 Chapter 1
ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic
Community (AEC)
Koichi Ishikawa
Professor, Asia University, Institute for Asia Studies
Key Points


The ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), which ASEAN will establish in 2015, isproceeding according to a blueprint with tasks towards establishment. The blueprint is
a comprehensive action program for 2008-2015, and has the four characteristics(targets) of: 1) a single market and production base; 2) a competitive economic region;3) equitable economic development; and 4) integration into the global economy.



The AEC has a far broader target range than economic partnership agreements (EPAs),
as in addition to building infrastructure and integrating in the areas of transport andenergy, there is engagement in reducing disparities. The rate of progress in Phase II(2008-2011) as announced in March 2012 was just 67.5%, and it will be difficult toachieve 100% by 2015.

The Japanese government should promote the reduction of intra-regional disparities
through improving distribution infrastructure in the CLM countries (Cambodia, Laos,and Myanmar), which are the least developed countries in the region, and should
provide lateral support for the building of the AEC. Also, while Japanese businesses
take advantage of the liberalization/facilitation of trade and strengthen operations in
the ASEAN region, it is necessary to put effort into reinforcing the cultivation ofhuman resources and research and development, and to contribute to the economic
integration of ASEAN as an important location of business deployment.

The work towards founding the AEC is behind(Scorecard evaluation with respect to the blueprint)
Phase I

Phase II

Phases I and II

Single market and production base

93.8%

49.1%

65.9%

Competitive economic region

68.7%

67.4%

67.9%

Equitable economic development

100.0%

55.5%

66.7%

Integration into the global economy

100.0%

77.8%

85.7%

Overall

86.7%

55.8%

67.5%

Source: ASEAN Economic Community Scorecard: Charting Progress Towards Regional Economic
Integration, PhaseⅠ(2008―2009) and PhaseⅡ(2010―2011), March 2012

ChapterJapan Center1 │ ASEAN,
for Economic
Aiming to
Research,Create an2012
Economic“Asia Community
Research” Report
(AEC)
13

1. What is the ASEAN Economic Community?

1.1

From Vision 2020 to the Vientiane Action Programme

ASEAN is aiming to create a community by 2015. The ASEAN Community is made up of threecommunities: a Political-Security Community, an Economic Community, and a Socio-Cultural
Community.

It was the ASEAN Vision 2020 that first mapped out the concept of ASEAN

unification in three areas.
The ASEAN Vision 2020, which was adopted at the Second Informal Summit of ASEAN in
December 1997, cited “A Partnership in Dynamic Development” as the goal in the area of theeconomy for 2020, presenting the idea of achieving the creation of “a stable, prosperous and highly
competitive ASEAN Economic Region” realizing “a free flow of goods, services and investments, afreer flow of capital, equitable economic development and reduced poverty and socio-economic
disparities.”
It was the Declaration of ASEAN Concord II, adopted at the Ninth ASEAN Summit in October
2003, which upheld an ASEAN Community made up of three communities as a goal.

Thisdeclaration clarified the target of an ASEAN Community made up of an ASEAN Security
Community (ASC), an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), and an ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community (ASCC).

By creating the AEC, ASEAN would become “a single market andproduction base, turning the diversity that characterises the region into opportunities… making theASEAN a more dynamic and stronger segment of the global supply chain.”
The Vientiane Action Programme (VAP), which is an action plan towards creating a community,
was adopted at the 10th ASEAN Summit in November 2004, and the Framework Agreement for the
Integration of Priority Sectors was also signed.

The VAP targets 2004-2010.

It clarifies astrategic objective of three communities making up an ASEAN Community with a theme of being“towards shared prosperity and destiny in an integrated, peaceful and caring ASEAN community,”and presents an action plan for achieving this objective.

1.2 The AEC Blueprint and Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity
The VAP was a plan until 2010, and the Framework Agreement for the Integration of Priority
Sectors only targeted 12 priority sectors and was not comprehensive. Consequently, it was the AEC
Blueprint that was created as a comprehensive action plan covering all sectors until 2015.
The blueprint was adopted in November 2007, and cites four characteristics of the AEC: 1) asingle market and production base, 2) a competitive region, 3) equitable economic development, and
4) integration into the global economy.

