Formulating International Higher Education Framework for Regional Cooperation and Integration in Asia
(Parallel Discussion 2)
January 17, 2008

Session II : Experiences of Asian Higher Education Frameworks and their Implications
for the Future
Format & Editing: David Passarelli
Transcription: Kyoko Moriya/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to this afternoon’s session.
Please let me introduce myself, my name is Miki Sugimura from Sophia University.
Today, I’m honored to be acting as the chairperson for this panel discussion.
This morning, we talked about trends in the internationalization of higher education andregionalism. We highlighted some internationalization trends in higher education and we
found that this had expanded very rapidly. The title of this session is ‘Experiences ofAsian Higher Education Frameworks and Their Implications for the Future.’ We havethree distinguished speakers joining us this afternoon. Each presentation will be 20
minutes in length.
First, we will hear the three presentations and just after we will have a discussion period,
when we will be taking questions and comments.
I would like to invite the first guest speaker, Professor Supachai. He is the director of the
SEAMEO Regional Centre for Higher Education and Development.
/Professor Supachai Yavaprabhas/Director, SEAMEO Regional Centre for Higher Education andDevelopment/Presentation: Experiences of Asian Higher Education Frameworks andtheir Implications for the Future
Thank you very much and good afternoon.
First of all, I would like to join the presenters this morning in thanking Waseda
University and thanking Professor Kuroda for having invited us to this very important
meeting.
I will make a rather quick presentation and I’ll try my best to keep it under 20 minutes.
This presentation is based on my paper and it will be divided in five parts. The first part,you may not find in your booklet because I just added it. It is just a very briefintroduction to our organization: SEAMEO-RIHED. SEAMEO stands for the Southeast
Asian Ministers of Education Organization, and RIHED stands for the Regional Institutefor Higher Education and Development.
Next, I will touch upon higher education challenges, and implications for national
agendas. Then, I will talk about current frameworks for higher education harmonizationand integration. Professor de Prado already outlined the European situation in themorning session, so I will touch on it only briefly. Then, I will talk a little about Latin
America, the Caribbean and West Africa. I will then touch on the future trends for aregional higher education framework in the Asia-Pacific, its characteristics and thepossible areas of collaboration. Finally, I will discuss the possible future framework for
closer higher education harmonization in the Asia-Pacific.
This is our umbrella organization: the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education
Organization or, SEAMEO, established in November of 1965. If you trace the history of
our organization, SEAMEO RIHED, you will find it was indeed established in 1965, but
it only came under the umbrella of SEAMEO about 10 years ago. This is a chart of thisinternational organization, which explains our aim to promote cooperation in education,science and culture in Southeast Asia. Actually the members of the organization are notlimited to ASEAN, but include Timor Leste, as well. Presently, we have 11 member
countries.
This is the SEAMEO family: we have BIOTROP in Indonesia who deals with tropicalbiology; we have SEAMEO-CHAT in Myanmar; we have SEAMEO-INNOTECH in thePhilippines; we have SEAMEO-RECSAM in Penang; we have SEAMEO-RELC in
Singapore; SEAMEO-RETRAC in Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh; we have our offices inThailand; SEAMEO-SEAMOLEC in Indonesia who deals with open and distancelearning; we have SEAMEO-SEARCA which offers various renowned agriculturaltraining programs located in the Philippines; we have SEAMEO-SPAFA in Thailand; wehave SEAMEO-TROPMED in Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand; andwe have SEAMEO-VOCTECH who deals mainly with vocational education in Brunei.
That is our SEAMEO organization. For SEAMEO-RIHED, the mission is to assist
member countries in promoting efficiency and effectiveness in higher education policy
planning and development. So we deal mainly with higher education policies inSoutheast Asian countries. That was just a brief introduction of our organization and I
would encourage you to visit our website.
So now I would like to touch on the challenges of higher education and their implications.
At the national level in developing countries - like we said in the morning – we see a
massive population boom and a greater need for access to higher education. At the end of
the last session, we spoke about the low quality of the courses and the higher cost of
higher education. If you look at the developed countries, like Japan and Korea, you will
notice smaller student numbers because of the changes in demography. So there is agreater need to attract tertiary level students and this leads to increased competition
amongst higher education institutions.

So, there is a need to enhance student mobility, as well as maintaining, if not increasing,the quality of higher education at the same time. At the international level, because of
globalization and because of the liberal economic regimes, as was mentioned in themorning session, higher education has become a key economic resource and is readily
exported. Higher education is to be open and held accountable to public scrutiny
especially through the quality assurance movement; a challenge that I think we face inevery country nowadays. Given this trend towards competitiveness, concerns of quality
assurance and flexible mobility, I think the institutional response has been to rethink
university governance, curriculum design and quality assurance both in teaching andresearch.
As Professor Morshidi from Malaysia discussed this morning, universities in Malaysia
are also working towards achieving more autonomy. I think this university autonomy
movement does not apply only to Malaysia, but to most universities in Southeast Asia.
I’m from Chulalongkorn University and we have just transformed from a regular public
university to become an autonomous public university, only a month ago. And otheruniversities such as Mahidol University, Chaingmai University and others, have alsotransformed from regular public universities to become autonomous public universities.
As of now, there are about 17 regular public universities that have transitioned to become
autonomous universities.
As far as intergovernmental responses, my observation is that higher education policies
have been moving toward harmonization and greater interaction at the governmental
level. In the morning session, Professor de Prado discussed the Bologna process, so I will
not touch on this. But I would like to call your attention to the fact that we should study
what Europe has been going through this harmonization process, notice how it works andwhat we can learn from it.
I would also like to mention that in Latin America there is a move toward cross-borderregional integration, working particularly with the EU. In Latin America and the
Caribbean, as opposed to creating a newly integrated higher education system, they workwith Europe so that it will be easier for them to move forward: aligning themselves with
the European system. They want to have a common space with Europe, as well.
In West Africa, they are also working on the promotion of regional integration in higher
education; this is the instrument they are using to upgrade the quality of their higher
education system. I will not discuss this further because you can find this information in
my paper.
Now, when we look at ourselves, look at Europe, look at Latin America and also to West
Africa, we find that in the Asia-Pacific, the existing cooperation in higher education
within the region is mainly institution-based; that is, cooperation is mostly institution-toinstitution.
We can also find higher education cooperation in functional programs, such as in quality
assurance with the APQN: Asia Pacific Quality Network; and promoting student and staff

