperating on disaster management under the framework of the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (AADMER), signed in 2005 and in force since 2009. Cooperation under AADMER is an institutionalized expression of the member states' joint efforts. Previously, ASEAN worked in an ad hoc manner to deal with major natural disasters, especially the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of 2004 and Myanmar's 2008 Cyclone Nargis.ASEAN now has two operating arms for disaster management. To facilitate the institutionalization of regional cooperation, the ASEAN Secretariat established a division responsible for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance (DMHA). This division works to help the 10 member states discuss the agreement, facilitate meetings to formulate standard operating procedure, and assist the parties in building a working plan for future development several years ahead. In addition, for executing mandated works such as dispatching emergency response and survey teams, coordinating aid from different member states, and delivering such aid to the field, the 10 member states established the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (the AHA Centre) in November 2011, headquartered in Jakarta. The AHA Centre has been involved in some major humanitarian operations, such as in Thailand's floods of 2011-12, the Philippines' Typhoon Bopha in December 2012, response preparation on the eve of Myanmar's Cyclone Mahasen in May 2013, the Aceh's Bener Meuria earthquake in July 2013, and Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in November 2013.1 This development is considered relatively progressive for ASEAN, which was originally established in 1967 as a political effort to contain Communism.I-2 Significance of the StudyThe development of ASEAN is not a unique phenomenon in the contemporary world. Within the last decade there have been many other intergovernmental arrangements established by different actors. The international community has agreed to further support the Hyogo Framework of Action (HFA) of2005 as the basis for strengthening global, regional, and local empowerment to tackle disasters. Hence, the growing trend of empowering intergovernmental cooperation in disaster management is interesting to examine from the perspective of international relations.In accordance with the HFA 2005, regional organizations are also strongly urged to establish their own frameworks for disaster management cooperation. According to Elizabeth Ferris and Daniel Petz (2013), there are 13 regional organizations working on their own frameworks for disaster risk reduction and management. International disas1) ter management involves a large number of nations, including ASEAN members.One motive seems to be positive: in today's international politics, regionalism plays an important role in effectively bridging the international and national systems (Ferris and Petz 2013). Regionalism has also moved from hard politics to more specific issues. The group of scholars who believe in Functionalism Theory argue that more sectorial cooperation is needed to achieve even deeper regional identities. For example, by cooperating in combating common problems, the member states of a region can learn that there are more advantages to cooperation than conflict. This leads to a decrease in military conflict. A reduction in military conflict means more space for peace, which could lead to regional stability, the fortunate condition that is a requirement to further nurture economic development. While interactions through trade and cultural exchange are intensified, at the end of the day the feeling of belonging (togetherness) with each other becomes stronger.Nevertheless, conventional or rational motives per se (as suggested by realism and liberalism) may not explain the specific reasoning of different regions with regard to their socio-political development. …","PeriodicalId":42525,"journal":{"name":"Southeast Asian Studies","volume":"5 1","pages":"491-514"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.20495/SEAS.5.3_491","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Southeast Asian Studies","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20495/SEAS.5.3_491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

I IntroductionI-1 BackgroundThe 10 member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) started cooperating on disaster management under the framework of the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response (AADMER), signed in 2005 and in force since 2009. Cooperation under AADMER is an institutionalized expression of the member states' joint efforts. Previously, ASEAN worked in an ad hoc manner to deal with major natural disasters, especially the Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of 2004 and Myanmar's 2008 Cyclone Nargis.ASEAN now has two operating arms for disaster management. To facilitate the institutionalization of regional cooperation, the ASEAN Secretariat established a division responsible for Disaster Management and Humanitarian Assistance (DMHA). This division works to help the 10 member states discuss the agreement, facilitate meetings to formulate standard operating procedure, and assist the parties in building a working plan for future development several years ahead. In addition, for executing