「邁向東協經濟共同體：投資自由化、保障與最新投資趨勢」國際 … ·...

「「邁邁向向東東協協經經濟濟共共同同體體：：投投資資自自由由化化、、保保障障與與

最最新新投投資資趨趨勢勢」」國國際際研研討討會會圓圓滿滿落落幕幕編輯部

由中華經濟研究院台灣東協研究中心主

辦，萬國法律事務所、台灣服務業聯盟協辦之「邁

向東協經濟共同體 :投資自由化、保障與最新投資

趨勢」國際研討會於 2014 年 10 月 29 日假中華

經濟研究院蔣碩傑國際會議廳舉行，邀請國內外

東協領域之重要學者、專家、企業人士擔任會議

講者，共同分析東協區域整合下之投資自由化現

況與趨勢。本次會議共吸引約 250 位企業人士、

政府官員、相關領域學者及研究生到場聆聽，現

場發言及討論相當踴躍。

在第一場次「邁向東協經濟共同體：投資自

由化與外人直接投資（FDI）趨勢」中，怡安風

險管理顧問集團大中華區包毅宏（Owen Belman）

行政總裁表示，中國大陸對外投資金額快速成

長，東協地區即為主要投資目的地之一。而未來

東協吸引外資將可能有以下四點特色：第一，相

對廉價工資優勢；第二，賦稅及金融誘因；第三，

天然資源與人力資源；第四，資本移轉。中華經

濟研究院台灣東協研究中心徐遵慈主任則建議

我政府應推動與東協國家洽簽 FTA/ECA/BIA 等

P.1 ◆「邁向東協經濟共同體：投資自由化、保障與最新投資趨勢」國際研討會圓滿落幕

P.4 ◆臺泰雙邊經貿關係與未來展望

P.10◆AEC 2015: Taiwan Industry Response

P.22◆ASEAN, AEC and Emerging Issues in Investment: What Role For Malaysia

P.42◆Investment Protection and Dispute Settlement in ASEAN Comprehensive Investment

Agreement (ACIA)