mobility, we find UMAP. Perhaps you can ask Professor Ninomiya about this, as heknows much better than me. And in terms of research and other activities, we have theAUN (ASEAN University Network), which covers QA (Quality Assurance), student andstaff exchange and research collaboration. We also have the APRU, the Asia-PacificResearch University based in Singapore. The very first network of higher education
institutes in Southeast Asia, however, is ASAIHL (Association of Southeast Asian
Institutes of Higher Learning). ASAIHL has been established for more than 40 years andcontinues to serve the region.
Cooperation among universities in the region has thus existed either between theinstitutions or in the form of different networks. The scope of regional cooperation is
however, limited to certain functions such as quality assurance and student exchange.
There is no, as of yet, intergovernmental “infrastructure” for promoting cooperation inhigher education. What we may need is a kind of voluntary regional policy mechanism orframework, leading to a structured cooperation in higher education within the region;
something similar to what we see in Europe.
If this kind of framework is needed, who will be the prime movers? Maybe it will comefrom the ASEAN socio-cultural communities; one of the three pillars of ASEAN. Perhaps
it will be SEAMEO; because SEAMEO centers are quite keen on promoting diverse
aspects of higher education cooperation in the ASEAN community. The prime mover
maybe Australia: the first promoters of UMAP and later the Brisbane Communiqué.
There are also other networks that could become prime movers in this movement. The
journey for harmonization of higher education in the region, for us, SEAMEO-RIHED, isfocused on raising awareness among universities and member countries. SEAMEORIHED has organized the meeting of the director general/secretary general responsible
for higher education in Southeast Asia, to meet and discuss the possibility of integrationof higher education in the region. The outcome was quite positive. We’ll later submit our
proposal on higher education harmonization in Southeast Asia for the consideration of theeducation ministers of SEA countries.
What we have been doing and are now doing is very much in-sync with what wasrecommended by our speakers this morning: we look at the existing networks, we see
what is lacking and subsequently we try to fill in the gap. It is at the intergovernmental
level where we need to pay more attention. We do need an intergovernmental
infrastructure to facilitate cooperation in higher education in the region. To this end, wemust work together more closely.
Thank you very much.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University

Thank you very much Professor Supachai, for that good presentation. You gave us
concrete and functional points for cooperation and future frameworks.
To point out one of those networks, I would like to invite our next speaker, Professor
Piniti. He is the director of the ASEAN University Network.

/Professor Piniti Ratananukuk/Director, ASEAN University Network/Presentation: Experience of Asian Higher Education Frameworks andtheir Implications for the Future

Thank you very much madam chairperson and good afternoon ladies and gentlemen.
Again, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Professor Kuroda for inviting me toparticipate in this important symposium, allowing me to share our experience and ourwork with you today.
To begin my presentation, I would like to quickly touch on the impact of globalization on
Asian higher education and how our organization has responded to this issue.
I believe the impact of globalization on Asian countries began to be felt in the late 19thand early 20th centuries. Of course, we have adopted a Western model for our higher
education system. Also, English has become the common language of higher education,
especially in international programs in countries where English is not native. Also, there
has been an increase in student and staff mobility in higher education mobility,
information exchanges and new course delivery systems. And what I would like to focus
on is the mobility of students and staff; specifically, how to make use of this to respond tothe calls for cooperation in education and also to address the issue of regional integration
or more precisely, ASEAN integration.
So, my presentation today will cover three main themes: first, it will cover ASEAN
education cooperation; then I will look at AUN implications and experiences; and the lastpart will consider the AUN strategic framework from 2008-2015. Some may wonder why
the strategic plan spans 2008-2015. As you may already know we, the ASEAN University
Network, were established as one of the secretariat bodies of ASEAN. Under the new
ASEAN charter we would like to address the ASEAN education issue. There is a newmandate under the new ASEAN charter to build-up the ASEAN community by the year
2015 to be a single community. That is the impetus to develop this strategic framework.
Last November, we had a workshop to discuss these issues and we were very lucky tohave the ASEAN Secretary General join our workshop to develop this strategic
framework. In terms of ASEAN cooperation, South Asia development ofinternationalization in higher education was initiated in the early 1990s. This was thenfollowed by the various efforts put forth by parties sharing a common interest ininternationalization activities.
Many of the universities in the region are already engaged in international activities
ranging from student and staff exchange to joint-research and development projects. At
the political level, under the ASEAN official framework on education ASEAN leaders set
a new direction for regional education collaboration when they welcomed the decision of
the ASEAN Education Minister at the 11th Summit in December 2005, to convene
meetings on a regular basis. The ASEAN Education Minister identified three priorities
for education. The first was to promote ASEAN citizens, particularly the youth, tostrengthen ASEAN identity through education. The second is to build ASEAN humanresources in the field of education. And finally, to strengthen the ASEAN University
Network. I think the priority for AUN is to make use of the existing network to support
these priorities that I have mentioned.
I would like to provide you with more information about the ASEAN University Network.
Our organization was considered to constitute a central body within ASEAN. We work
together on the ASEAN Senior Officials Meeting on Education. This is the legal bodythat operates under the ASEAN Education Ministers Meeting, ASEMM. At this level, we
also work together with SEAMEO, the Southeast Asia Ministers of Education
Organization that Professor Supachai mentioned. When we have a policy
recommendation, we will submit it through the summit and then go through the ASEMM.
It will subsequently reach the ASEAN Summit for approval. This is the way we operate
under the ASEAN framework.
Before 2005, the ASEMM did not exist. I can say that the ASEAN Education Ministers
Meeting stems from an initiative Professor Supachai and I launched, after having met
with the Thai Education Minister at the Ministry of Education. We told him that within
ASEAN, a body that could overlook the whole education system did not exist. ASEAN
The first ASEAN Education Ministers Meeting was held in Bangkok in 2005, as a retreat
before commencing the year.
Our network was founded by an idea that came out of a head of states meeting in 1992.
Until 1995, the Charter of the ASEAN University Network had only been signed by the
ASEAN minister responsible for higher education. Subsequently, the presidents, rectors
and vice-chancellors of participating universities also signed an agreement recognizing
the establishment of the ASEAN University Network.

