Regional Versus Multilateral Solutions to Transboundary Environmental Problems: Insights from the Southeast Asian Haze

Abstract

At an analytical level, economists have often categorised the international dimensions of environmental problems and policies as being national (or competitiveness), psychological (as opposed to physical) and transboundary (global) in nature. Focusing on transboundary pollution problems, the reasons why a multilateral approach among sovereign nations to solve such global externalities may be difficult are discussed within a simple analytical framework. The paper examines the Southeast Asian experience at a regional approach to tackling the haze problem due to the Indonesian forest fires. It goes on to explore multilateral policy options and constraints for dealing with such transboundary environmental pollution problems. Copyright Blackwell Publishers Ltd 2001.

Public concerns about transboundary haze: A comparison of Indonesia, Singapore, and Malaysia

“…Various analysts have proposed regulating and fining individuals starting fires (Chang and Rajan, 2001;Jones, 2004). But it is usually difficult to identify actors responsible for fires.…”

The Asean Way and Haze Mitigation Efforts

“…A common explanation for the persistence of the haze is the limitations posed by the ASEAN Way of regional governance. Scholars like Tan (2005), Tay (2002), Yahaya (2000), Nguitragool (2011), and Chang and Rajan (2001) have argued that while regional environmental governance can be instrumental in finding solutions to collective action problems, this model of ASEAN cooperation does not work when dealing with environmental challenges such as fires and haze. Scholars have argued that because the ASEAN Way is too deeply engrained in the process of regional governance in ASEAN, member states cannot imagine ASEAN functioning any other way (Kamaruddin [M26] Severino (2006) has described the ASEAN Way as a 'doctrine'; something ideological and therefore, to be adhered to at all costs.…”

“…Because of this, it is argued that ASEAN states struggle to draw a line between respecting their neighbouring government's right to self-determination and cooperatively mediating the haze situation which ultimately affects the entire region (Tan, 2005). Therefore, ASEAN has emphasized policy pronouncements and rhetoric over actual implementation of effective haze mitigation efforts (Chang & Rajan, 2001), largely rendering them ineffective.…”

“…Declarations and agreements adopted at the ASEAN level usually articulate mere 'principles' for regional environmental cooperation but rarely include guidelines for national environmental practice which could be construed as 'intervention' (Elliott, 2003). Therefore, ASEAN environmental initiatives have relied on voluntary cooperation, non-binding agreements, and a weak institutional infrastructure (Campbell, 2005) emphasizing aspirational policy pronouncements and rhetoric over actual implementation (Chang & Rajan, 2001).…”