东盟内部的议程设置:压力的增加、扩大和打破

Q1 Social Sciences
Ryan Ashley
{"title":"东盟内部的议程设置:压力的增加、扩大和打破","authors":"Ryan Ashley","doi":"10.21512/jas.v11i1.9035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a clear example of an “organized anarchy” within agenda setting literature; meaning that ASEAN has problematic preferences due to its multiple conflicting goals, relies on unclear methods to accomplish those goals, and experiences fluid participation of its members and leaders. This leaves the organization a case study in the path dependency of norms, as ASEAN typically defaults to its founding principles of non-interference, economic inter-connectivity, and regional “centrality” during crises. The research question was on the examples of variation when ASEAN broadens the scope of its mission. The research aimed to answer by framing ASEAN as a subsystem of Southeast Asian regionalism and conducting a comparative historical analysis of three case study periods: the creation of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the failure to reach a joint communique in 2012 over tensions in the South China Sea, and the ongoing crisis of human rights and governance in Myanmar. The case studies demonstrate that the most effective broadening forces for ASEAN are exogenous. The conclusion argues that this is a problematic status quo for a regional organization that seeks to promote its centrality to counter interference from outside powers.","PeriodicalId":52561,"journal":{"name":"Journal of ASEAN Studies","volume":"278 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agenda Setting within ASEAN: Thickening, Broadening, and Breaking Pressures\",\"authors\":\"Ryan Ashley\",\"doi\":\"10.21512/jas.v11i1.9035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a clear example of an “organized anarchy” within agenda setting literature; meaning that ASEAN has problematic preferences due to its multiple conflicting goals, relies on unclear methods to accomplish those goals, and experiences fluid participation of its members and leaders. This leaves the organization a case study in the path dependency of norms, as ASEAN typically defaults to its founding principles of non-interference, economic inter-connectivity, and regional “centrality” during crises. The research question was on the examples of variation when ASEAN broadens the scope of its mission. The research aimed to answer by framing ASEAN as a subsystem of Southeast Asian regionalism and conducting a comparative historical analysis of three case study periods: the creation of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the failure to reach a joint communique in 2012 over tensions in the South China Sea, and the ongoing crisis of human rights and governance in Myanmar. The case studies demonstrate that the most effective broadening forces for ASEAN are exogenous. The conclusion argues that this is a problematic status quo for a regional organization that seeks to promote its centrality to counter interference from outside powers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52561,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of ASEAN Studies\",\"volume\":\"278 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of ASEAN Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v11i1.9035\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of ASEAN Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21512/jas.v11i1.9035","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

东南亚国家联盟(ASEAN)是议程设定文献中“有组织的无政府状态”的一个明显例子;这意味着东盟由于其多个相互冲突的目标而有问题的偏好,依靠不明确的方法来实现这些目标,并且其成员和领导人的参与不稳定。这使得该组织成为规范路径依赖的研究案例,因为东盟在危机期间通常默认其不干涉、经济互联互通和区域“中心地位”的基本原则。研究问题是关于东盟扩大其使命范围时的变化例子。该研究旨在通过将东盟作为东南亚地区主义的一个子系统来回答这个问题,并对三个案例研究时期进行比较历史分析:东盟地区论坛(ARF)的创建,2012年未能就南中国海紧张局势达成联合公报,以及缅甸持续的人权和治理危机。案例研究表明,最有效的扩大东盟的力量是外生的。结论认为,对于一个寻求提升其中心地位以对抗外部大国干预的区域组织来说,这是一个有问题的现状。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Agenda Setting within ASEAN: Thickening, Broadening, and Breaking Pressures
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is a clear example of an “organized anarchy” within agenda setting literature; meaning that ASEAN has problematic preferences due to its multiple conflicting goals, relies on unclear methods to accomplish those goals, and experiences fluid participation of its members and leaders. This leaves the organization a case study in the path dependency of norms, as ASEAN typically defaults to its founding principles of non-interference, economic inter-connectivity, and regional “centrality” during crises. The research question was on the examples of variation when ASEAN broadens the scope of its mission. The research aimed to answer by framing ASEAN as a subsystem of Southeast Asian regionalism and conducting a comparative historical analysis of three case study periods: the creation of the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), the failure to reach a joint communique in 2012 over tensions in the South China Sea, and the ongoing crisis of human rights and governance in Myanmar. The case studies demonstrate that the most effective broadening forces for ASEAN are exogenous. The conclusion argues that this is a problematic status quo for a regional organization that seeks to promote its centrality to counter interference from outside powers.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of ASEAN Studies
Journal of ASEAN Studies Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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