P.51◆Triangularity in India-China-Japan Relations: Implications for East Asia

本本期期目目錄錄

2 東協瞭望 010

協定，並尋求與東協國家建立產業、人力資源或

投資基金等方面之合作；對於產業界而言，徐主

任建議應成立「東協─臺灣商會」，並針對東協

不同國家、不同產業之特性擬訂個別化拓銷策

略。

圖 1 「邁向東協經濟共同體:投資自由化、保障與最

新投資趨勢」國際研討會會場

在第二場次「檢視東協國家投資保障與投資

爭端機制」中，越南工貿部工業與貿易資訊中心

黎國方（Le Quoc Phuong）副主任指出，ACIA

將可為東協投資者帶來六大效益，包括投資自由

化、非歧視原則、透明化、投資保障、爭端解決

機制等。而 ACIA 特別強調投資保障與爭端解決

功能，提供東協投資者夠完善的投資保障環境，

以及更多元的爭端解決機制。新加坡 Rajah &

Tann 法律事務所黎耀輝（Lai Yew Fei）合夥律

師則針對東協投資爭端解決進行案例分析，認為

當前 ACIA 架構下的東協投資爭端解決有幾項重

要趨勢值得各界關注，包括：第一，投資者大多

選擇曾對地主國做出重大裁決之法庭做為仲裁

地點；第二，投資者聲請補償可能純粹是施壓策

略；第三，一些新的訴訟或仲裁資金係由企業所

資助；第四，委任律師往往依據判決金額收取不

同費用。



在第三場次「投資東協：新趨勢與新議題」

中，馬來西亞經濟研究院羅希（Zakariah Abdul

Rashid）執行長認為，東協是一個充滿活力的經

濟區域，未來十年內東協經濟成長與投資商機將

快速增加，而 AEC 與 ACIA 將對外人投資帶來更

大吸引力，馬來西亞則可在此波浪潮下成為外人

資東協的重要區域樞紐。中央研究院經濟研究所

黃登興研究員則提到，東協經濟整合進程非常快

速，但未來仍有許多問題有待解決，例如在東協

會員國經濟發展高度落差下，東協能否建立單一

市場與生產基地？在東協與東亞其他國家之物

流系統、政治制度、社會制度等方面仍具高度差

異下，東協能否進一步融入區域生產鏈？此類問

題皆為未來東協經濟整合所需面臨的重要挑戰。



本中心辦理「東南亞經貿工作推廣平台第三次會議」 3

在第四場次「跨國企業投資東協之經驗與策

略」中，聯昌證券有限公司北亞及南亞區企業融

資部科亞董事總經理對於臺商投資東協提出建

議，認為東協經濟成長快速且擁有龐大內需市

場，臺商應可透過投資、建立夥伴關係、併購等

方面展開東協市場布局，但也需特別留意東協存

在的主要問題，例如東協各國經濟發展落差、國

情環境差異、區域整合仍在發展階段等。中華民

國對外貿易發展協會陳廣哲研考委員指出，東協

擁有豐富的天然資源、人口紅利，且平均薪資仍

低於中國大陸，而東協主要國家成長快速，擁有

年輕且人數逐漸成長的中產階級，皆為臺商投資

的主要誘因。臺北市電腦商業同業公會國際合作

辦公室胡天盛執行長認為，臺商投資東協應先做

好五項準備，包括觀察與研究當地市場、尋找合

作夥伴、擬定財務規劃、人力資源管理、解決語

言問題、優先釋出善意等。



4

臺臺泰泰雙雙邊邊經經貿貿關關係係與與未未來來展展望望

中華經濟研究院台灣東協研究中心輔佐研究員葉俊廷

一、前言

泰國係我國在東南亞地區相當重要之經貿

夥伴，在我國政府積極推動臺商對東協國家之海

外布局下，我國與泰國之間的貿易與投資關係蓬

勃發展。2013 年，泰國係我國第 14 大貿易夥伴，

第 10 大出口市場，以及第 16 大進口來源國。另

一方面，自 1959～2014 年 6 月，我國對泰國累

計投資件數為 2,201 件，累計投資金額約 134.98

億美元，係泰國當地累計第 3 大外人直接投資來

源國。

我國與泰國之人力資源互動也相當頻繁，其

中以勞工與教育互動最為顯著。此外，由於我國

與泰國在許多產業擁有互補特性，例如貿易便捷

化、農產品、中小企業、綠色經濟、智慧財產權、

文創產業等，皆為我國與泰國值得進一步拓展雙

邊合作關係之重要產業。

二、臺泰雙邊經貿關係現況

表 1 臺灣與泰國雙邊關係與簽署協議

項目雙邊關係

臺灣泰國

外交無邦交，但互設有辦事處

駐泰國臺北經濟文化辦事處泰國貿易經濟辦事處

貿易現況

臺泰雙邊貿易總額約100.89億美元（2013年）

臺灣對泰國出口額約63.36億美元（2013年）

臺灣自泰國進口額約37.52億美元（2013年）

泰國係我國第14大貿易夥伴，第10大出口市場，以及第16大進口來源國（2013年）

我國係泰國第12大貿易夥伴，第19大出口市場，以及第11大進口來源國（2013年）

投資地位臺灣為泰國第3大投資國（累計至2014年6月），僅次於日、美

重要經

濟合作

會議

官方

1.「臺泰經濟（工業）合作會議」：由我國經濟部及泰國工業部召開之部長級會議，於2010年10

月召開第三屆會議。

2.「臺泰局長級經貿諮商會議」：「第一屆臺泰局長級經貿諮商會議」於2013年5月20日至22日在

臺北召開，由我經濟部國貿局局長與泰國商業部貿易談判廳長率團出席。

民間「臺泰經濟合作會議」：由中華民國國際經濟合作協會、泰國工業院共同召開，於 2012年8月舉

辦第三屆會議。

雙邊經貿協定

1. 1996年4月30日簽署《中泰投資促進及保障協定》。

2. 1999年7月9日簽署《駐泰國臺北經濟貿易辦事處與駐臺北泰國貿易經濟辦事處避免所得稅雙

重課稅及防杜逃稅協定》。

3. 2003年7月24日簽署《臺泰農業合作協定》。

4. 2007年5月8日簽署《加工出口區與泰國土地工業管理局瞭解備忘錄》。

5. 2010年11月6日簽署《國合會與泰國皇家計畫基金會農業技術合作協定》。

6. 2012年12月3日修訂《駐泰國臺北經濟貿易辦事處與駐臺北泰國貿易經濟辦事處避免所得稅雙

重課稅及防杜逃稅協定》。

資料來源：駐泰國臺北經濟文化辦事處、外交部、經濟部國際貿易局，暨本研究整理

臺泰雙邊經貿關係與未來展望 5

在出口貿易方面，我對泰國之出口貿易額從

2004 年的 33.18 億美元，成長至 2013 年的 63.36

億美元，增加約 30.18 億美元，成長幅度達

90.96%。觀察近 10 年我國與泰國之出口貿易趨

勢，可發現我對泰國出口大致呈正向成長，除

2007～2009 年全球經濟因受美國次貸危機及歐

債危機之影響出現衰退外，2010～2013 年都呈現

大幅度成長，出口表現超過 2007 年以前的水準，

顯示泰國對我出口貿易之重要性與成長潛力。

（參圖 1）

在進口貿易方面，我國對泰國之進口貿易額

從 2004年的 27.84億美元，成長至 2013年的 37.52

億美元，增加約 9.68 億美元，成長幅度達

34.77%。我國自泰國進口受到全球景氣低迷之影

響，在 2007～2009 年面臨衰退，其餘年度則大

致呈現正向成長，惟 2012 年我國自泰國進口金

額再度衰退。整體觀察，我國自泰國進口貿易之

發展趨勢尚稱平穩，全年進口額大約維持在 23

～44 億美元左右，並於 2011 年達到 43.93 億美

元的高峰，惟其成長幅度遠低於我國對泰國出口

貿易之成長幅度。（參下圖 1）

資料來源：財政部關務署

圖 1 2004～2013年我國對泰國進出口貿易額

在投資方面，近十年我國對泰國投資呈現 U

型發展趨勢，同樣也受到 2007～2009 年國際經

濟環境不佳之影響，導致我國對泰國投資金額與

投資件數在此期間面臨衰退。從趨勢上來看，

2005 年我國對泰國投資金額達到近十年高峰，約

4.18 億美元，至 2010 年則衰退至近十年谷底，

約 1.40 億美元，隨後雖在 2012 年達到近十年次

高水準，惟 2013 年卻又大幅衰退至 2.30 億美元。

2004～2013 年，我國對泰國投資金額共計減少

0.39 億美元，衰退 14.50%。而在投資件數方面，

2004 年我對泰國投資件數為 53 件，至 2013 年投

資件數減少為 41 件，整體投資件數呈現下降趨

勢。（參下圖 2）

6 東協瞭望 010

資料來源：The Board of Investment of Thailand (BOI)

