ABSTRACT
Resource security has recently emerged as a major policy concern in the AsiaPacific. Soaring world prices for minerals and energy are threatening the economic security of many countries in the region, whose governments are now seeking solutions to secure supplies of natural resources. Given deep patterns of interdependence between resource-poor consumers in Asia and resource-rich producers on the Pacific Rim, one of the strategies have been attempts to
*Jeffrey D. Wilson is a Fellow of the Asia Research Centre at Murdoch University. <j.wilson@ murdoch.edu.au>
Vol. 69, No. 2, 224-245, https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2014.978741
regionalise resource cooperation. During the last decade, all four intergovernmental bodies in the Asia-Pacific-the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), ASEAN Plus Three, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) and the East Asia Summit-have launched resource cooperation initiatives. These have aimed to improve the resource security of member states through information-sharing, the coordination of resource policies and the further integration of regional resource markets. However, the outcome of these initiatives has been mixed. While these efforts have succeeded in building mechanisms for intergovernmental dialogue, more substantive initiatives have either failed or have been watered down in ways that significantly constrain their effectiveness. Resource cooperation in the Asia-Pacific therefore remains poorly developed and is yet to deliver substantive outcomes of consequence for regional resource security. Why, given the region’s increasing resource security problems, have efforts to
institutionalise cooperation been limited to low-impact dialogue activities? This article argues that the answer lies in the domestic resource policy preferences of governments. Many regional governments maintain resource nationalist policy regimes that prioritise state control rather than market mechanisms, which are designed to support the economic interests of particular domestic groups. These nationalistic policies mean governments take an inward-looking approach to resource security, oppose liberalisation efforts and are highly sovereigntyconscious when participating in regional initiatives. These policies do not prevent resource cooperation entirely, but mean that efforts are instead channelled towards low-cost dialogue activities-commonly referred to as ‘soft law’—while more substantive endeavours have failed to gain traction. The roots of weak resource cooperation in the Asia-Pacific therefore lie in the nationalistic policy preferences of regional governments.