The picture shows the trustee meeting, which is held bi-annually, every 6 months, and ishosted by board members in alphabetical order. This year, the meeting will be held inJune, in Vietnam.
The objective for the establishment of the AUN is to promote collaboration and solidarity
among ASEAN scholars and academicians; to develop academic and professional humanresources; to promote information dissemination among the ASEAN academic
community; and to enhance the awareness of regional identity and the sense of‘ASEANness’ among members. At present, we have 21 universities representing member
countries from within ASEAN. The secretariat is located at Chulalongkorn University, in
Bangkok, Thailand. Qualifying universities, as you can see, have to be nominated by the
Ministry of Education from each country. We are lucky to have a leading university fromeach country as partners within this framework.
There are a lot of questions asking why we cannot extend membership to otheruniversities. The reason is that we only want active members to participate in our
activities. This is because some of our activities are conducted on a cost-sharing basis
and some activities are funded by the ASEAN Secretariat or by our dialogue partners.
The main activities we are conducting within ASEAN include: the ASEAN Study
Program, student exchange programs and the AUN Educational Forum (this program isconducted annually on a cost-sharing basis, bringing students and staff together). As well,
we have the AUN Distinguished Scholar Program, the AUN Youth Cultural Forum (thisis also conducted on a cost-sharing basis), collaborative research activities andinformation networking and the AUN Quality Assurance program.
The purpose of setting-up the AUN Quality Assurance program is to set a benchmark forthe quality of education in ASEAN. We do set up something like a guideline for the
institution to choose the KPI that is most suitable. We also have the ASEAN Graduate
Business and Economics Program Network. This is a network wherein graduates inbusiness administration and economics can join together to discuss their research.
The purpose of these activities is to narrow the gap between ASEAN + 6 and ASEAN + 4.
ASEAN + 4 includes Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam. Last year we set up
another network called the AUN Intellectual Property Network. This network will focus
solely on ‘intellectual property’ education in universities. This program is partially
supported by the EU. We also hold activities in cooperation with dialogue partners,
including China, European Union, Japan and the Republic of Korea.
From the activities that I have mentioned, how can the AUN contribute to ASEAN
integration? As you can see, education permeates all three pillars of the ASEAN
community. The three pillars include economic, security and socio-cultural communities.
The activities mentioned provide students with opportunities to take part in regional
collaboration. We are working toward developing a regional system for accreditation; as
you can see, we have set up a guideline for a quality assurance mechanism. We began
using this guideline to assess education programs from amongst AUN member
institutions. Last year, we undertook an assessment of the engineering and businessprograms at the University of Malaya. This year the assessment will be conducted in thePhilippines, at both De La Salle University and the University of the Philippines.
And what about building an ASEAN identity? This can be done by building robust
exchange programs, in order to promote the concept of “ASEANness” within the region.
As I already mentioned, the new ASEAN charter was adopted in Singapore in Novemberof last year. There have been some changes in AUN’s structure since the adoption of thisnew charter. I have spoken with the new Secretary-General and suggested that we, theAUN, can act as the ASEAN’s educational arm. We can address some issues for ASEAN;
for example, if there are some questions or problems that need dealing with by means ofresearch, the AUN can supply those services.
From the workshop that was organized to define AUN’s strategy and position toward andwithin the ASEAN community, we acknowledged four main areas that need to beaddressed to satisfy priority areas identified by ASEAN. The four main themes include:
investing in people, narrowing the developing gap, narrowing the digital divide andpromoting deeper regional awareness.
How to respond to an investment in people? We should develop an AUN scholarshipinitiative. The ASEAN secretariat has already adopted this idea: it will be offered in thenext couple of years. We can also realize this investment by developing research
partnerships for knowledge transfer; concentrating on building relationships with ASEAN
dialogue partners. We can begin narrowing the developing gap by considering existing
offers of scholarships: the II project that I already mentioned was financed by the
ASEAN secretariat, through the ASEAN Foundation. A distinguished scholar program
should be implemented, as well as an ASEAN credit transfer system. The ASEAN credit
transfer system can be implemented, provided we do not have a gap in the quality
between ASEAN universities. This is why we are also emphasizing a full implementationof the quality assurance system.
In an effort to narrow the digital divide, we should consider enhancing our website alongwith those belonging to member universities. We also need to concentrate on promoting agreater awareness of ASEAN and the AUN by publicizing them more in the universities.
We are considering the establishment a series of annual AUN sporting events to promote
integration, as well. In the same vein, we would like to facilitate student mobility andinternships within ASEAN.
These are the four main themes that we would like to implement and evaluate on our way
to promoting greater regional integration within ASEAN.
Thank you very much.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University