圖 2 2004～2013年我國對泰國投資金額與投資件數

在泰籍勞工人數方面，近十年泰籍勞工在臺

就業人數呈現下滑趨勢，2004 年泰籍勞工人數仍

10.53 萬人，至 2013 年則已下降至 6.17 萬人，衰

退幅度達 41.39%。（參下圖 3）探究泰籍勞工在

臺灣逐漸減少之原因，從供給面來觀察，近 10

年來泰國經濟好轉，使出國工作之勞工數量較

少，當泰國國內就業機會多時，勞工即會挑選在

國外所從事的工作。1從需求面來看，泰籍勞工在

臺多從事製造業與營造業，屬產業外勞之範圍。

然我國近年來大型公共工程數量減少，在產業外

勞中重大投資外勞數量減少之情況下，泰國在臺

勞工亦因此減少。

1 欣悅人力資源管理顧問股份有限公司引自中央通訊

社。2011。《泰國東北漸發展臺灣可能漸缺泰勞》

http://urweb27.vipcase.net/html/front/bin/ptdetail.pht

ml?Part=news06&Rcg=110165


資料來源：勞動部

圖 3 2004～2013年泰籍勞工在臺就業人數

若從泰國在臺學生人數之變化觀察，近十年

間泰國學生在臺人數逐年上升，僅 2012 至 2013

學年有小幅下降。2003 至 2004 學年期間，泰國

學生在臺人數為 279 人，而 2013 至 2014 學年時

已達 972 人，近十年期間成長超過 3 倍之多，目

前泰籍學生在臺就學人數已達到近十年高峰。

（參下圖 4）

資料來源：教育部

圖 4 2004～2013年泰籍學生在臺就學人數

此外，我國教育部為因應國際化與低出生

率，將臺灣高等教育學生招募推廣至東南亞地

區，目標係將臺灣塑造為提供東南亞地區高等教

育之關鍵地區，以吸引東南亞大量優秀學生至臺

灣求學，相關做法與臺泰雙邊合作之內容包括：

（一）辦理臺灣高等教育展與臺泰高等教育論

壇；（二）推動臺泰菁英 600 專案；（三）成立

泰國臺灣教育中心。

8 東協瞭望 010

三、臺泰重要合作領域與方向

針對我國與泰國之雙邊產業合作，主要包

括：貿易便捷化、農產品貿易、中小企業、綠色

經濟、智慧財產權、文創產業等方面進行研析，

探究兩國未來在該等領域之可能合作方向與利

益。

（一）貿易便捷化

貿易便捷化議題係推動我國與泰國雙邊貿

易關係不可缺席的一環，具體內涵可包括關務機

關加強合作，審慎考量業者關心事項，包括關稅

制度及其相關規章之透明性與適用性；研議雙邊

可行性研究時，研究制定關務合作條款或經濟合

作章節之可行性。而臺泰未來可針對雙邊貿易與

投資活動建立法制化規範，降低我國業者與泰國

業者在貿易與投資時所需負擔的營運成本，促進

雙邊經貿互動；同時，臺泰亦可研擬推動簽署關

務合作協定或備忘錄，針對雙方海關之間的法制

化合作建制，改善我國與泰國在進出口貿易之通

關時效、透明性、簡化所需文件等，使臺泰雙邊

經貿合作進一步深化。

（二）農產品貿易

從臺泰間農業合作互動模式及泰國農業發

展情況可看出，我國與泰國在農業上具有不同優

勢，並應具有互補關係。我國擁有優良之農業技

術，泰國則具有農產品外銷供應能力與豐沛之農

產品物種原。因此，臺泰雙邊農業合作可藉由我

國資金及技術協助改善泰國農業生產技術、提升

農業部門產值，而我國則可由泰國進口初級農產

品原料，透過調製加工提升產品附加價值，並利

用與泰國農產品種原保存等相關資訊交換，做為

日後與泰國進行材料與技術交流之參考資料。此

外，臺泰間之雙邊農業合作會議之持續進行將可

為農業議題提供交流平臺，促進兩國農業貿易、

技術與資訊等面向之交流。

（三）中小企業

我國與泰國早在 APEC 架構下已建構相當

程度之合作基礎，也為臺泰加強中小企業雙邊合

作塑造友善利基。由我國所倡議成立的「APEC

中小企業危機管理中心」於 2010 年 5 月正式成

立，現由我國經濟部中小企業處處長葉雲龍擔任

該中心執行長，並邀請泰國「亞洲災防中心災害

風險管理系統部」主任 Aslam Perwaiz 擔任該中

心專家成員。在具體合作內容方面，由於我國在

中小企業方面擁有長期且深厚的發展經驗，而泰

國中小企業亦為該國產業結構中相當倚重的主

要領域，雙方應可針對中小企業建立技術移轉、

技術協助、能力建構等合作，或鼓勵我國業者與

泰國業者進行合資，透過結合臺泰中小企業的發

展資源，提升雙方在該領域的發展潛力。

（四）綠色經濟

我國在綠色經濟發展方面具有一定優勢，於

環保技術開發上，相對優於東南亞國家。2在臺泰

綠色經濟合作上，綠色產業之推動為泰國國家經

濟社會發展計畫中的重點項目之一，而再生能源

比例的提升更為泰國政府所重視。對此，我國在

綠色產業技術上之發展優勢，應將符合泰國國家

發展所需，並可為我國業者拓展泰國或東南亞之

綠色產業市場。臺泰未來推動綠色經濟雙邊合

作，應可加強技術與研發合作、設置共同發展組

織或基金、共同推動對第三國家市場出口、以及

互相提供投資優惠以及市場進入之優惠待遇等。

2 行政院經濟建設委員會。2005。〈臺灣邁向綠色經濟

的優勢與潛力〉。

http://ebooks.lib.ntu.edu.tw/1_file/CEPD/109/taiwan%

20toward%20a%20green%[email protected]