Also, 17 items were cited as core elements ranging fromthe free flow of goods to participation in the global supply network. The blueprint is made up of aJapan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report14presentation of measures and a schedule for each core element of the four characteristics, to which isadded implementation mechanisms and a strategic schedule (Figure 1). The strategic scheduleconsists of four stages from phase 1 in 2008-2009 to phase 4 from 2014-2015. The core of thestrategic schedule is the single market and production base, which takes up 22 of the 35 pages.

Figure 1: The makeup of the economic community blueprint
1. Introduction(Core Elements)

2. Characteristics and Elements of
AEC
A. Single Market and Production
Base① Free flow of goods, ② Free flow of services, ③ Free flowof investment, ④ Freer flow of capital, ⑤ Free flow ofskilled labor, ⑥ Priority integration sectors, and ⑦ Food,agriculture, and forestry

B. Competitive Economic Region① Competition policy, ② Consumer protection,③ Intellectual property rights, ④ Infrastructure

C. Equitable Economic
Development

development, ⑤ Taxation, and ⑥ E-commerce① SME development and ② Initiative for ASEAN
integration

Economy① External economic relations and ② Participation in global

3. Implementation

Implementation Mechanism, Resources, Communications, and

D. Integration into the Global

Strategic Schedule

supply networks

Review

Source: Produced from the ASEAN Community Blueprint from the ASEAN Secretariat

The Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity (MPAC) was adopted at the 17th ASEAN Summit in
October 2010. The MPAC strengthens and complements the AEC Blueprint. The goals of the
MPAC are: 1) to enhance integration and cooperation of ASEAN; 2) to enhance global
competitiveness of ASEAN through stronger production networks; 3) to enhance the well-being andlivelihood of the ASEAN peoples; 4) to enhance rules and good governance for ASEAN; 5) toenhance connections to economic centers both within the ASEAN region and within individual
Member States and narrow the development gaps; 6) to enhance local economic and social
development; 7) to enhance efforts to tackle climate change as well as promote sustainable
development; and 8) to address the negative impacts of Connectivity.

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)
15

The three types of connectivity are: 1) physical connectivity (transport, ICT, energy network); 2)
institutional connectivity (agreements, legal and institutional mechanisms); and 3) people-to-people
connectivity (education, cultural exchanges, tourism).

To promote these, 19 strategies (projects)

are presented.

1.3

What is the ASEAN Economic Community: Market integration and the promotion ofdevelopment
The AEC is configured from four characteristics (pillars), but its subject areas can be organized
into the following five sectors: 1) market integration for the free and smooth flow of trade,investment, services, capital, and skilled labor; 2) integration and cooperation (institutions andinfrastructure) in transport, energy, ITC, and the like; 3) a common policy for consumer protection,competition policy, intellectual property rights, and the like; 4) reducing disparities; and 5) FTAs
outside of ASEAN. Infrastructure and reducing disparities are also development policies.

The

feature of market integration is similar to the EPAs that the Japanese government is signing, but thetarget sectors are far wider ranging.
The foundation is market integration.

AFTA was mostly realized in 2010, and the free flow ofgoods progressed to a substantial level. However, only goods satisfying the rules of origin are
targeted, and it is not the case that all goods can flow freely.
only been for an extremely limited range of items.

Mutual acceptance of standards has

There is the goal of eliminating non-tariffbarriers, but as discussed below, achievement by 2015 is doubtful. The opening up of government
procurement is completely excluded.
The flow of services is to be liberalized for all fields (sectors), but equity participation limits
remain in Mode 3 (flow of commercial presence), and it is not clear whether implementation will beto the degree of Mode 4 (flow of service providers).

Minimal restrictions will remain forinvestment, and the flow of people is limited to skilled labor. There is no goal of introducing
common external tariffs or a common currency.
Regional integration that achieves the free flow of goods, services, capital, and people is referred
to as a common market, but the AEC is incomplete as a common market, and can be considered to
be an “FTA Plus.” Indeed, its contents are close to the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) that
the Japanese government has signed with ASEAN.
The greatest difference in the principles of integration is that in the EU, national sovereignty istransferred to the EU in terms of market integration and currency integration, while ASEAN does nottransfer national sovereignty and has a basis in non-interference in the domestic matters of otherstates.

