The Report of the NEAT Working Group on
East Asian Socio-Cultural Connectivity
Introduction
Socio-Cultural Connectivity is an important factor in building East Asian
Community as East Asia is a region of great social and cultural diversity. Further
understanding of social and cultural diversity and a common vision for community isneeded for the coordination of political economic interests within the region. There has
been a great tendency towards developing a humanistic regional community throughincreasing socio-cultural exchanges in the process of building an East Asian
Community that places enhanced importance on shared ideas and identity.
The spirit of socio-cultural community was enshrined in the 1998 ASEAN Plus
Three Summit including statements on Asian identity, human exchanges, mutual
cultural understanding, and so on. The East Asia Vision Group II (EAVG II) proposes
the establishment of an Asian version of UNESCO, to foster education and science andensure the preservation of historic sites and the rich cultural heritage of the East Asianregion. A major challenge it confronts today is that cultural institutional networking
lags behind expectations.
Recalling this spirit, the Network of East Asian Think-Tanks (NEAT) recognized theimportance of building an East Asian socio-cultural community at the 2004 annual
conference and the necessity of building East Asian identity at the 2005 annual
conference. NEAT has organized a number of working groups to deal with generalissues of cultural exchange and explore various ways to enhance cultural exchange in
East Asia. The working groups, five led by NEAT Korea and one by NEAT Japan, havemade practical policy recommendations on key areas of cultural cooperation in East
Asia. A valuable output of the working groups is a broadened consensus on the necessityof cultural institutional networking in East Asia.
A network of socio-cultural institutions is of particular concern given the existing
imbalanced progress in comparison with economic and political-security cooperation.
There should be an institutional arrangement to project a new vision and policy
recommendation over the longer period beyond segmented exchange programs in theregion. There are increasing demands for regional arrangements for institutional
connectivity in the socio-cultural sector by facilitating discussions and shared identity
in a harmonious way.
The NEAT Working Group Meeting on ‘East Asian Socio-Cultural Connectivity:
Building an Institutional Network’ was organized by NEAT Korea at the Yonsei
University Wonju Campus, Korea on July 20, 2018 with the presence of 17
representatives from ASEAN Plus Three (APT). This report strives to put forward
policy proposals on strengthening socio-cultural connectivity through an institutional
1

network in APT countries while it presents major points discussed during the meeting.
Socio-Cultural Elements and East Asian Community
ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) as one of the three pillars of theASEAN Community focuses on “cooperative activities that are people-oriented,people-centred, environmentally friendly, and geared towards the promotion ofsustainable development to face new and emerging challenges in ASEAN” (ASCCBlueprint 2025, 2016). In the context of regional cooperation in East Asia, theimportance of socio-cultural cooperation is widely acknowledged by the governmentsin the region. A notable example can be found in the East Asia Vision Group Report(EAVG II), which is concerned “with sociocultural challenges such as increase in theaging population, a decline in the working age population, along with the growing
development gap in the region and environmental challenges” (EAVG II). The report
also highlights the role of joint R&D activities for improving public health services.
Reducing the gap among the various actors in society is one of the great concerns ofthe APT cooperation.
The region is now facing multi-dimensional concerns and cross-sectoral issues thatinvolve complex relationships to manage and comprehend, which are made morechallenging by overlapping, contrasting, and intersecting national and regional interests— for instance, disputes and conflicts among countries in the region, non-traditional
security issues (climate change, food security, energy security, and disastermanagement), gaps in development and manpower levels, lack of trust due to historicalissues, the low level of people’s awareness towards regional cooperation, thecomplexities of the regional situation and the influence of policies of major powers.
Other sociocultural issues considered in the process of building East Asian
community include protecting the fundamental rights and dignity of migrant workers;
improving access to education to help children complete primary and secondary school;
facilitating the leading role of universities in the region; reducing the digital divide bygiving ICT training programmes to less-developed countries; making efforts in forest
cooperation through sound forest policies and proven technologies; sharing of
information on water resources management and coordinating policies; strengtheningof people-to-people connectivity through joint tour programmes; promoting intraregional travel through visa facilitation, as well as an East Asian volunteers’ programme;
strengthening of cooperation of East Asian public broadcasting stations; and increasing
the support of East Asian nations for East Asian Studies at major universities. Thepromotion of cultural identity in order to increase awareness, mutual understanding,cooperation and cultural exchange has been mainly encouraged at the domestic level.
At the regional level, APT countries have organized the ASEAN+3 CulturalCooperation Network (APTCCN), which is a senior officers’ meeting.
However, the implementation of these socio-cultural visions has a long way to go.
There is a lack of institutional governance to manage and monitor the implementationof the programs. Like the case of ASCC, the socio-cultural pillar is overshadowed byother pillars and, in particular, economic cooperation.
2