Thank you very much Professor Piniti. Along with Professor Supachai’s presentation on
SEAMEO, Professor Piniti’s presentation of the ASEAN University Network showed us
frameworks and networks are developing in the region - thank you very much.
Thank you very much, as well, for keeping to the time limit – it is most helpful.
I would like to invite the last speaker, Dr. Zainal. He is the coordinator of the Regional
Center of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development at the University Sains
Malaysia. His presentation is entitled: Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for
Sustainable Development.
/Mr. Zainal Abidin Sanusi, PhD/Coordinator, Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable
Development, Universiti Sains Malaysia/Presentation: Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable
Development (RCE-EfSD): An Emerging Model for
Regional Cooperation through Higher Education
Thank you, madam chairperson.
First and foremost, I would like to register my double honor to be here: first, to be invitedfor this momentum-building conference; and secondly, to be able to come back to thisuniversity, from which I graduated. I remember graduating downstairs, just two years
back, and now I am coming back again to present my paper – I very happy to be here.
After listening to this morning’s presentations, I feel like there isn’t much that I would
like to elaborate, except perhaps to share our experiences, from a bit of a different
perspective. I’ve just listened to two presentations that explained two big institutions in
ASEAN, and this, by two big professors. The way I see it, we have structured thediscussion around the structure, the actors and the contents. What I’m going to look at isthe contents of higher education; that is, how do we shape the content, given the structure
and actors that we already have. I have a few small contentious issues that I’d like to add
to the discussion of integration and cooperation.
Because I come from background of political economy, I find it a little confusing to speakof this kind of ‘regionalism’ in higher education. Okay, I’ll have two parts to mypresentation. I thought I would have extra time since the presenters before me finishedearly. But, I’m happy to spend more time on the Q&A.
I would like to propose a question – again, coming from a political science background –to set the context within which I intend to go forward. First, I’d like to give somecontextual background to regional integration; although Professor Kuroda alreadycovered this, I’d like to offer my own perspective on this. Secondly, I’d like to speak
about regional integration in higher education, again, just to set the background to mytalk and my experience. Lastly, I’ll be looking at a case study, that of the Regional Centerof Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development, and I’d like to propose a model
for regional integration through higher education. This may look complicated as a topic,
but I’ll try to simplify it in the actual presentation.
I would like to say that I’m personally, very interested in this subject because I am trying
to connect the two things that I am currently teaching: regionalism from both
perspectives; as well as my current project work: promoting education for sustainable
development. So, when I taught, I would always wonder how I’d really be able tocontribute to regionalism in a practical way – it is something that I think about a lot. At
the end of the day, the role of the university is to contribute back to society. So this is theplatform for my arguments.
Again, I will share maybe the ideal that has been put forward already: we would like to
see how our local values, regional values, Southeast Asian values can be used as aframework to really promote our own unique higher education framework. On this, I
would like share of the ideas I have in mind.
So, I agree with what Professor Morshidi said, we have old and new regionalisms, we see
different driving forces in regionalisms - economic, trade, etc. And, Professor Supachai
also mentioned functional cooperation, and it is precisely this point that my talk will
focus on – that is where I have the most experience. Looking at functional cooperationand functional regionalism means that we are looking at thematic issues rather thanspecific ones; like security issues, which was a driving factor for regionalism before. We
see in previous regionalisms, a sort of top-down approach. What I would suggest is an
emerging trend - or the issue that is becoming more important – and which I am currently
working on, is the mainstreaming of functional cooperation. So I’m share the same
thoughts Professor Supachai advanced: Promoting a kind of functions-based cooperation.
That will encompass human resource development, global issues, environmental issues,
human rights, and so on; and it will most definitely include sustainable development.
When trying to conceive of the structure of such an approach, I think it will adopt
something of the bottom-up type of regionalism, rather than top-down. And here, we
witness another important element of the equation: the functions of networking. I think
Professor Piniti spoke about this already, but I believe this will be a very important
platform we have to look at. Another point I would like emphasize is the presence ofmultiple actors and multiple stakeholders, in order to really forward a regional higher
education framework. There is another contention I have when we talk about this topic.

Are we going to focus on higher education alone, or are we going to get seriously
involved with the other stakeholders: civil society and the community?
This will set the basis from which I can explain my experience at the Regional Centre ofExpertise. This can be summed up by asking, what are the different elements between the
new and old? Something that I find is quite interesting to talk about is locally developed
platforms, where we really get bottom-up participation from actors: treating the issues
and developing future structures. At the same time, we need to ensure regional interests
really call for maintaining diversity. This is where my definition of sustainability comes
from; meaning that different cultures need to compromise to be maintained. And lastly,
we need to integrate multi-disciplinary thinking in the integrated higher education
framework. So the question becomes, is there any existing model that can be duplicatedwhich will accommodate these integrated platforms?
I think this next point has already been mentioned, but in response various development
models have been put forth, from the globalization approach, the localization approach,and so on. And from these perspectives various universities have sprung up: private
universities, state-based universities, and many others. These are the models andapproaches we’ve been discussing, and they all aim to produce internationally-valued
students. However, many universities still wonder what ‘value’ must comprise thedesignation ‘international.’ This is what I will discuss when I mention ‘content.’ I simply
throw out academic imperialism. So, I would like to end this section with a question:
What are the elements, contents and framework of such a system of education, and what
are they leading to? Our work try’s to deal with the latter part of the question “where arethey leading to?”And again, as has already been mentioned, there is a common ‘recipe of responses’ to theinternationalization process: I’m trying to focus on developing networks (consortiums
and multilateral agreements) and developing a common regionalization based oncommon issues - functional things.
To provoke some thought I would like to another few questions: who is setting thebenchmarks? What will be the final output? These questions suggest that we need amodel of higher education that will reflect the emerging trend of regionalism.
After having set the background, I would like to talk about my experiences. I am now
part of a group of centers, called the Regional Centre of Education for Sustainable
Development. And would like to suggest the term GLORENACAL. Some, in theliterature, have suggested a GLOCAL perspective, others a GLONECAL – Global,
National and Local. I would like to suggest that the regional perspective is equallyimportant, and that would translate into GLORENACAL.
I was really quite impressed by this quotation from a French anthropologist: “The Age of
the Nation is past, it is time to build the Earth.” It means we need to work towards
achieving a global consensus.