[email protected]


（五）智慧財產權

我國與泰國未來在智慧財產權方面的合

作，主要應包括：第一，遵循 WTO 規範下之

TRIPS；第二，對現有各項規定，雙方能夠彼此

理解，同時提供平等的相關法令規章及政策性研

究活動機會以增加兩國國民權益；第三，適時並

有效地交換最新資訊，俾確保智慧財產權保護及

創新的利益；第四，雙方加強行使智慧財產權相

關法規，尤其是對貨品輸出入及服務業權益造成

侵害者；第五，擴展雙方智慧財產權領域，加強

推動研發創新；第六，加強區域性智慧財產權保

護，支持多國間之適用與調整。

（六）文創產業

泰國政府已將創意經濟視為國家發展的關

鍵，在其國家經濟振興方案「泰堅強計畫」中納

入創意經濟計畫，在國家經濟與社會發展計畫

中，也將創意經濟列入優先發展項目等。我政府

雖將「文化創意產業」列為國家發展重點之一，

但未見具體成效，雙方應可加強臺泰之合作與交

流。未來我國與泰國應可就文創產業加強文創政

策交流與人才培育合作、投資文創產業相關投資

之優惠、加強對於創作與商標之保護、推動共同

創立區域品牌、共同發展影視產業、數位內容、

遊戲軟體等合作。此外，我國亦可考慮在曼谷設

立文創發展與產品展示中心，以泰國做為進入東

協市場的橋頭堡。

四、結語

臺泰雙邊經貿關係密切且悠久，除了貿易、

投資活動以外，在勞工、教育、觀光、文化交流

等眾多領域亦有深遠之互動與合作基礎，未來雙

方如能進一步推動雙邊經貿合作，不僅有助鞏固

雙邊關係，重振兩國貿易與投資盛況，更可望為

彼此在區域整合中尋找新的合作機會，創造經濟

上之雙贏局面。

10

AAEECC 22001155:: TTaaiiwwaann IInndduussttrryy RReessppoonnssee Kristy Hsu

Programme Director

Taiwan ASEAN Studies Center, Chung-Hua Institution for Economic Research

I. The Economic Landscape

of ASEAN in 2015

I.1 The AEC 2015 in Shaping

On 7th

October 2003, the ASEAN Leaders adopted

the Declaration of ASEAN Concord II (Bali Concord II)

in Bali, Indonesia, to establish an ASEAN Community

by 2020. On 13th

January 2007, the ASEAN Leaders at

their 12th ASEAN Summit in Cebu, the Philippines,

further affirmed their strong commitment to accelerating

the establishment of the ASEAN Community by 2015.

The Leaders believed “the strengthening of ASEAN

integration through the accelerated establishment of an

ASEAN Community will reinforce ASEAN’s centrality

and role as the driving force in charting the evolving

regional architecture.”1

The ASEAN Community will comprise of three

pillars -- the ASEAN Political-Security Community

(APSC), the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) and

the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC). All

three will be closely intertwined and mutually

reinforcing for the purpose of ensuring durable peace,

stability, and shared prosperity in the region.

With respect to the second pillar -- the ASEAN

Economic Community (AEC), the ASEAN Leaders

agreed to transform ASEAN into a region with free

movement of goods, services, investment, skilled labour,

1 Cebu Declaration on the Acceleration of the

Establishment of an ASEAN Community by

2015, 13 January 2007.

http://www.asean.org/news/item/cebu-declaratio

n-on-the-acceleration-of-the-establishment-of-a

n-asean-community-by-2015

and freer flow of capital by 2015. The AEC envisages

four characteristics, including a single market and

production base, a highly competitive economic region, a

region of equitable economic development, and a region

fully integrated into the global economy.2

According to the ASEAN Economic Community

Blueprint, in order to enable ASEAN businesses to

compete internationally, to make ASEAN a more

dynamic and stronger segment of the global supply chain

and to ensure that the internal market remains attractive

for foreign investment, it is crucial for ASEAN to look

beyond the borders of AEC. In order to achieve the goal

of integration into the global economy, the Blueprint

points out two approaches: coherent approach towards

external economic relations and enhanced participation

in global supply networks. In the former approach,

ASEAN shall work towards maintaining ASEAN

Centrality in its external economic relations, including,

but not limited to, its negotiations for free trade (FTAs)

and comprehensive economic partnership (CEPs)

agreements (ASEAN 2007).

To stock-take and assess the latest development of

the AEC, at the ASEAN Summit in 2013 in Brunei

Darussalam, ASEAN leaders reviewed the work of the

three areas of the AEC. According to the ASEAN

Secretariat, an average of 82.5 percent of all action lines

towards the ASEAN Community 2015 have been

completed or are being implemented — representing 78

2 Declaration on the ASEAN Economic

Community Blueprint, November 20th

, 2007.

AEC 2015: Taiwan Industry Response 11

percent for the political security, 79.7 percent for the

economic and 90 percent for the socio-cultural pillars.3

As the year of 2015 is approaching, ASEAN’s

post-2015 vision is also being more frequently discussed.