This is delaying progress in integration extending to domestic institutions and policies suchas elimination of non-tariff barriers, liberalization of trade in services, and unification of rules.

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report
16

Figure 2: Subject sectors of the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and other regional
integration
EU

AEC

EPA

FTA (narrow definition)

Abolition of tariffs

○

○

○

○

Common external tariffs

○

×

×

×

Elimination of non-tariff barriers○○

Liberalization of trade in services

○

○

△

△

Harmonization of rules/standards

○
○
○

○

△

×

Trade facilitation

△

△

×

Liberalization of the flow of people△○

Flow of investment

○

○

○

△

×

Flow of capital

○

×

△

×

Liberalization of government procurement ○△Protection of intellectual property rights

○

○

×

Competition policy

○

△

×

Cooperation

△

△

×

×

○

△

○

△

○

×

Common currency

○

×

×

×

Transfer of sovereignty

△

×

×

×

Note: A ○ indicates being included, a △ indicates being included in a limited fashion, and a × indicates not being
included. However, these are not strict categorizations. Among FTAs, those signed by the US stipulate
wide-ranging liberalization of trade in services, protection of intellectual property rights, and the like. Whether
or not the AEC will be able to implement measures towards its goals is a large issue, and here it is supposed that
this is achieved.
Source: Created by author

2. Implementation rate of 67.5% in Phase I and Phase II

2.1

What is the scorecard?

Two scorecards have been released evaluating the state of implementation of the AEC Blueprint.
One targeting Phase I (2008-2009) was released in March 2010, and one targeting Phase II(2010-2011) as well as Phase I and Phase II together was released in March 2012. 1 In this paper, the2012 scorecard is used.
The scorecard evaluates the state of implementation of measures based on reports by member
countries. The ratio of implemented measures to all the measures to implement is expressed as apercentage, and the primary measures implemented (achievements) as well as measures that have not
1

ASEAN Secretariat (2010a) and (2012).

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)17been implemented (issues) are presented. Also, the state of implementation overall is evaluated foreach member state by core element (primary sector).
The scorecard notes the following issues:① The detailed implementation state by country and by sector is not known.
② The data is self-reported, and is not an objective third-party evaluation.
③ It is not known whether the measures are implemented on the ground in each country. Various
measures are signed as an agreement in ASEAN meetings, ratified/brought into effect and madeinto law or policy domestically, and then implemented on the ground. However, measures areevaluated as having been implemented at the stage before implementation on the ground.
④ Measures are not weighted by importance.

Reduction of tariffs, building infrastructure,holding seminars, and the like are treated as single measures.

However, the scorecard is the only public ASEAN document evaluating the state of
implementation of the Blueprint, and it is realistic to evaluate the state of deployment of the AEC
based on the scorecard, and supplementing with other documents such as the MPAC.

2.2

Scorecard evaluation

The implementation rate for all the measures in Phase I and Phase II is 67.5% (Figure 3).
“Integration into the global economy” is high at 85.7%, but the other three areas stand at 66-67%.
The implementation rates of “single market and production base,” and “competitive economic
region” were high in Phase I, but lower in Phase II.

Figure 3: Implementation rate for measures in Phase I and Phase II
Phase I

Phase II

Phases I & II

Single market and production base

93.8%

49.1%

65.9%

Competitive economic region

68.7%

67.4%

67.9%

Equitable economic development

100.0%

55.5%

66.7%

Integration into the global economy

100.0%

77.8%

85.7%

Overall

86.7%

55.8%

67.5%

Source: ASEAN Secretariat (2012)

Next, let us examine the situation by strategic objective.

For “single market and production

base,” the implementation rates for flow of goods, services, and investment are low at the 50% level(Figure 4).

These are the most important sectors, and have a large number of measures. The

implementation rate in Phase II is less than 50%, and it can be understood that as the level ofJapan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report18

liberalization increases, implementation becomes more difficult.
For “competitive economic region,” the overall implementation rate is high, but for transport,
which has the greatest number of measures, it is low at 53.8% (Figure 5). This is because the maincontents of the measures for the sector of transport is signing/ratifying agreements and building
infrastructure such as roads, and so the sector has many difficulties such as domestic coordinationand fundraising. Consumer protection also has many measures and a low implementation rate.
Taxation has only one measure (network of agreements on avoidance of double taxation), but it has
not been implemented so the implementation rate is 0%.
For “equitable economic development,” the implementation rate for SMEs is on the low side, andexternal economic relations has the highest implementation rate since there has been progress in thesigning of ASEAN+1 FTAs (Figure 6).