I will engage in a little promotion, where the university is and what it is about. What is an
RCE? It is a regional center, as you can see, existing of formal and non-formal education
organizations, mobilized to deliver education for sustainable development to local andregional communities. A network of RCEs worldwide will constitute the Global Learning
Space for Sustainable Development. RCEs aspire to achieve the goals of the UN Decadeof Education for Sustainable Development, by translating its global objectives into thecontext of the local communities in which they operate. That is where I see the regional
contributions of these RCEs.
How are these RCEs running? At the moment, we have 44 centers - 44 RCEs around theworld - and they are aiming to have 300 RCEs by the end of the decade, by 2015. So
what are core elements of an RCE? Governance: addressing the management of different
stakeholders; collaboration: understanding how the many different stakeholders areinvited to consult with each other – it is important that even the small minority in our
extensive network be represented. These RCEs are led, mostly, by top universities in theregion.
They are also involved in research and development in both the sciences and social
sciences, often working to bring them together. They also focus on transformativeeducation; contributing to the transformation of the current education and training
systems to satisfy the ambitions of the region regarding sustainable living and livelihoods.
So, this is a framework for all the RCEs, but then it is important to note that it is entirely
up to the RCEs to contextualize their work, because we still respect the principle ofcontextualization. Local issues need to be approached differently.
This is an example of what an RCE is – they are all stakeholders: we find the Ministry of
Education representatives, a higher education component, a vocational education
component, a NGO component, media groups and insights from individuals. Here, wehave different views being represented, from the local to the national level.
As you can see RCEs are really spread out around the world; I think are 23 of them now
in the Asia-Pacific. These are the universities leading the RCEs around the world. Someof them are ranking quite high and others not so high, but they all have their own
strengths. So, I have presented a few projects that we have and are currently engaged in,
but I would also like to present those we would like to commence in the very near future.
We see emerging platforms that really try to bring collaborative projects among different
universities within the RCE’s framework. Last year, we held an RCE international
conference, which I organized at the university. 44 RCEs joined the conference,
representing more than half of all the universities in our system. It was a general
conference on inter-regional collaborative projects. It helps us survey which different
regions have their own local projects and how they are putting them together. The
outcome of this conference is the list of collaborative projects I listed before, and this for
projects within the region and between regions. RCE Penang was the one leading theconference, coordinating different issues throughout. Also, the RCE is closely related to
the United Nations University and we translate information from the regional level andthe inter-regional level to the local level, and that’s how it works.

The other program we have involves 4 RCEs actually, University Sains Malaysia and 3
universities in Japan, all involved in collaborative research. Their research focuses onunderstanding the governance of sustainable development in both countries by means of acomparative approach: what can we learn from each other’s experiences and what kind ofgeneral template can be used in order to promote local solutions at the regional andglobal levels through NGOs and other actors.
The other research that I am particularly interested in is very recent. Having associatedwith the United Nations universities’ framework, I would suggest that this platform will
become very important in the future. This platform is founded upon postgraduate
research of education for sustainable development; at present it comprises a network,
which we call the Asia Pacific network. Apart from one Australian university, I would
consider all the other institutions as being from Asia. Rather than promoting a generalframework – which we already find in ASEAN, the UN and SEAMEO – just take small
fragment of the debate, the part concerned with sustainable development, and we promote
it at the local levels. So, it goes from the researcher’s level to the student level.
The other program we are working in, to be launched in April, is a kind of channel forsustainable development. A place where scientists and social scientists can reallyintegrate and share their local solutions from their countries, for the rest of Asia. So, thisis, I believe, a way to harness local solutions for regional problems, ultimately giving
way to a regional approach.
And the last project I would like to talk about will be held in June, it is the first Southeast
Asian conference on sustainable development. I really find this initiative quite interesting,insofar as it is a promotion of local solutions. In my eyes, this means that regional values
are being promoted. So, slowly a shared understanding amongst countries in the region
will develop. We plan to call expert scientists from different universities in the region tocome up local solutions. For example, some of our scientists have developed a very cheap
and affordable kit that can be made accessible to the poor families in the region. Most
inventions nowadays are not accessible to the poor as they are often meant for the rich.
We are addressing the lower levels of the community. So, what we have is this kind of
platform for innovation and idea sharing among different agencies in the region.
Based on the 3 projects we are planning, we have learnt is that apart from talking about
the structure, we need to consider how to fill in the contents. Sustainable development isreally an overarching issue that can bring structure and content together.
Thank you.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much Zainal-sensei. Dr. Zainal’s speech was also very informative andinstructive. He gave us a very crucial framework, some argument points, especially
focusing on functional based cooperation. He also explained RCE inter-regional activities,
which is important to us.
So I’d like to now move on to our discussion session. The floor is for open for discussion.
We have 40 minutes for discussion from now. Please don’t hesitate to offer questions,comments or answers.
/Comment # 1/Professor Tereso S. Tullao, Jr.
/De La Salle University