In October 2013, ASEAN Leaders adopted the “Bandar

Seri Begawan Declaration on the ASEAN Community

Post-2015 Vision” during the 23rd

ASEAN Summit in

Brunei Darussalam. The Leaders tasked the ASEAN

Community Councils to expedite their work on

developing the ASEAN Community’s post-2015 vision,

and instructed that realising a politically cohesive,

economically integrated, socially responsible, and a truly

3 Post ASEAN Summit Highlights- ASEAN

Leaders to intensify efforts towards ASEAN

Community 2015, ASEAN Secretariat News,

October 16th

2013.

people-oriented, people-centred and rules-based ASEAN

would be the central elements of a Post-2015 Vision of

the ASEAN Community.4

ASEAN had experienced robust economic growth

in the past decades, notably its “golden decade” of the

late 1980s and early 1990s before the Asian Financial

Crisis in 1997/1998. It continued to grow at an average

rate of around 5 percent in the 2000s until it was hit

again by the Global Financial Crisis and succeeding

global volatility since 2008. Comparatively, ASEAN

GDP grew moderately in the 2000s (see Table 1).

4 The Leaders requested the ASEAN Coordinating

Council (ACC) to further develop the central

elements of the post-2015 vision for

endorsement by the ASEAN Summit in 2014,

and for the ACC to establish a Working Group

of the ACC at the level of Senior Officials of the

three pillars to oversee the overall process of

developing this post-2015 vision by the 27th

ASEAN Summit, with progress reports

submitted to the 24th, 25th and 26th ASEAN

Summits. See the Bandar Seri Begawan

Declaration on the ASEAN Community

Post-2015 Vision.

http://www.asean.org/images/archive/23rdASE

ANSummit/bsb%20declaration%20on%20the%2

0asean%20communitys%20post%202015%20vis

ion%20-%20final.pdf

http://www.asean.org/news/asean-secretariat-news

12 東協瞭望 010

Table 1: Average GDP and GDP Per Capita Growth (in percent)

GDP Growth 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011

Brunei -1.65 3.17 1.35 2.08 0.94

Cambodia 8.49 6.46 7.18 9.36 6.80

Indonesia 6.93 7.83 1.06 4.71 5.86

Lao PDR 4.47 6.19 6.17 6.33 7.99

Malaysia 6.70 9.47 4.99 4.76 4.57

Myanmar -1.98 5.90 8.35 12.87 10.30

Philippines 4.74 2.19 3.59 4.60 4.75

Singapore 8.69 8.57 5.84 4.83 6.33

Thailand 10.34 8.50 0.87 5.45 3.09

Vietnam 4.16 8.21 6.96 7.51 6.83

ASEAN (Aggregate) 7.02 7.48 2.82 5.09 5.14

GDP Per Capita Growth 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2005 2006-2011

Brunei -4.37 0.35 -1.08 -0.03 -1.26

Cambodia 4.54 3.14 4.89 7.83 5.59

Indonesia 4.98 6.15 -0.29 3.40 4.73

Lao PDR 1.60 3.38 4.00 4.67 6.40

Malaysia 3.66 6.68 2.46 2.51 2.84

Myanmar -3.60 4.42 6.96 12.20 9.52

Philippines 2.03 -0.17 1.33 2.50 2.96

Singapore 6.38 5.50 3.37 3.06 2.93

Thailand 8.44 7.55 -0.27 4.30 2.38

Vietnam 1.96 6.11 5.64 6.35 5.67

ASEAN (Aggregate) 4.84 5.63 1.28 3.74 3.94

Source: UNCTAD Stat (2013)

The high economic growth rate of ASEAN is

correlated with high investment rate and a higher share

of international trade to national output. Many ASEAN

Member States show relatively high trade orientation,

particularly Malaysia, Thailand, Viet Nam and, to a

lesser extent, Cambodia. Among them, Singapore,

Malaysia and Thailand are the main ASEAN participants

in regional production networks or global value chains

(GVCs), and since recent years Vietnam’s increasing

participation in the production networks further makes

ASEAN a more important integral part in the rise of the

“Asian Factory”.

ASEAN integration efforts accelerated

tremendously in the past two decades from the ASEAN

tariff preferential arrangements (PTA) of the 1980s. In

1992 ASEAN endorsed the establishment of the ASEAN

Free Trade Area (AFTA), paving the way for deeper

economic integration within the ASEAN region and

broader cooperation with external countries. The six

ASEAN older Members – Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia,


Philippines, Singapore and Brunei -- agreed to reduce the

common effective preferential tariff (CEPT) rates to

0%–5% by 2008. At the Fifth ASEAN Summit in 1995,

the deadline was advanced to 2005, and later to 2003.

In 1995 ASEAN adopted the ASEAN Framework

Agreement on Services (AFAS), and later the ASEAN

Investment Area (AIA) in 1998, aiming to expand their

economic cooperation from merchandise trade to

services and investment. With ASEAN’s expanded

membership to its four new Members – Cambodia, Laos,

Myanmar, and Vietnam (CLMV countries),5

these

economic agreements were adopted in its ten Member

States.