Figure 4: Implementation rates for single market and production base (Phases I and II)
Implementation rate

Implementation rate(# of measures)(# of measures)

Flow of goods

57.1％（56）Skilled labor

100.0％ （1）Services

53.5％（43）

Priority integration

100.0％ （29）sectors
Investment

52.6％（19）Food, agriculture,

68.4％ （19）and forestry
Capital100.0％ （6）Overall

65.9％（173）

Source: Same as Figure 3.

Figure 5: Implementation rates for competitive economic region (Phases I and II)
Implementation rate

Implementation rate(# of measures)(# of measures)

Competition policy

100.0％ （4）Minerals

100.0％ （8）Consumer protection

63.6％（11）ICT100.0％ （6）Intellectual property

80.0％ （5）TaxationTransport

53.8％（39）

E-commerce

100.0％ （1）Energy66.7％ （3）Overall

67.9％（78）0％ （1）

rights

Source: Same as Figure 3.

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)19

Figure 6: Implementation rates for equitable economic development (Phases I and II)
Implementation rate

Implementation rate(# of measures)(# of measures)

62.5％ （8）SMEs

Initiative for ASEAN

75.0％（4）integration
Overall (equitable

66.7％（12）economic development
External economic

85.7％（14）relations
Source: Same as Figure 3.

3. The state of progress in the primary sectors: Contents pertaining to “single market andproduction base”
3.1

Free flow of goods(Elimination of ASEAN-6 intraregional tariffs)
Intraregional tariffs for the ASEAN-6 were eliminated on January 1, 2010. AFTA, which began
in 1993, achieved the lowering of tariffs to 0-5% (for the ASEAN-6) by 2002 as an initial goal, andeliminated tariffs as planned in January 2010. Tariffs were eliminated for 99.65% of all tariff lines,
and the average intra-regional tariff rate for the ASEAN-6 dropped from 3.64% in 2000 to 0.05% at
the end of 2011. 2

With the abolition of tariffs for the six countries constituting 90% of ASEAN

intra-regional trade, it can be said that AFTA has nearly been realized. Tariffs will be eliminatedfor the remaining four CLMV countries by 2015 (a subset that is no more than 7% of items by tariffline by 2018).

There are cases where AFTA is not regarded very highly, but it should be noted thatthe liberalization rate in AFTA for the leading six countries is higher than that in Japan’s EPAs. 3(Launch of ATIGA)In Phase I, the Common Effective Preferential Tariff (CEPT) agreement, which was theinstitutional mechanism for implementing AFTA, was to be reviewed and a comprehensive
agreement created, and so the ASEAN Trade in Good Agreement (ATIGA) was launched as planned.
By contrast with the CEPT agreement, which comprised only 10 articles, ATIGA grew considerably
in size to 11 chapters and 98 articles, its provisions also expanded and became more detailed, andnew provisions were added such as for trade facilitation, customs, standards, sanitary and
2

The ASEAN-6 lowered tariff rates to 0.5% by 2010 for sensitive items and highly sensitive items, and the plans isfor Vietnam to lower rates to 0-5% by 2013, Laos and Myanmar by 2015, and Cambodia by 2017.
3
The liberalization rate (ratio of items for which tariffs have been eliminated) of the ASEAN-6 by tariff line is
99.65%, while Japan’s EPAs are around 85%.

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report20phytosanitary measures, trade remedy measures, and the like. 4。
(Elimination of non-tariff barriers)
The five countries of Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Brunei were supposed toeliminate non-tariff barriers by 2010 and the Philippines by 2012. But according to the scorecard:
1) Malaysia and Thailand implemented the third round of a three-tranche elimination plan in 2011;2) the non-tariff barrier database is being reviewed and updated; and 3) dialogue is being conducted
to identify non-tariff barriers with industry groups in the areas of automobiles, electronics, andtextiles.