Hello, I’m Professor Tullao from the Philippines.
I would like to link this discussion with the morning discussion. We have been discussing
cooperation in higher education, but one of the issues in the globalization of higher
education is the issue of divide: which framework are we going to pursue, a framework ofdivergence or a framework of convergence?
The discussion here is on how higher education institutions, whether the ASEAN
University Network or SEAMEO, are cooperating with each other. But these universities
are the select universities in the respective economies and countries. What is not
mentioned are the local educational issues; I mean this is where the divide and divergenceexists. This is the issue of globalization. What is left out, are the other educational
institutions.
My question to the panelist is: how are your organizations trying to address this potential
divide within the educational system in your respective countries?
/Comment # 2/Professor César de Prado Yepes/Universidad de Salamanca
This morning in my presentation I talked about the developments in Southeast Asia, andNortheast Asia. Northeast Asia will perhaps be addressed in more detail later, but since
you mentioned that there is a drive towards having a first ministerial of Northeast Asian

Ministers of Education, I wanted to know whether the ASEAN Ministerials have been
key drivers of this, or has it bee an autonomous development?
Thank you.
/Comment # 3/Professor Anthony R. Welch/University of Sydney
Thank you very much.
My question is for Mr. Sanusi. I was interested in your allusion to Asian values - a longstanding debate within Asia. And I started thinking about what that might mean. Does itmean, for example, a socialist market economy: Vietnam, China? Does it mean strong
authoritarian state based on a neo-Confucian model: Singapore? Does it mean aplutocracy of a few competing families, such as in the case of Pakistan?
What does, in your view, Asian values really mean? To what extent you see themconverging or diverging?
/Comment # 4/Professor Kazuo KURODA/Waseda University
I would like to pose an additional question to Professor Piniti and Professor Supachai
about ASEAN identity. Both of your presentations mentioned ASEAN identity. But
ASEAN, as well as the rest of Asia, is a very diverse network, so how do you pursue
ASEAN identity within diversity?
Thank you.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you all for your questions and comments.

Since we have received so many questions, at this point I would like to turn the
microphone over to our panelists. Thank you Professor Tullao, Professor Welch,Professor de Prado and Professor Kuroda for your questions.
Professor Supachai, if you wouldn’t mind addressing these questions, first.
/Respondent # 1/Professor Supachai Yavaprabhas/Director, SEAMEO Regional Centre for Higher Education andDevelopment
Sometimes I find that the questions are better than the answer.
I would like to share my ideas on some of the questions that have been raised by ourcolleagues. First, to address Professor Tullao’s question; I just want to give you a pictureof the AUN that I sometimes evoke: sometimes I joke it is like the OECD group in higher
education, because it groups the premier universities in ASEAN. But for our organization,
SEAMEO-RIHED, we cover all higher education systems in ASEAN. And I would also
like to point out that most of our work focuses on policy issues and policy directions. One
thing that I would like to mention – you asked about inequality within one system – myown opinion is that it is different within all ASEAN countries, from one to another. For
example, I would like to pick Thailand, because I know it best.
When there was an increase in demand for higher education 30 years ago, the reaction
from the country is to allow private institutions establish themselves. But, at the sametime, we established open and distance learning programs. So, those who cannot afford
private higher education can have access to higher education through open and distancelearning: everywhere learning is possible. I think that it is quite a smart strategy, in a way,
because it can respond to the increasing demand in a good manner. I think one of ourdistance learning centres, the STOU, have at any one time something like 100,000
students. So this is one way those who cannot afford private higher education, can still
gain access to higher education. And for other countries like Indonesia, that’s why wehave SEAMEOLEC. This is the SEAMEO center dealing, mainly, with open and distancelearning. They are also taking the same route. I think in Malaysia, Professor Morshidi cancorrect me if I am wrong, but I think in Malaysia they now have at least two true open
learning centres. One is run by the government and the other is private. But they areamongst those championing the AEU under the framework of ACD. I think this is theappropriate response to an increased demand in higher education: using electronics andthe Internet as a base.
If you look at 10 countries, you will see that they each have there own way of reacting toreact it. But what we try to do at the regional center, is to share the regional experienceson who is doing what. I think that is quite important, because in ASEAN we rely on
voluntarism; we will not impose, but share and learn from each other. So, I think it isimportant for every nation to deal with inequality within first, but then we can assist,share and learn. That’s what we are doing now.
I think the role of ASEAN - perhaps Dr. Piniti can address this later - will be to keep
moving forward with more important agendas from different countries and also fromother organizations like the UN, SEAMEO-RIHED, other SEAMEO centres, in order totry to table the important issues for ASEAN. I just discovered this morning listening to
your presentation that there would be a meeting with the DG for higher education in
Northeast Asia, and I would encourage you to invite the three countries to participate in
our meeting; I think that will be a good way to have a dialogue not only at the ministerial
level, but that the civil service level, as well.
I just want to share one more idea with you. Professor Sanusi, one thing that we will do at
the DG meeting in Kuala Lumpur in December, is to inject special content in the general
education curriculum. Perhaps, one thing we could add in this segment at theundergraduate level, something like sustainable development. And perhaps another could
be about discussing the ASEAN dimension; yet another could be about sustainable
development in the ASEAN context. If students at every university can have a chance tolook at this kind of concept, it will be good for not only them, but for their families andour future.
The last point I would like to mention relates to ASEAN identity. This is difficult and I
think that perhaps Dr. Piniti may be able to give you a better answer, but I want tomention that we could put more ASEAN dimensions in every subject taught in theuniversities. Now, in Thailand for example, every course we offer to the students is basedon textbooks from abroad – mostly from Western countries. So the examples andillustrations do not represent ASEAN. But, through course collaboration, I think we cangradually add the ASEAN dimension to every subject. And this will make the students inour own region appreciate what we have, more.
Thank you.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much.
Would Professor Piniti please respond to the questions.