The outbreak of Asian financial crisis in 1997/1998

hit the fast growing economy of most ASEAN Member

States, and changed ASEAN’s plans of economic

integration – shifting from focusing on internal

cooperation towards an outward looking partnership with

East Asian countries.6 Since the early 2000s, ASEAN

gradually expanded economic cooperation with its six

Dialogue Partner countries. On the one hand, ASEAN

successfully concluded bilateral ASEAN+1 free trade

agreements (FTAs) with its six Dialogue Partner

countries, starting from China in 2004, South Korea in

2006, Japan in 2008, and India, Australia and New

Zealand in 2009.7 As of 2009, these 6 countries have

5 Viet Nam joined in 1995, followed by the Lao

PDR and Myanmar in 1997, and Cambodia in

1999. 6 On 17 December 1997, ASEAN leaders in Kuala

Lumpur adopted “ASEAN Vision 2020”,

emphasizing its aim to build ASEAN as a

“ ...outward looking, living in peace, stability

and prosperity, bonded together in partnership in

dynamic development and in a community of

caring societies”. 7 Among the ASEAN+1 FTAs, Australia and New

Zealand together negotiated and singed with

ASEAN the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand Free

Trade Area (AANZFTA). The AANZFTA

Agreement is the first region-to-region FTA for

both ASEAN and Australia and New Zealand.

separately or jointly developed ASEAN+1 FTAs with

ASEAN. On the other hand, ASEAN cooperation under

the ASEAN+3 framework was formalized and

strengthened, and expanded to ASEAN+6 in the East

Asia Summit (EAS) in December 2005, and later to

ASEAN+8 by inviting the United States and the Russian

Federation in 2011.

Among the five ASEAN+1 FTAs, four FTAs have

completed and entered into effect, except for the

ASEAN-India FTA (AIFTA). The FTAs with China,

Japan and South Korea respectively marked the

establishment of networks of ASEAN-centered FTAs in

the Northeast Asia. Later on the FTA networks expanded

to Asia Pacific countries –Australia and New Zealand –

and further to India in South Asia. ASEAN has

successfully played as a platform bridging Northeast and

Southeast Asia and South Asia by connecting these

ASEAN+1 FTAs in these sub-regions.

According to a Mid-Term Review of the

Implementation of the AEC Blueprint conducted in 2012,

the Mid-Term Review highlights a number of significant

achievements of ASEAN towards AEC 2015 (Intal,

Ponciano et al, 2014). The most significant achievement

would be the tariff reduction. Intra-ASEAN tariffs

(CEPT) have drastically come down under the decade

long integration. For the ASEAN-6, the percentage of

items with zero tariff in CEPT rose from 40 percent in

2000 to 99.11 percent in 2012, while the percentage of

zero tariff in CEPT for CLMV countries rose from about

10 percent in 2000 to 67.6 percent in 2012. Averagely,

the ASEAN-6 tariff rate has been virtually zero (0.05

percent) since 2010, and the rate for CLMV countries is

1.69 percent in 2012 (see Figure 1). The elimination of

tariffs, supported by political commitments of ASEAN

Leaders, makes the integration of ASEAN a success

story

14 東協瞭望 010

Source: ASEAN Tariff Database 2013

Figure 1: Average CEPT Rates in ASEAN Countries: 2000-2012

ASEAN has also progressed significantly in the

services liberalization and investment liberalization.

According to the results of the ASEAN Business Outlook

Survey 2014 conducted by the American Chambers of

Commerce in ASEAN, the report indicates ASEAN has

incremental improvements in most factors affecting

investors’ satisfaction of local environment in many

ASEAN Member States (Intal, Ponciano et al, 2014).

According to the Mid-Term Review of the

Implementation of the AEC Blueprint, ASEAN is

moving towards the goals of the AEC 2015 Vision.

However, there are still main challenges ahead for

ASEAN as follows:

1. There are still large number of poor and

marginally non-poor in most of the ASEAN member

states. It is estimated that there were around 100 million

people in ASEAN who were still poor (1.25 $ PPP per

capita per day) in the late 2000s. Eliminating the number

of the poor is the dominant key challenge facing ASEAN

now and beyond 2015.

2. ASEAN’s overall competitiveness is still weak

and needs to improve. In a study of labour productivity

growth and total factor productivity growth during

1996-2011 for ten ASEAN Member States as well as

China, India, Korea, Taiwan, Japan, USA and Latin

America, The results show robust growth in labour

productivity, particularly in Cambodia, Viet Nam, and

Indonesia, and the Philippines. However, the growth of

total factor productivity has been very modest or even

negative for most of ASEAN Member States. The

study shows that ASEAN needs to improve its total

productivity growth performance relative to its East

Asian neighbors, in order to improve its competitiveness

and move up the global value chains (GVCs).


Source: The Conference Board Total Economy Database (2013)

Figure 2: Labour Productivity and TFP Growth in ASEAN and Selected Partners (Annual Average)

I.2 Competitive

Liberalization in East

Asia: TPP vs. RCEP

At the 19th

ASEAN Summit in November 2010, the

ASEAN Leaders adopted the ASEAN Framework for

Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

In November 2012, at the 21st ASEAN Summit, ASEAN

Leaders announced the commencement of RCEP

negotiations in early 2013 and aim to complete them by

the end of 2015. The RCEP will comprise of 16

participating countries, namely ASEAN Member States,

China, Japan, Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and India.

The leaders commit to achieve a “comprehensive,

high-quality and mutually beneficial economic

partnership agreement establishing an open trade and

investment environment in the region to facilitate the

expansion of regional trade and investment and

contribute to global economic growth and

development”.8

8 Joint Declaration on the Launch of Negotiations

for the Regional Comprehensive Economic

Partnership, November 20th

2012 in Phnom Penh,

Cambodia.

Since the announcement of the RCEP negotiations,

the world’s largest FTA in terms of population has

attracted increasing attention from within and around the

region. The total of RCEP participating countries’

combined output reached USD 21.3 trillion in 2013,

which accounts for nearly 30 percent of world output.

