Energy security in this day and age is an increasingly complex concept for policymakers to deal with. In order to sustain future economic growth while keeping in account issues of territorial...Show moreEnergy security in this day and age is an increasingly complex concept for policymakers to deal with. In order to sustain future economic growth while keeping in account issues of territorial disputes and environmental pollution, many scholars have anticipated a great role for ASEAN, the regional organisation in Southeast Asia, in fostering regional cooperation on energy security. The dominant perspective within the literature analyses ASEAN in practical terms of material outcomes and claims that ASEAN should follow a similar path as the European Union, focussing on functional cooperation. However, the current research concurs with a marginalised and underdeveloped perspective in the literature and claims that norms and the establishment of a regional identity are crucial in understanding cooperation on energy security in Southeast Asia. The contribution of the research is twofold. First, its analyses of ASEAN’s regional energy security policies, the Laos-Thailand-Malaysia-Singapore power interconnection project and nuclear energy developments finds that ASEAN’s normative approach is crucial in understanding development of and the rationale behind cooperation on energy projects in the region. Secondly, it finds that contrary to the assumption of many scholars in the existing literature on energy security in ASEAN, ASEAN’s norms are not static but undergo change through a process of norm localisation, in which external norms and practices are adopted and localised within pre-existing institutional norms and practices. The thesis concludes that norms play a crucial role in ASEAN’s approach to fostering regional cooperation on energy security, dictating both form and function of cooperation. A normative approach is therefore key in gaining a better understanding of the development of energy security cooperation amongst Southeast Asian states.Show less
International Relations theories have generally accepted the idea that the global system is structured by the principle of anarchy. In some regional systems however, the anarchical character of the...Show moreInternational Relations theories have generally accepted the idea that the global system is structured by the principle of anarchy. In some regional systems however, the anarchical character of the international politics has disappeared because of external hegemonic actors who have transformed the regional system into a hierarchical regional structure. In this structure, the distribution of power is affected to the extent that the regional dynamics are no longer determined by a state of anarchy but by a state of hierarchy, in which the hegemonic state renders regional competition by the subordinate states meaningless. Cooperation on conflict management in these regional systems is therefore bound to have different outcomes than in systems characterized by anarchy, as is shown in the case study of Central Asia, since uncertainty does not prevail and a central government (in the form of the hegemonic actor) is able to impose order on the regional members. Re-conceptualizing the systemic structure in which regional conflict management functions will enhance understanding of the changing world order, and improve predictions of state behavior in hierarchical regional structures.Show less