/Respondent # 2/ Professor Piniti Ratananukuk/ Director, ASEAN University Network
Well, first of all, I would like to discuss the perception some of you may have of theASEAN University Network as an exclusive club, because we have only the 21 leading
universities in ASEAN joining us as member universities. But, as I have pointed out, thereason behind this is to bring these leading institutions to join hands, to work together, toset-up a kind of benchmark for the quality of education in ASEAN. And later, we hopethat non-member universities, the less developed universities, can build their own
capability and capacity to meet that benchmark.
The second reason is that if we were to open the membership to all universities it would
be very hard to manage the programs, involving a lot of budgeting. As you know,
ASEAN countries are not rich. We have to work, as I told you, on a cost-sharing basis.
Some activities are funded by ASEAN and dialogue partners fund others. So, we have tomanage our finances according to the budget that has been allocated to support thisorganization. That’s why we have limit the membership.
The purpose, as I told you, is to narrow the gap between universities in ASEAN; not only
between countries, but also at the university level. In over 20 twenty activities we arecollaborating and helping each other within ASEAN.
Regarding the ASEAN Education Minister Meeting, this was originally initiated tooverlook education in ASEAN as a whole. In the past, as you can see, we have had
SEAMEO, the Southeast Asia Education Minister Organization. Some of you may
already know that this organization was established before ASEAN, during the cold war.
Even though SEAMEO is not a member of ASEAN, we work together, side by side.
Actually, the body of the ASEAN Education Minister Meeting and the members of
SEAMEO’s board, are exactly the same persons: education ministers in ASEAN. This
organization will develop the strategic plan or policy recommendations, focusing on
education issues for the ASEAN Summit. It will overlook issues of education, for thewhole region.
In the past, ASEAN was more focused on economics and trade. Now, we try to persuade
the leader of ASEAN to look more on education as a source of development of future
human resources. That is the reason why ASEMM was set-up.
Actually, I’m very lucky because Dr. Supachai was the former executive director of theASEAN University Network, and has already answered some of your questions. But frommy experience, as the director of this organization, operating so many activities, I would
like to share the idea that ASEAN is very diverse. But, we have something in common
that we can share. We can learn from our joint experiences and activities. For example,
we have cultural forums that bring together staff and students in the ASEAN University

to express their identity by dance, songs, or other performances. At the end of the forum,
we have a conversation with members of the forum, and we encourage them to create
something together. It was very successful in the last 5-6 years, and it fostered a feelingof ‘ASEANness’ amongst the students and staff when they joined in these activities. All
the other activities at the educational forum, along with the young speakers contest,
brings students and staffs to a work camp for about 2 weeks. The organization of these
activities is led from different countries, rotating in alphabetical order. When one country
hosts the event, we learn about that country in terms of history, economics, culture and soon. At the end of the second week, students will make a speech based on a theme we offer.
So, this kind of activity will promote a sense of ‘ASEANness’ or ASEAN identity. And, itworks quite well. Now, I can say we have over 500 students from ASEAN countries andwhen they join the network, they are linked together, sharing information. This is thecontribution of these activities.
Thank you.
/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much. And next, I would like to ask Dr. Zainal to respond to some partsof the questions, please.
/Respondent # 3/Mr. Zainal Abidin Sanusi, PhD/Coordinator, Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable
Development, Universiti Sains Malaysia
I was hoping that Prof. Piniti would proceed with his response, so that I wouldn’t have toanswer the questions.
I totally agree with what Professor Piniti mentioned. Looking at these comments from asustainable development perspective, it reminds me of the three pillars: the social aspect,economics and environment. My observation is that if you look at the possible solutions
from a social, economics and environmental perspective, you see the need for local
solutions. Of course there are those debates like the one on Asian values, I suppose thosepeople downstairs are debating the same subject. But again, we need to look at theseissues as something that is up to us. The values are debatable. If you reframe the debate
as an appreciation of the diversity or a critique of the diversity, that is where we will find
our answer.

For myself, from a socio-cultural perspective – because if you look at it from a politicalperspective it is indeed very debatable – there are some similarities: communal values of
the Asian society in comparison to the Western society, and also how close we are to theenvironment, especially in Japanese society, for example.
These are some of the little differences that are debatably different, between what I
perceive to be Asian values and so called Western values. Finally, one last thing that I
would like to highlight from my presentation was the presence of multiple stakeholders:high school teachers, kindergarten teachers, etc. So, it forces us to ask, what are the local
issues to be addressed. These platforms of multiple actors and multiple stakeholders are
key, according to me.
Thank you.
/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much. We have 10 more minutes, so I would like to continue the Q&A
session.
/Comment # 5/Professor Ki-Seok Kim/Seoul National University
I find Professor Welch’s question very difficult, because the subject is not “Asian
identity”, but because we are taking about “identity”; the terminology is the problem. For
example, it’s not a singular word, it’s plural: we cannot say Asian value, rather we say
Asian values. Likewise, we can say Asian identities. The concept of identity is very
difficult.
Can you identify American identity? No. Does the Anglo-Saxon heritage represent
American identity? How about the Afro-American heritage? And the indigenous cultures,
like the Apache? Are they not also a part of the American identity?
Can you identify a European identity?
It’s very difficult, because we are talking about identity, something that is not
immediately obvious or given. It is something we are making; it is being made, unmade
and remade. It is a very complicated process.

But compared to other continents, there is some commonality in Asia. We are in theprimitive stages of defining Asian identities, but we are sure that there is something incommon and the remaining issue becomes, how to work together.
This is good place to be talking about this; to find out similarities and dissimilarities; todiscuss common experiences; allowing us then to elaborate on what Asian values may be.
Thank you very much.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much.
Professor Sirat, would you care to follow-up with some comments, please.

