Although climate-linked impacts on ASEAN’s economy, increasing vulnerability to severe weather, and interlinkages to transboundary haze, health, security and marine pollution are evident, a recent survey by the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute reveals that Southeast Asians are ambivalent about ASEAN’s effectiveness in tackling climate change. All ASEAN Member States (AMS) are fully committed to accelerating reductions to global emissions under the Paris Agreement and demonstrate political will to set up intersectoral climate governance on renewable energy transition, agriculture and food security, forest and land use protection, disaster risk management, conservation on biodiversity, among many other measures. Under the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) pillar, the ASEAN Ministerial Meetings on the Environment (AMME) and the ASEAN Senior Officials’ Meeting on the Environment (ASOEN) meet annually to discuss environment-related issues, including climate change. The ASEAN Working Group on Climate Change (AWGCC), one of seven technical working groups reporting to the ASOEN, is tasked to enhance regional cooperation on climate change, promote collaboration between sectoral bodies, and articulate ASEAN’s concerns and priorities at the international level. Climate change issues have become cross-cutting and involve various ASEAN sectoral bodies. The AWGCC’s role, however, is still limited to the environmental mandate. ASEAN needs to establish a super coordinating body on climate change that can ensure information sharing across ASEAN bodies, convene support from dialogue partners, and engage with civil society organizations. The ASEAN Coordinating Council Working Group on Public Health Emergencies (ACCWG-PHE) model established during the COVID-19 crisis can serve as a precedent.

This volume showcases the diversity of the politics and practices of climate change governance across Southeast Asia. Through a series of country-level case studies and regional perspectives, the authors in this volume explore the complexities and contested nature of climate governance in what can be considered as one of the most dynamic and multi-faceted regions of the world. They reflect upon the tensions between authoritarian and democratic climate change governance, the multiple roles of civil society and non-state interventions, and the conflicts between state planning and market-driven climate change governance. Shedding light on climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts in Southeast Asia, this book presents the various formal and informal institutions of climate change governance, their relevant actors, procedures, and policies. Empirical findings from a diverse set of environments are merged into a cross-country comparison that allows for elaborating on similar patterns whilst at the same time highlighting the distinct features of climate change governance in Southeast Asia. Drawing on case studies from all Southeast Asian countries, namely Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Viet Nam, this book will be of great interest to students, scholars, and practitioners dealing with climate change and environmental governance.

Micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) account for approximately 97 per cent of all active business entities within the ASEAN region. They are an important contributor to both emissions generation and future reduction. A recent large-scale, multi-country quantitative assessment was undertaken into how SMEs are dealing with climate change in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Vietnam. Most respondents reported a high level of concern about climate change. Over 90 per cent of firms are currently undertaking measures to reduce emissions, albeit that they are typically simple steps such as reducing air conditioning and electricity, recycling or installing low-energy lighting. Common intentions to deal with future extreme weather events include reducing emissions, developing a disaster plan, or reviewing business insurance policies. Major obstacles to dealing with climate issues are firstly, a lack of knowledge and secondly, insufficient funds. Governments are the preferred source of information, followed by business associations/chambers, friends and family. Social media, YouTube and websites are overwhelmingly the dissemination modes of choice. There were significant variations in these patterns from one reporting country to another. Policymakers can help SMEs adjust to climate change by: encouraging them to adopt simple emission reduction measures; providing training and financial support; ensuring appropriate online delivery of advisory and assistance measures; and localising responses to meet the needs of SMEs which are specific to different ASEAN member states.

Rapid urbanization and development in Southeast Asia have impacted its high biodiversity and unique ecosystems, directly through the use of forest lands for infrastructure building, and indirectly through increasing ecological footprints. In Greater Bandung, Indonesia and Greater Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, rapid urbanization over the last thirty years has resulted in an increase inbuilt infrastructure of approximately two and three times respectively. A Nature-Based Solutions approach can potentially underpin urban design and planning strategies in Greater Bandung and Greater Kuala Lumpur, as well as other cities in Southeast Asia, to address biodiversity conservation and also global environmental challenges such as climate change adaption and mitigation while supporting well-being. Mainstreaming Nature-Based Solutions in Southeast Asia will require knowledge gaps to be addressed, greater awareness, increasing the evidence base, metrics for measuring success, support from institutions and stakeholders, and new and innovative financing. The urgency of global socio-ecological challenges, in particular the biodiversity and climate crisis, means transformational change is needed in Southeast Asia, for urban, ecological, technical, economic, and social systems, while still supporting sustainable development.

Investors are increasingly integrating environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues into their investment decisions. Currently, more than half of managed assets in Europe are linked to ESG factors, while in Japan, ESG investment has grown dramatically in recent years. In principle, ESG investment can help to bridge the gap between profit-driven investment and economic and social sustainability in Asia and the Pacific. However, a number of challenges, such as unclear and varied sustainable investment criteria, untested impacts on corporate value and social issues, and the lack of quality data cloud the potential for increasing ESG investment. This book aims to contribute to developing a framework for future analysis and monitoring to ensure the growth of ESG investment.

Asia and the Pacific continues to be exposed to climate change impacts. Home to the majority of the world's poor, the population of the region is particularly vulnerable to those impacts. Unabated warming could largely diminish previous achievements of economic development and improvements, putting the future of the region at risk. Read the most recent projections pertaining to climate change and climate change impacts in Asia and the Pacific, and the consequences of these changes to human systems, particularly for developing countries. This report also highlights gaps in the existing knowledge and identifies avenues for continued research.

The Paris Agreement embodies a flexible approach to global cooperation, aimed at encouraging ever more ambitious climate action by a variety of players on all levels of governance. Regional organizations play an important role in mobilizing such action. This Element provides novel insights into the conditions under which policy entrepreneurs can bring about transformative policy change in regional settings, with a focus on the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It finds that opportunity structures in the EU have been conducive to successful climate-progressive policy entrepreneurship at several key junctures, but not consistently. In contrast, the ASEAN governance context provides few access points for non-elite interests, making it fiendishly difficult for policy entrepreneurs to push for substantive policy change in the face of powerful domestic veto players. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.