With regards to trade and investment flows in RCEP

economies, in 2013 total trade of RCEP participating

countries amounted to USD 10.7 trillion, equal to 29.0

percent of global trade, while total FDI inflows to RCEP

participating countries reached USD 339.8 billion, equal

to 23.4 percent of global FDI inflows.9

ASEAN’s decision to promote the RCEP was

regarded by many people a response to the US-led TPP

which may threaten ASEAN’s integrity and its central

role in leading the regional economic integration. With

every ASEAN Member State participating as original

member, the RECP is emphasized as an ASEAN-driven

9 Joint Media Statement, the Second RCEP

Ministerial Meeting, 27 August 2014, Nay Pyi

Taw, Myanmar,

http://www.asean.org/images/Statement/2014/au

g/2nd%20RCEP%20Minsterial%20Meeting%20

JMS%2028FINAL29.pdf

16 東協瞭望 010

or ASEAN-led regional initiative and regarded as a peer

to the TPP. On the other hand, the RCEP is planned to

include ASEAN+ 6 countries, and may potentially

expand to the US and Russia in the future if the two

negotiate an FTA with ASEAN. The RCEP integration

process encompasses a population and international trade

volume lager than that of the TPP, making it

economically more attractive than the TTP.

RCEP is not only important to achieve AEC

Blueprint’s second pillar of becoming a Competitive and

Dynamic ASEAN, it is also important in the Blueprint’s

fourth pillar -- Towards Full Integration into the Global

Economy. According to a report tasked by ASEAN

Secretariat on the future of the AEC 2015, the report

raises the importance of the RCEP, regarding it

ASEAN’s most important initiative in stepping up

further regional integration in East Asia as well as

ASEAN’s major expression of a global ASEAN(Intal,

Ponciano et al, 2014). It is largely perceived that both

RCEP and TPP can be pathways to East Asian economic

integration and the eventual formulation of a Free Trade

Area of Asia Pacific (FTAAP).10

The integration of the

current 16 RCEP participating countries and expansion

of its geographical coverage with its open accession

clause to enable new members in the future will

contribute to ASEAN’s ambition to have a larger voice

in the regional and global economy.

The TPP has evolved from the P411

to P9 and then

to the current 12 negotiating members (Australia, Brunei

10

For example, in 2010 APEC Leaders adopted

“Pathway to FTAAP”, recognized “FTAAP

should be pursued as a comprehensive free trade

agreement by developing and building on

ongoing regional undertakings, such as

ASEAN+3, ASEAN+6, and the Trans-Pacific

Partnership, among others” . Pathway to FTAAP,

Yokohama, Japan, 14 Nov 2010. 11

The trade agreement began in 2005 as the

Trans-Pacific Strategic Partnership Agreement

(TPSEP) with 4 members – Singapore, Brunei,

Chile and New Zealand.

Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico,

New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and

Vietnam). The agreement became strategically

important when in November 2009 the President of the

United States Barak Obama announced an intention to

participate and to conclude an “ambitious,

next-generation, Asia-Pacific trade agreement that

reflects U.S. economic priorities and values.” In the

past few years, several Asian Pacific economies have

expressed, formally or informally, their interests in

joining in the agreement, including Thailand, Philippines,

Korea and Taiwan. However, the TPP adopts very

restrictive rules in accepting new members. One of the

rules is that an interesting country or economy needs to

“demonstrate its full commitments to liberalization”

before it is admitted by consensus of all existing TPP

members to participate in the accession negotiations.

There are four ASEAN Member States participating

in the current TPP negotiations: Singapore, Brunei,

Malaysia and Vietnam. Among them, Singapore and

Brunei are the original members in the TPSEP, while

Malaysia and Vietnam participated in the negotiations

since 2009. When the TPP concludes among the current

12 members, the combined market potential would

attract more countries to follow suit. Although some

ASEAN Member States consider the high standards of

the TPP barriers for them to participate for the moment,

they may consider participation when they think they are

better prepared later. If more ASEAN Member States

turn their attention to the TPP, it may undermine the

RECP.

Facing TPP’s original timeline to complete

negotiations by 2013, the RCEP also sets a very tight

timeline to conclude its negotiations by end of 2015.

Furthermore, the TPP adheres to APEC’s open

regionalism, and has an open accession clause that

allows accession by “any other APEC economies or

countries” in the future. The RCEP also follows suit and


sets an open accession clause to open for “any other

ASEAN FTA partner countries or any other extra

economic partners in the region”. Contrast to APEC’s

open regionalism, ASEAN has been a closed forum and

has never adopted an open accession clause in its FTAs.

The open accession clause in RCEP reveals the influence

of the TPP. It also reflects ASEAN’s efforts in

considering expansion of economic integration beyond

its Dialogue partner countries.

In terms of economic incentives or potential gains,

it is often argued that RCEP will have larger economic

gains to individual ASEAN Member States and its FTA

partners. Firstly, with China and India participating in the

RCEP, the population and market size of RCEP will

provide larger economic gains than the TPP. Secondly,

the flexibility and respect for participating members’

different nature, instead of the “one size fits all”

approach adopted in the TPP, makes RCEP negotiations

easier than the TPP. Last but not least, RCEP will build

on the existing ASEAN+1 FTAs, meaning less

adjustment costs for ASEAN Member States.

II. The Changing

Taiwan-ASEAN Economic

and Trade Relation

Since the 1980s, scarcity of natural resources

and increasing land and labour costs had driven

Taiwanese firms to relocate their manufacturing

facilities in Southeast Asia and China. In the

meantime, Taiwan began to undertake industrial

re-structuring and upgrading by promoting ICT and

electronics industry and more value added services

at home in order to differentiate from its

competitors in the Asia Pacific region.