/Comment # 6/Professor Morshidi Sirat/ Director, National Higher Education Research Institute
In Malaysia, all the universities – private and public – offer a compulsory course called
Islamic and Asian civilizations. We don’t have one civilization as such, and at the end of
the day we are teaching about Japanese civilization, Indian civilization and Chinese
civilization. And cutting across these civilizations, we have Confucius and Islamicteachings. Those are the two pillars of civilization that we have.
This is unlike the European context, where they have they the Christian heritage as thebinding force of Europe. But can we have this kind of phenomenon in Asia? I don’t know.
Can we find one in Asia? No.
In other regions of the world, there exists one binding element. But can we have such athing? Do we need to have one? Can there be three or four binding elements?
This is the issue, as I see it.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much, Professor Sirat.
We are almost out of time, so if there are any more pressing comments, I would invite
them now.
Professor de Prado, if you would speak first, followed by Professor Yamaguchi. After the
responses to these comments, if you would all please provide some closing remarks; thatwould be appreciated.
Thank you.
/Comment # 7/Professor César de Prado Yepes/Universidad de Salamanca

I would like to add a few comments to the discussion on values.
In Europe there is a great diversity that has been breached, thanks to the European Unionand other projects. But one can still distinguish between Anglo-Saxon, Nordic, as well as
Latin and eastern countries. Latin countries are actually much closer to Asia than many
realized: family, communities and neighbors are still very important.
I would argue that in Asia, especially in China, communities are important because thestates are not functioning very well. And in other countries you could say the same: you
rely on your personal family and extend family networks. In Japan, the networks aredifferent. They tend to be more concentric with smaller groups embedded in larger groups.
It’s quite a different system of community building, I believe.
The different approaches to values in Europe, those of the Catholic and Christian cultures,
have been breached to some extent. Many Europeans want to adopt more humanistic
values. Luckily they don’t diverge too much, but there are some tensions. Some rather
strong tensions were evident when they were debating the European constitutional treaty;
whether to include terms relating to humanistic or religious values in the preamble. They
made some compromises, but now with the Lisbon Treaty this is a little off the mark,because it’s not really a constitutional treaty, but rather an intergovernmental upgrade ofprevious treaties.

I want to say that perhaps these types of balances, between traditional religions andglobalized human values, could be the answer for Asia, for the time being.
Thank you.

/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much, Professor de Prado. Professor Yamaguchi, if you would like to
speak next, please.

/Comment # 8/Professor Yumi YAMAGUCHI/Tokyo Institute of Technology

My name is Yumi Yamaguchi, from the Tokyo Institute of Technology.
I have been enjoying this heated discussion on identity and ‘ASEANness’. And to cool
down the debate, I would like to pose a question from a different perspective.
I enjoyed the presentation made by Dr. Sanusi, particularly the part that touched onfunctional integration. I think when we talk about integration, it is important to recognizethat there are different levels of integration: national-local or global-local integration, as
well as the integration of different agencies. There is also integration of academic
disciplines. As Dr. Sanusi mentioned, I think one of the important aspects of integration –and this may not only be limited to the ASEAN framework - is the integration of scienceand technology and the social sciences.
This stems from my experience working for the Tokyo Institute of Technology, because
my background is in the social sciences, but my university’s focus is mainly on scienceand technology. I have been realizing the vertical functions within the university, or thevertical function of the disciplines, within Asia. This means, when we talk about
integration in higher education, not many different disciplines mingle. And someresearchers, as Dr. Sanusi has mentioned, have been trying to create a synergy withinprograms.

So, my simple question is: are there, right now, any specific platforms to try to gather andintegrate science and technology cohorts - professionals at different levels from
Universities, NGOs, government officials, and so on – with people from the social
sciences. I think this is going to be one of the important areas of discussion when we talkabout integration in higher education in ASEAN nations.
Thank you.
/Session Moderator/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University
Thank you very much.
First, I would like to ask Dr. Zainal to respond and after that, since it is the time to wrap
up this portion of the conference, could we have a few words from Professor Piniti andProfessor Supachai to close the session.
If you could please go first, Dr. Zainal.
/Closing Remarks/Mr. Zainal Abidin Sanusi, PhD/Coordinator, Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable
Development, Universiti Sains Malaysia

Thank you very much for those comments; indeed, they were very interestingobservations.
I suppose we come from the same background, the social sciences, and we are bothworking in a scientist’s world. In the response, yes, we do have platforms in place. In
terms of practical experience, I would like to share one project with you.
We have one project in place, in which the research is usually based on science, but wehave proposed a science and arts innovation space. So, we are essentially promoting thescience elements in an arts package.
We also have programs that bring together NGOs and local stakeholders. There is one
program, where we make paper from banana trees. The scientists are providing thetechnology and it benefits the surrounding villages. This is what we mean by science andart coming together.

To conclude, I would like to say that again that this goes back to values. Despite people
who would criticize the existence of Asian values, I would suggest that they have been
progressing and developing based on local solutions. These local solutions are based onvalues that they already have. These values have to correspond with national and regional
development.
Thank you.

/Closing Remarks/ Professor Piniti Ratananukuk/ Director, ASEAN University Network
Well, to conclude, I would like to point out that globalizing pressures are unavoidable,
hence the only possible alternative is to engage in international cooperation. We must do
this in ways that would take advantage of globalizing trends.
I sincerely believe that a networking arrangement, such as the ASEAN University
Network, is one such possible way.
Thank you.

/Closing Remarks/Professor Supachai Yavaprabhas/Director, SEAMEO Regional Centre for Higher Education andDevelopment
I would like to conclude by saying that we share something in common. We want to see amore peaceful world. And we want to see higher education serve the world to this end. Aslong as we share our thinking, as long as we open our mind to listen to others and keep
our goals, we will reach this shared future.
Thank you.

/Moderator’s Closing Remarks/Associate Professor Miki SUGIMURA/Sophia University

Thank you very much.
I think that it’s an appropriate time to bring the session to a close, discussing theexperiences of Asian higher education, the frameworks and the implications for the future.
I think that similar to this morning’s session, we have had a very fruitful discussion,
despite the poor chairwomanship.
I would like to thank you all for your active participation. Thank you audience members
for your excellent comments.
Thank you.