ATIGA stipulates for the ASEAN-5 an elimination of non-tariff barriers in three tranches

by 2008, 2009, and 2010, for the Philippines in three tranches by 2010, 2011, and 2012, and for the
CLMV countries in three tranches by 2013, 2014, and 2015 (Article 42). Thailand and Malaysia
completed this elimination as planned, but there is no explanation for what the state of
implementation is in the other three countries.
(Rules of origin)
The blueprint plans the improvement of the CEPT rules of origin, the simplification of issuance,
and a review of the rules of origin of member countries. Already, 1) the 2009 revised productspecific rules (PSR) have been approved, 2) the display of the FOB value in Form D, which is the
AFTA certificate of origin, has been abolished, and 3) a pilot project for self-certification has been
implemented (with Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand participating).

Regarding number 3,

a pilot project 2 (with Laos, Indonesia, and the Philippines participating) was signed in 2012. The
MPAC cites 1) the facilitation of certificates of origin through electronic processing and the like(2012), and 2) harmonization of issuance procedures in each country (2012).

It can be said thatrules of origin are making steady progress.
(Trade facilitation and the Single Window)
A “Comprehensive Trade Facilitation Work Program” was established to simplify, harmonize, andstandardize trade and customs procedures.

A National Coordinating Committee on Trade

Facilitation was founded, the ASEAN Trade Repository was developed, and trade facilitation wasassessed at the country level.

In the facilitation of customs procedures, the ASEAN Customs

Declaration Document, the ASEAN Custom Transit System, ASEAN Cargo Processing Model, andmeasures for pre-arrival clearance and cargo release were implemented. However, a series ofmeasures are cited as issues in the scorecard, and continue to be implemented as incomplete
measures.
(Standards and mutual recognition)
A Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) proceeded forinspection of manufacturers of medicinal products, and an MRA for electronic and electrical4

With regards to ATIGA, see Ishikawa (2009), pp. 44-67.

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)21

equipment (ASEAN EE MRA) was implemented.

As a result, conformity assessment bodies werelisted and approved, a number of standards and rules were harmonized in the priority integration
sectors, and the domestic legislation of the ASEAN Cosmetic Directive was performed. As a result,a number of the primary measures in Phases I and II were implemented.
Issues in Phases I and II include; 1) establishing an MRA for processed food and automobiles; 2)establishing an ASEAN Medical Device Directive Agreement; and 3) approving and nationallylegislating the ASEAN Regulatory Framework on Traditional Medicines and Health Supplements.
The MPAC lists actions including: 1) establishing common rules for standards and conformity
assessment (2015); 2) introducing the ASEAN Conformity Mark (2015); 3) harmonizing national
standards with international standards and develop ASEAN standards (2015); and accelerating theoperationalization of MRAs for priority and selected items.

3.2

Services(Promise to liberalize 80 sectors)
First is an explanation of the mechanisms for liberalizing trade in services in ASEAN. 5 This has
been implemented through the ASEAN Framework Agreement on Services (AFAS), which wassigned in December 1995. The liberalization negotiations proceeded through three years of rounds,
and were held through the fifth round. Since the fifth round, it has been performed according to theplans and goals of the blueprint. The plan is to liberalize 128 subsectors by 2015.
In the blueprint, there are the goals of: 1) eliminate essentially all restrictions for Modes 1(cross-border services) and 2 (consumption abroad); 2) set the foreign equity participation rate to
70% and remove other market access limitations for Mode 3 (cross-border commercial presence);and 3) determine the range of liberalization for national treatment limitations, mode 4 (cross-borderservice providers), and limitations in the horizontal commitments for each round. For Phase II, theplan is: 1) the liberalization of and an equity participation rate limit of 70% for four priority services
sectors (air transport, e-ASEAN, healthcare, and tourism); 2) an equity participation rate limit of atleast 51% for other sectors; and 3) the scheduling of liberalization commitments according to agreed
parameters for national treatment limitations, Mode 4, and limitations in horizontal commitments.
(Mutual recognition of qualifications)
The Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs) signed at Economic Ministers Meetings are as
follows: 1) Engineering Services (December 2005); 2) Nursing Services (December 2006); 3)
Architectural Services (November 2007); 4) Framework Arrangement for the Mutual Recognition ofSurveying Qualifications (November 2007); 5) Mutual Recognition Arrangement Framework on
Accountancy Services (February 2009); 6) Medical Practitioners (February 2009); and 7) Dental
5

For details, see Sukegawa (2010) and ASEAN Secretariat (2009).

