{"title":"监管区域化与东盟银行一体化的局限性:以印尼为例","authors":"M. F. Karim, Adelia Putri Irawan, T. Mursitama","doi":"10.1177/02633957211061233","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to integrate the banking industry in the region. To achieve this, ASEAN members have agreed to create the ASEAN Banking Integration Framework (ABIF) to support such integration. Despite being endorsed in 2014, the framework remains vague and lacks clear policy coordination arrangements as well as standardisation instruments that enable ASEAN member states to integrate their banking sectors. This article examines why the member states agreed to such regulatory arrangements. Building upon the regulatory regionalism approach, we argue that the regulatory arrangement is underpinned by a socio-political struggle among dominant social forces in ASEAN. The article further argues that the political endeavour to internationalise domestic capital through the banking integration project remains problematic, given that local banking players seem to largely focus on protecting and penetrating domestic markets rather than regional expansion. This has hindered the progress of regional banking integration in ASEAN. To substantiate this argument, we use Indonesia’s engagement in the process as a case study. This article contributes to the study of political economies of banking integration outside of the European experiment by emphasising the importance of state–society relations in shaping the outcome of regional integration.","PeriodicalId":47206,"journal":{"name":"Politics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regulatory regionalism and the limits of ASEAN banking integration: The case of Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"M. F. Karim, Adelia Putri Irawan, T. Mursitama\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02633957211061233\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to integrate the banking industry in the region. To achieve this, ASEAN members have agreed to create the ASEAN Banking Integration Framework (ABIF) to support such integration. Despite being endorsed in 2014, the framework remains vague and lacks clear policy coordination arrangements as well as standardisation instruments that enable ASEAN member states to integrate their banking sectors. This article examines why the member states agreed to such regulatory arrangements. Building upon the regulatory regionalism approach, we argue that the regulatory arrangement is underpinned by a socio-political struggle among dominant social forces in ASEAN. The article further argues that the political endeavour to internationalise domestic capital through the banking integration project remains problematic, given that local banking players seem to largely focus on protecting and penetrating domestic markets rather than regional expansion. This has hindered the progress of regional banking integration in ASEAN. To substantiate this argument, we use Indonesia’s engagement in the process as a case study. This article contributes to the study of political economies of banking integration outside of the European experiment by emphasising the importance of state–society relations in shaping the outcome of regional integration.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47206,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Politics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Politics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02633957211061233\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02633957211061233","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Regulatory regionalism and the limits of ASEAN banking integration: The case of Indonesia
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) aims to integrate the banking industry in the region. To achieve this, ASEAN members have agreed to create the ASEAN Banking Integration Framework (ABIF) to support such integration. Despite being endorsed in 2014, the framework remains vague and lacks clear policy coordination arrangements as well as standardisation instruments that enable ASEAN member states to integrate their banking sectors. This article examines why the member states agreed to such regulatory arrangements. Building upon the regulatory regionalism approach, we argue that the regulatory arrangement is underpinned by a socio-political struggle among dominant social forces in ASEAN. The article further argues that the political endeavour to internationalise domestic capital through the banking integration project remains problematic, given that local banking players seem to largely focus on protecting and penetrating domestic markets rather than regional expansion. This has hindered the progress of regional banking integration in ASEAN. To substantiate this argument, we use Indonesia’s engagement in the process as a case study. This article contributes to the study of political economies of banking integration outside of the European experiment by emphasising the importance of state–society relations in shaping the outcome of regional integration.
期刊介绍:
Politics publishes cutting-edge peer-reviewed analysis in politics and international studies. The ethos of Politics is the dissemination of timely, research-led reflections on the state of the art, the state of the world and the state of disciplinary pedagogy that make significant and original contributions to the disciplines of political and international studies. Politics is pluralist with regards to approaches, theories, methods, and empirical foci. Politics publishes articles from 4000 to 8000 words in length. We welcome 3 types of articles from scholars at all stages of their careers: Accessible presentations of state of the art research; Research-led analyses of contemporary events in politics or international relations; Theoretically informed and evidence-based research on learning and teaching in politics and international studies. We are open to articles providing accounts of where teaching innovation may have produced mixed results, so long as reasons why these results may have been mixed are analysed.