NEAT as a track II entity for the APT has organized a number of working groups
on various socio-cultural issue. Also, culture institutional networking is needed for
effective implementation of the cultural cooperation initiatives. The previous NEAT
working groups proposed a number of programs in different cultural areas to makefuture cultural cooperation fruitful, such as to organize popular culture and culturalfestivities; to promote mutual understanding of common history and culture from theelementary school level to secondary school level; to hold biennales and triennales inthe region; to designate East Asian Cultural Capitals, whereby Asian cities take turns
showcasing their cultures; to build an ASEAN+3 University Network (ASEAN+3UNet); to promote systematization of regional quality assurance and credit transfer
systems of higher education in ASEAN＋3; to develop cultural exchanges among youth;
to establish a regional language training framework and create a knowledge sharing
system on the culture and tourism of ASEAN + 3 countries; to develop academic
collaborative research on historical artifacts; to promote preservation and protection ofcultural assets and cultural heritage; to promote cultural industry development bymaking visible systems and capacity building of human resources. Those programs are
all innovative and worthy of effective implementation.
The working groups on sociocultural issues were mainly based on a problemsolving approach to issues in which the hosting countries have interests. However, there
was no attempt to draw an institutional framework for the socio-cultural community
while the issues-based working groups are fragmented. At least three problemscontributed to creating the difficulties for constructing clear pathways and institutionalframeworks to develop socio-cultural connectivity. The first is the issue of complexity.
Many different issues, sometimes overlapping with each other, are put under the term‘socio-cultural issues.’ The second problem is that socio-cultural issues are often
considered as lesser priorities compared to political-security and economic issues. For
policymakers, political, security, and economic issues are more visible because they are
the traditional measures for the success of their leadership. The third problem is thedifficulty in measuring the progress of the socio-cultural agenda. This lack of clarity isseen in the progress of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community. On paper, assessmenton the implementation of the ASCC 2015 Blue Print concluded that most of the actionplans are addressed.
Conclusion and policy recommendations
Socio-cultural elements have increasingly become significant to building an East
Asian Community given the increasing demand for harmonized policies in dealing withvarious sociocultural challenges. Realising the social and cultural value of the region isparticularly important. Each country needs to protect and preserve her national culturaland artistic heritages so that these can become the identity of each country. In order toachieve this goal, each country in the region should have a long-term perspective on
the process of strengthening cultural and social cooperation and building socio-culturalinstitutions. At the regional level, the institutionalization of socio-cultural connectivity
is more necessary now, and calls upon cooperation among the governments to arrange3sociocultural policies in the process of community building in the region. Initiatives
need to work with a people-oriented spirit to benefit their peoples, promote sustainable
development and embrace the goals of United Nations SDG 2030. This is also thedirection to enhance mutual trust and understanding among ASEAN+3 countries aswell as the effectiveness of initiatives.
It is particularly significant to maintain the centrality of ASEAN and reinforce plus
three’s role. The network should operate under the principle of ASEAN centrality,
which means that ASEAN plays a central role in the network; ASEAN norms, such as
the principles of mutual respect, mutual benefit, consensus, and the comfort levels of
all parties, should be adhered to; decisions of the network should be made on the basisof consensus on issues, following a principle of non-interference in the internal affairsof members from outside or within the region. Furthermore, newer members of theASEAN countries need to be encouraged to get involved even more within sociocultural cooperation.
Promoting dialogue and cultural exchanges should be a crucial element to build a
network among ASEAN+3 countries to share best practices from education, youth, andsport policies and program implementations. It also requires us to take a more crosssectorial and inter-pillar coordination approach on socio-cultural cooperation,
particularly on the ‘culture of prevention.’In the process of building East Asian Community, common and shared identity is
the fundamental issue. It is important to promote greater awareness and appreciation ofeach other’s traditions, heritage and cultures, including through regularly held cultural
festivals, art exhibitions, film festivals and other cultural events; discuss and exchange
experiences on preserving traditional cultural values and work together to prevent theft,
illicit and illegal trade and trafficking and the transfer of cultural properties. APT also
needs to enhance the awareness and understanding of each other’s culture, customs andfaiths, including through regular people-to-people and cultural exchange activities suchas cultural festivals, exhibitions, film festivals, youth camps and media exchanges.
Socio-cultural cooperation should not solely depend on the market-oriented approach
but people-oriented approach, which will also help to preserve the culture of minorities.
It should be noted that the cooperation among higher education institutions in East
Asian countries will benefit the institutions, countries and region. The author offerssome recommendations for action. In the context of East Asia, higher education
institutions in East Asian countries should be encouraged and supported to open a jointdegree or double-degree program in their institutions, which include a joint degree
program or setting the same standard in order to enhance cross-border cooperation.
Support should be provided to higher education institutions to set up East Asian Studies
programmes at major universities, which can contribute to socio-cultural exchange andcollaboration.
It is also recommended to establish a NEAT Secretariat to enhance the role of
NEAT to be the hub of think tanks and academics in East Asia, as well as the hubs-ofhubs of people-based initiatives for socio-cultural connectivity.
In this context, the following issues should be considered. First, it is highly4necessary to build a network among the sociocultural institutes in the member countries.
Upon the recommendation of NEAT coordinators, the representing institute will share
information and update the state of the member states national and regionalsociocultural policies and challenges.
Second, to form a regional vision for more concrete socio-cultural cooperation, a
regular policy forum needs to be conducted. The regional network of the sociocultural
institutes conducts collaborative research on the socio-cultural community and various
sociocultural challenges the region is facing. The regular forum will identify thepriorities on sociocultural cooperation. This initiative would lead to the formation of an
epistemic community that consists of scholars, policy makers and other stakeholders
including those who participated in the NEAT process previously.
Third, for the medium- and long-term development plan, an inter-state research
and monitoring unit for the sociocultural community needs to put in place, the so-called
Institute for Socio-Cultural Cooperation for ASEAN and East Asia. The institute canoffer policy recommendations for the ASSC and East Asian sociocultural community.
It may handle selected socio-cultural cooperation programs mainly in the field ofeducation and research to fulfill its main task. Importantly it would monitor the progressof the ASCC and APT plans for socio-cultural cooperation.