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report22Practitioners (February 2009).

According to the scorecard, the engineering and architectural MRAs

have been implemented, and work towards implementation of the other MRAs is underway.

3.3

Investment

The goal is to achieve a free and open investment regime with only minimal restrictions by
2015.

In the blueprint, the plan was to produce the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment

Agreement (ACIA) 6 in Phase I and to reduce/eliminate investment restrictions and
impediments in three phases, completing phase I in 2010 (2011 for Laos and Myanmar) andcommencing phase II in the same year. According to the scorecard, the ACIA was ratified, but
the reservation lists (table indicating the sectors for which liberalization is not implemented)
have not been produced, with completion planned for the first quarter of 2012. The jointstatement of the 2012 ASEAN Economic Ministers Meeting mentions the entry into force of
ACIA on March 29 of the same year, and it is believed that the reservation lists were put inorder as well.

A modality for eliminating investment restrictions and impediments (method forfurthering future negotiations) was created, and its cooperation towards promoting andfacilitating investment is considered to have been strengthened.
3.4

CapitalThe goal is to integrate capital markets and promote the flow of capital. Specifically, an
action program is cited for: 1) harmonizing capital market standards (debt securities, disclosureof information, distribution rules, and the like); 2) cross-recognition of qualifications of market
professionals; 3) flexibility in language and law for securities issuance; 4) withholding taxes forbroadening the investor base in debt issuance; and 5) market-driven promotion of exchange anddebt market linkages.

An action program for each phase is not indicated. The scorecard

notes that the marketing campaign for the ASEAN Exchanges Initiative began in 2011, and that
the ASEAN Bond Market Development Scorecard was developed. 7 Also, it is stated that a
Credit Guarantee and Investment Facility (CGIF) for development of local-currency bondmarkets was established in October 2011, and an agreement was signed for a $485 million
ASEAN Infrastructure Fund (AIF).

6
7

Regarding the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA), see Ishikawa (2010), pp. 3-20.
The ASEAN Exchanges is a securities market integration concept launched jointly by seven securities exchanges ofIndonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam (Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh) in 2011. It
began in 2012 with the three countries of Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand, and the plan is for Indonesia andVietnam to join in 2013. It is planned that 30 blue-chip stocks from each country will be selected, resulting in
210 stocks traded under the name ASEAN Stars.

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)23

4. Will the ASEAN Economic Community be realized?

4.1 The conditions in 2015.
The implementation rate through Phase II of the blueprint is 67.5%, which is considerably behind
what was planned. In addition to the economic disparities and diversity of ASEAN, there are many
issues such as the difficulty of domestic coordination, insufficient funds, and insufficient humanresources. Although it was decided at the April 2012 Summit Meeting to redouble efforts towards
the 2015 founding date, it will be difficult to reach 100% implementation by 2015. The completion
date for a subset of targets including building infrastructure has been deferred to 2020.
(Single market and production base)
The ASEAN-6 have, as planned, eliminated intra-regional tariffs in 2010, and it is believed thattariff elimination approaching 100% will be achieved as planned for all ASEAN member countries(a subset of tariff lines for the CLMV countries are set for 2018). A system for changing tariff
numbers has already been applied to rules of origin, the display of the FOB value in Form D has
been eliminated, experimental introduction of self-certification has begun, and the like, which are
improving the situation to more easily-used institutions.

In the initial plan, non-tariff barriers were

supposed to be abolished by 2012 for the ASEAN-6, but this is considerably behind schedule. It isthought that the situation is at the stage where an establishment for engagement towards eliminating
non-tariff barriers such as through updating and completing a non-tariff barrier list using the latest
international classification, creating guidelines such as quotas, and the like is possible by 2015.
Governmental procurement has not been opened at all.
A national single window is being completed for the ASEAN-6. In ASEAN, for the seven
non-CLM (Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar) countries, an institutional framework and infrastructure
aiming for operation at selected ports are being completed, and it is expected that operation will stallat the stage of starting for a subset thereof.
For trade in services, liberalization will occur in all fields in Mode 1 and Mode 2, but there remain
doubts about whether the target of a 70% equity participation rate in Mode 3 will be achieved in all
sectors. It appears that the work is lagging in Mode 4, and it is unclear to what extent opening up
will be achieved by 2015. Agreements have been signed in eight professions through MRAs
pertaining to qualifications, but with an optional participation modality (ASEAN-X or 2+X), it isbelieved that implementation for ASEAN as a whole will be delayed.
Skilled workers are the subject for flow of people, and unskilled labor is not included.