mandated works such as dispatching emergency response and survey teams, coordinating aid from different member states, and delivering such aid to the field, the 10 member states established the ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management (the AHA Centre) in November 2011, headquartered in Jakarta. The AHA Centre has been involved in some major humanitarian operations, such as in Thailand's floods of 2011-12, the Philippines' Typhoon Bopha in December 2012, response preparation on the eve of Myanmar's Cyclone Mahasen in May 2013, the Aceh's Bener Meuria earthquake in July 2013, and Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines in November 2013.1 This development is considered relatively progressive for ASEAN, which was originally established in 1967 as a political effort to contain Communism.I-2 Significance of the StudyThe development of ASEAN is not a unique phenomenon in the contemporary world. Within the last decade there have been many other intergovernmental arrangements established by different actors. The international community has agreed to further support the Hyogo Framework of Action (HFA) of2005 as the basis for strengthening global, regional, and local empowerment to tackle disasters. Hence, the growing trend of empowering intergovernmental cooperation in disaster management is interesting to examine from the perspective of international relations.In accordance with the HFA 2005, regional organizations are also strongly urged to establish their own frameworks for disaster management cooperation. According to Elizabeth Ferris and Daniel Petz (2013), there are 13 regional organizations working on their own frameworks for disaster risk reduction and management. International disas1) ter management involves a large number of nations, including ASEAN members.One motive seems to be positive: in today's international politics, regionalism plays an important role in effectively bridging the international and national systems (Ferris and Petz 2013). Regionalism has also moved from hard politics to more specific issues. The group of scholars who believe in Functionalism Theory argue that more sectorial cooperation is needed to achieve even deeper regional identities. For example, by cooperating in combating common problems, the member states of a region can learn that there are more advantages to cooperation than conflict. This leads to a decrease in military conflict. A reduction in military conflict means more space for peace, which could lead to regional stability, the fortunate condition that is a requirement to further nurture economic development. While interactions through trade and cultural exchange are intensified, at the end of the day the feeling of belonging (togetherness) with each other becomes stronger.Nevertheless, conventional or rational motives per se (as suggested by realism and liberalism) may not explain the specific reasoning of different regions with regard to their socio-political development. …
东盟区域灾害管理合作案例:理解国际规范如何传播的建构主义方法
东南亚国家联盟(东盟)10个成员国在2005年签署、2009年生效的《东盟灾害管理和应急协定》框架下开始开展灾害管理合作。亚太经合组织框架下的合作是成员国共同努力的机制化体现。此前,东盟以特别方式应对重大自然灾害,特别是2004年印度洋地震和海啸,以及2008年缅甸纳尔吉斯强热带风暴。东盟现在有两个运作部门负责灾害管理。为了促进区域合作的制度化,东盟秘书处设立了一个负责灾害管理和人道主义援助的司。该司的工作是协助10个成员国讨论协议,协助会议制定标准操作程序,协助各方制定未来几年的工作计划。此外,2011年11月,10个成员国设立了东盟灾害管理人道主义援助协调中心(人道主义援助中心),总部设在雅加达,以执行派遣应急反应和调查队、协调不同成员国的援助以及向实地提供援助等授权工作。美国人道主义中心参与了一些重大的人道主义行动,如2011- 2012年泰国的洪水、2012年12月菲律宾的台风宝霞、2013年5月缅甸“马哈森”飓风前夕的应对准备、2013年7月亚齐省的贝纳默里亚地震和2013年11月菲律宾的台风海燕。对于东盟来说,这一发展被认为是相对进步的,东盟于1967年成立,最初是为了遏制共产主义的政治努力。1 -2研究意义东盟的发展并不是当代世界独有的现象。在过去十年中,不同的行动者建立了许多其他政府间安排。国际社会同意进一步支持2005年兵库行动框架(HFA),作为加强全球、区域和地方应对灾害能力的基础。因此,从国际关系的角度来看,赋予灾害管理方面的政府间合作权力的日益增长的趋势是有趣的。根据《2005年灾害管理框架》,还强烈敦促各区域组织建立自己的灾害管理合作框架。根据Elizabeth Ferris和Daniel Petz(2013)的研究,有13个区域组织正在制定自己的灾害风险减少和管理框架。国际灾害管理涉及包括东盟成员国在内的许多国家。其中一个动机似乎是积极的:在当今的国际政治中,地区主义在有效地连接国际和国家体系方面发挥着重要作用(Ferris和Petz 2013)。地区主义也从硬政治转向了更具体的问题。相信功能主义理论的学者认为,需要更多的部门合作来实现更深层次的区域认同。例如,通过合作解决共同的问题,一个地区的成员国可以认识到合作比冲突更有利。这导致了军事冲突的减少。军事冲突的减少意味着更多的和平空间,这可能导致区域稳定,这是进一步培育经济发展所必需的幸运条件。虽然通过贸易和文化交流的互动得到加强,但最终彼此的归属感(团聚感)变得更加强烈。然而,传统或理性动机本身(如现实主义和自由主义所建议的)可能无法解释不同地区关于其社会政治发展的具体推理。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Southeast Asian Studies
Southeast Asian Studies AREA STUDIES-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The new journal aims to promote excellent, agenda-setting scholarship and provide a forum for dialogue and collaboration both within and beyond the region. Southeast Asian Studies engages in wide-ranging and in-depth discussions that are attuned to the issues, debates, and imperatives within the region, while affirming the importance of learning and sharing ideas on a cross-country, global, and historical scale. An integral part of the journal’s mandate is to foster scholarship that is capable of bridging the continuing divide in area studies between the social sciences and humanities, on the one hand, and the natural sciences, on the other hand. To this end, the journal welcomes accessibly written articles that build on insights and cutting-edge research from the natural sciences. The journal also publishes research reports, which are shorter but fully peer-reviewed articles that present original findings or new concepts that result from specific research projects or outcomes of research collaboration.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信