5List of ParticipantsCambodia

ROS Soveacha
Mr. Heng Hokmeng

Deputy Director General of Policy andPlanning
Deputy Bureau Chief, Department of ASEAN
Plus Three Cooperation and East Asia Summit

SROY SOCHEATH

Deputy Direcotr of Youth, Ministry ofEducation, Youth and Sport

China

Dr.Han Zhili

Director of the Center for Asia-pacific Studies
at China Foreign Affairs University.

Indonesia

Dr. Shofwan Al NEAT Indonesia Contact Person
Banna Choiruzzad

JapanAmb.
TAKAHASHI
Kunio,
Inwon Hwang
Choonglyol Lee

Vice Chairman, Institute for International
StrategMalaysia

Haniah Hassan

Senior Assistant Secretary
Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture
Malaysia

MyanmarDaw Than
Htay,
Professor
Thithimadee

Korea

LaosThailand

VietnamGyeonsang National University
Director General, Korean Institute of Southeast
Asian Studies(KISEAS)
Keeseok KIM
Kangwon National University
Hyung Jong KIM
Yonsei University at Wonju
Samyung Park
Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Director
General, Korean Institute of Southeast AsianStudies(KISEAS)
Jaehyon Lee
The Asan Institute for Policy Studies
Mr.
Thongkhoun Director of Research Division, the Institute of
SENGPHACHANH Foreign Affairs

Than

Member of Myanmar ISIS

Dr. Research Institute for Languages and Culturesof Asia, Mahidol University.

Somkiat Kamolpun

the Office of theCommission (OHEC).

Mrs DO Mai Lan

Researcher
Institute for Foreign Policy anf StrategicStudies
The Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam6Higher

Education