If theAgreement on Movement of Natural Persons is promulgated, what degree of free flow will beachieved will be understood to some extent.

It is expected that exemption of visas for

intra-regional travel will be achieved with the optional participation modality.

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report24Investment liberalization is to leave minimal restrictions, and the state of liberalization is expected
to be understood through the ACIA reservation lists planned for release in 2012. Integration ofcapital markets is progressing through harmonization of capital market standards, cross-recognitionof qualifications of professionals, and the like.

4.2 Japanese corporations and the AEC
Will Japanese corporations be able to benefit from the liberalization and facilitation of the AEC?
With respect to trade in goods, if it is possible to satisfy rules of origin, it will be possible to enjoy
the merits of tariff abolition and the like. Separate benefits will be reaped through the eliminationof non-tariff barriers and the mutual recognition of qualifications (MRAs). The liberalization of
trade in services results from the denial of benefits under the AFAS. Article 6 of AFAS (Denial of
Benefits) stipulates, “The benefits of this Framework Agreement shall be denied to a service supplier
who is a natural person of a non-Member State or a juridical person owned or controlled by personsof a non-Member State constituted under the laws of a Member State, but not engaged in substantive
business operations in the territory of Member State(s).”Accordingly, Japanese corporations

engaging in business operations in ASEAN countries will be able to reap the benefits of theliberalization of trade in services under the AFAS.
Next, the liberalization of investment results from the stipulation of the denial of benefits under
ACIA. According to Article 19 (Denial of Benefits), the subjects of denial are: 1) “an investor ofanother Member State that is a juridical person of such other Member State and to investments ofsuch investor if an investor of a non-Member State owns or controls the juridical person and thejuridical person has no substantive business operations in the territory of such other Member State;”
2) “an investor of another Member State that is a juridical person of such other Member State and toinvestments of such investor if an investor of the denying Member State owns or controls thejuridical person and the juridical person has no substantive business operations in the territory ofsuch other Member State;” and 3) “an investor of another Member State that is a juridical person ofsuch other Member State and to an investment of such investor if investors of a non-Member Stateown or control the juridical person, and the denying Member State does not maintain diplomatic
relations with the non-Member State.” The definition of “own” is according to the laws andpolicies of the Member States, and the definition of “control” is when an investor has the authority toname a majority of directors.

Japanese corporations that are engaging in substantive business

operations will be able to enjoy the benefits of investment liberalization. There is no explanation
for what “substantive business operations” are and the definition of ownership is in accordance withthe laws of each country, and so the actual operation of services and investments must be confirmedwith the government of each country.

Chapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)25

5. ASEAN goals from 2015 onward

5.1 The next target year is 2020
ASEAN following 2015 is indicated in the Bali Declaration on ASEAN Community in a Global
Community of Nations (“Bali Concord III”) adopted at the 19th ASEAN Summit Meeting held in
Bali in Indonesia in November 2011. 8

It includes a commitment to realize an ASEAN common

platform on global issues by 2022, and the raising of ASEAN’s profile and constructive role on aninternational level. With the target date of 2022, raising ASEAN’s role, voice, and profile throughactively engaging in global issues on a regional and global level became the next target after thefounding of the ASEAN Community in 2015.
Meanwhile, as was made clear in the discussion of the scorecard and the MPAC, it is evident thatthe implementation rate of the blueprint and MPAC targets will fall short of 100% in 2015. In the
MPAC and the Brunei Action Plan, the items that are not completed have a target date of 2020. It is
likely that in 2015, the AEC will be evaluated as having been largely implemented, and theimplementation of the action plan of liberalization, facilitation, and infrastructure building will be
continued with the next target date of 2020.

