Critics of "ASEAN Way" have often portrayed it as sluggish in making progress in regional integration. The criticism raises questions about ASEAN's role in the development of physical connectivity. There is a lack of political economy studies on the subject, particularly on ASEAN's role in rail transport connectivity. Hence this paper aims to address the research lacuna. It begins with tracing the historical development of railway networks across Asia since the colonial period to examine the evolution and factors affecting the progress in railway connectivity across the region. Based on the available data on various stages of railway networks in Asia, our research indicates that economic factor has been the main impetus for railway connectivity development in the region. The factor has become even more important following Asia's increasing participation in the global production network and rising intra-and inter-Asia trade with other regions since 1990s. This article argues that rail connectivity development in Asia has progressed without following the European Union model where implementation is bound by the European legislation. The ASEAN approach, which emphasizes consensus and national autonomy, accords flexibility to its member countries in implementing their own connectivity projects. However, growing economic potential has enhanced Southeast Asian leaders' political wills to further develop TAR networks despite some political and geographical/technical impediments. Therefore, the prospect for TAR is bright due to the combined efforts of ASEAN, China and Japan through MPAC, BRI and PQI, alongside technical and financial assistance from organizations like UNESCAP, ADB dan AIIB.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.