Background: This article offers a new perspective of ASEAN as network governance (NG) at its core, with a hierarchical organisational structure as its front (hybrid organisation). The works on network forms of organisation and policy network theory (PNT) were used for the analysis.

Methods: Two case studies from the ASEAN Community were selected to show the applicability and effectiveness of NG. They were selected for their prominence and the prevalence of critical comments on their ineffectiveness in promoting ASEAN’s integration. A study on how these policies are made and implemented in ASEAN was evaluated using a qualitative research methodology by analysing existing literature.

Results: The findings show ASEAN as a hybrid structure that has helped in two ways critical to ASEAN's survival and relevance. First, the approach provides legitimacy for ASEAN in the international community by purposefully adopting structures similar to the EU without the supranational elements. Second, it highlights ASEAN’s goal of asserting its centrality. While adopting a hybrid structure has led to the soft institutionalisation of ASEAN, characterised by a less empowered secretariat, whose member states are the decision-makers and implementors of policies, adopting NG better reflects the underpinnings allowing a more nuanced assessment of its performance. In addition, it opens a pathway to recognising the states’ autonomy where the extent of actors’ will and interests leads to decision-making and defines ASEAN’s performance.

Conclusions: This article demonstrates ASEAN’s goal to pursue ASEAN centrality in regional cooperation and institutional arrangements through the alternative approach of NG. NG allows for a nuanced assessment of ASEAN’s performance by first highlighting ASEAN’s context and history and emphasising the role of member states as decision-makers and implementers of policies. The NG framework has contributed to ASEAN’s legitimacy and centrality, fostering regional integration despite its inherent limitations.

A qualitative content analysis and case studies related to the significance of NG and policy networks in ASEAN were undertaken. Through qualitative content analysis, relevant information was systematically analysed to identify patterns and themes. The case studies provided specific examples that shed light on the dynamics of policy networks, member states’ motivations, and the role of ASEAN’s centrality in policymaking. Combining these methods, the study aimed to understand the relevance and application of NG and policy networks within ASEAN.

Content analysis

The primary data used for the content analysis was ASEAN reports, documents, and research articles, besides analysis of studies and research papers on NG, policy networks, and ASEAN processes. They provided an understanding of the policy process phases and their varying degrees of success in the individual ASEAN communities. This study's search strategy for documents and sources involved a comprehensive approach. A systematic literature review was conducted using online academic databases such as Google Scholar, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, and ASEAN Secretariat and ASEAN member states websites. The search terms included keywords related to ASEAN, network governance, hybrid organisations, policy network theory, and related concepts. The search was conducted between June 2019 to March 2021, covering a wide range of scholarly articles, books, reports, and policy documents as part of the author’s doctoral research. The author conducted further searches between January to June 2023 in developing this article.

Data collation involved a two-step process. First, relevant literature was gathered through the systematic literature review. The selected documents were then subjected to content analysis to identify key themes and concepts related to ASEAN’s network governance, resource dependence theory and organisational structure. The variables included in the analysis focused on understanding the structure, functioning, and effectiveness of ASEAN as a hybrid organisation with network governance at its core. These variables encompassed aspects such as organisational legitimacy, decision-making processes, policy implementation, and the role of member states in shaping ASEAN’s performance.

The methods of analysis employed in this study were qualitative. Content analysis was used to examine the gathered literature and identify recurring themes, patterns, and theoretical frameworks related to network governance and hybrid organisations. The findings from the literature analysis were synthesised and interpreted to provide a comprehensive understanding of ASEAN’s hybrid structure and its implications for the organisation’s legitimacy and pursuit of centrality.

Case studies

Two case studies, one from AEC and another from APSC covering two policy networks each, were utilised to study the presence and workings of NG in ASEAN alongside the resource dependence among member states that impacted policymaking. 

The selection of AFTA as a case study within the ASEAN Economic Policy Subsystem (AEPS) is a deliberate choice, as the AFTA was established before the AEC itself. Moreover, with its long and substantive history, AFTA is a significant policy network to examine the performance of AEPS. Its significance is pertinent because AFTA’s framework-agreement approach was used to launch negotiations for the AEC and establish other regional free trade arrangements. Besides, the ASEAN Single Window (ASW), a core component of AFTA, was selected as it is a relevant micro case study on the operations of NG in AFTA, where custom cooperation and trade facilitation are forged across the region. Likewise, the ARF was identified as a case study since it is recognised as a venue for multilateral and bilateral dialogue and consultations and the establishment of effective principles for dialogue and cooperation, where a myriad of political and security issues is discussed. On the other hand, the ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Transnational Crime (AMMTC) policy network was chosen as a contrast to ARF, where the focus on non-traditional security has often relied on the partnerships and cooperation of non-state actors (NSAs), which points to some acceptance of them in the APSS and at the discretion of member states. Figure 1 depicts the policy universe of the ASEAN Community with the two communities (AEC and APSC) and the policy networks (AFTA, ASW, ARF and AMMTC).