5.2

Recommendations
Finally, the following are recommendations for Japanese cooperation with the founding of the

AEC.
① Have suggestions regarding impediments to integration and solutions to them from theperspective of Japanese businesses: when creating a unified market in the EU, obstacles tomarket integration were eliminated, the “Completing the Internal Market” white paper was
produced, and market integration was made into policy.

In order to achieve the goals of the

AEC Blueprint in the field, it would be beneficial for Japanese corporations that are building
production networks in the ASEAN region to identify and propose solutions for impediments tointegration that they are facing on the ground.

It would be realistic for JETRO, which

conducts an annual survey of Japanese corporations in ASEAN, to take a central role in
implementing an investigation with the cooperation of ERIA and the ASEAN Secretariat.
② Support distribution facilitation: promote support for the Comprehensive Asian Development
Plan and strengthening connectivity.
③ Promote ASEAN standards agreements and MRAs: ASEAN’s MRAs are still limited.
Cooperation is desired from the perspective of ties to all of East Asia for a wide range of items.

8

http://www.aseansec.org/26719/htm/documents/19th％20concord％20Ⅲ.pdf

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report26

④ Assist the building of a qualification system: support the creation of qualification systems ofvarious types for ASEAN based on Japan’s experience and accumulation.

This will be useful

in fostering human resources and increasing the level of technology, but creating common
qualifications for ASEAN will promote a freer flow of people.
⑤ Foster human resources and distribution infrastructure for the CLM countries: causing the CLM
countries to participate in the East Asian production network will contribute to promotion ofexports, technology transfers, reducing disparities, and the like.

In addition to building

infrastructure including roads, bridges, and ports, putting in place industrial complexes forindustries that move in lockstep with distribution infrastructure should be furthered, and thecultivation of human resources in the distribution sector in addition to luring foreign capitalized
firms should be promoted.
⑥ Expand engagement by Japanese corporations: Japanese corporations have thus far taken
advantage of the trade liberalization measures that ASEAN has furthered including AFTA,
AICO, ASEAN+1 FTAs, and the like.

In the future, the liberalization and facilitation

measures towards building the AEC of trade in goods, as well as services, investment, MRAs,
the flow of people, customs procedures, and the like should be more actively taken advantage
of.

Meanwhile, it is necessary to put effort into fostering human resources, engaging inresearch and development, as well as sourcing parts from local businesses in the ASEAN region,and to support the realization of an AEC aiming for a “single market and production base” anda “competitive economic region.” The more ASEAN economic integration proceeds, the more
benefits will be experienced in the operation of Japanese corporations, which have many basesof business in the region.

It is vital to build a “win-win” relationship with ASEAN.

References

Ishikawa, Koichi. (2009) “Shin AFTA kyotei no teiketsu” [Concluding a new AFTA agreement].
Kikan Kokusai Boeki to Toshi [International Trade and Investment Quarterly]. No. 75, Spring
2009.
Ishikawa, Koichi. (2010) “ASEAN hokatsuteki toshi kyotei no igi to gaiyo” [The significance andoutline of the ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement]. Kikan Kokusai Boeki to Toshi[International Trade and Investment Quarterly]. No. 79.
Sukegawa, Seiya. (2010) “Keizai kyodotai no kochiku ni muketa ASEAN no chosen—buppin boeki
to sabisu boeki no jiyuka wo chushin ni” [ASEAN’s challenges towards building an economic
community: A focus on liberalization of trade in goods and trade in services]. Aoki, Ken andChapter 1 │ ASEAN, Aiming to Create an Economic Community (AEC)27

Umada, Keiichi eds. Gurobaru Kinyu Kiki to Sekai Keizai no Shinchitsujo [The Global
Financial Crisis and a New Order in the Global Economy]. Nippon Hyoron Sha Co., Ltd.
ASEAN Secretariat (2009), ASEAN Integration in Services
ASEAN Secretariat (2010), “ASEAN Economic Community Scorecard: Charting Progress Towards
Regional Economic Integration”, March 2010
ASEAN Secretariat (2012),”ASEAN Economic Scorecard: Charting Progress Towards Regional
Economic Integration, PhaseⅠ(2008-2009) and phaseⅡ(2010-2011)”, March 2012

Japan Center for Economic Research “Asia Research” Report28