In the past decades, Taiwan’s FDIs in Southeast

Asia have undergone significant changes in different

periods of time. According to statistics, prior to the

middle to late 1990s, Indonesia, Thailand and Malaysia

remained the top three destinations of Taiwan’s outbound

FDIs in the region, accumulated FDIs in these three

countries accounting for up to 85% of the total FDIs in

the region. Most of the FDIs focused in manufacturing

sectors, aimed at exporting to North America and other

international markets. Most of the investors were small

and medium sized companies. It was only until around

middle of the 1990s that Taiwanese investors,

particularly larger companies, began to seriously look

into the potentials of the domestic markets of certain host

countries and then adjusted their investment decisions

and strategies accordingly.

In the same period, Taiwan’s FDIs began to move to

mainland China since the 1990s, followed by a gradual

shift of certain labour intensive manufacturing sectors,

such as furniture, textile, garment and footwear

industries, to Vietnam and Cambodia, among others.

Despite the government’s “Go South” policy in the

1990s trying to encourage investors to choose Southeast

Asia over China, the trend never returned to the region,

except for Vietnam and Singapore. In Vietnam,

Taiwanese investment first focused in labour intensive

manufacturing industry in South Vietnam, then expanded

to more capital- and technology-intensive industry in

North Vietnam, while in Singapore investment mainly

focused in services industry.

Due to political rivalry across the Taiwan

Straits since 1949, Taiwan government had not

opened up investment to China until 1992 when the

then President Lee Tung Hui decided to officially

relax bans on cross straits economic exchanges and

allowed trade with and indirect investment in

China.12

During the period 1990-2012, the

12

The government of Taiwan had adopted a

No-Engagement policy with China since 1949

until Present Lee relaxed the bans and allowed

Taiwanese citizens to visit China and indirect

trade and investment in 1992.

18 東協瞭望 010

government had approved more than 40,000

investment projects in China, total reported volumes

reaching USD124.5 billion. It is informally

estimated that, if unreported or indirect investment

included, investment in China by Taiwanese firms

may well reach USD250 to USD300 billion,

accounting for more than 70 percent of Taiwan’s

total overseas investment. The high concentration,

together with the fact that exports to China

(including via Hong Kong) comprise of around 40

percent of Taiwan’s total exports, indicates the

dependence on China is not only an economic issue

but also a national security issue.

The production networks or value chains

established by Taiwan-invested manufacturing

operations in China and Southeast Asia not only

have created millions of jobs across those countries

but have also helped develop manufacturing

industries and made possible economic restructuring

in some host countries. For example, in the 1990s,

more than 200 Taiwanese electronics firms invested

in Penang, Malaysia, and helped establish one of the

most important electronics industrial clusters in

Southeast Asia at that time.

In China, Taiwanese firms have also

contributed significantly to the development of

several industries, ranging from textiles and

garment, footwear, toys to electronics and electrical

machinery. Benefitted from capital, technology and

management knowhow brought by Taiwanese firms,

China was hence able to establish production

networks which later became the base for its

successful development of GVCs today.

It is important to note that there is a close

correlation between Taiwanese FDI in Southeast Asia

(and India) and Taiwanese FDI in China. Starting

from mid-2000s when investment environment in

China began to appear less favorable, some

Taiwanese firms began to look outside China in

search of both overseas investment destinations and

new markets in order to diversify dependence on

China. Wage increase, shortage of labour in

Southeast coastal provinces of China and

enforcement of new labour and environmental laws

all drove an increasing number of Taiwanese firms

away from the once “World Factory”. Some

Southeast Asian countries, particularly the

“emerging markets” such as Vietnam, Indonesia and

Cambodia, and India hence began to entice these

investors with their abundant labour force and

comparably low wages. The sharp growth contrasted

with the consecutive decline of FDI flows to China

since 2009 implies that Taiwanese firms are

“returning” to Southeast Asia.

According to data of host countries in ASEAN,

the total volume of FDI stock from Taiwan to

ASEAN as of June 2014 amounted to around USD

83.63 billion. However, as this amount does not

include the Taiwanese investment via third country

or by a holding company registered in a third

country, it is estimated that the real investment from

Taiwan, directly and indirectly, may be significantly

larger. For example, according to Ministry of

Planning and Investment in Vietnam, Taiwanese FDI

stock totaled USD 27.61 billion. Taiwan’s informal

estimation was around USD 40.0 billion. Therefore,

Taiwanese investment is ASEAN has been largely

under-presented due to the incomplete statistics.

According to ASEAN statistics, as of June of 2014,

Taiwanese FDI stock ranks as No. 3 in Thailand, No.4 in

Malaysia and Vietnam, No. 6 in Cambodia, and No. 9 in

the Philippines and Indonesia.13

Although Taiwan is still

13

Department of Investment Service, Ministry of

Economic Affairs, at

http://www.dois.moea.gov.tw/asp/relation3.asp


a principle investor in Southeast Asia, it lags far behind

major competitors such as Japan and Korea, and faces

growing threats from China, a late comer but catching up

at full speed.

According to ASEAN statistics, Taiwan ranked

as the 9th

among the top 10 of ASEAN largest source

of FDI. During 2011 and 2013, Taiwanese FDI

accounted for around 1.0 percent of ASEAN’s total

FDI inflows (see Figure 3).

Source: ASEAN Secretariat.

Figure 3: Top 10 Sources of FDI inflows in ASEAN (2011~2013)

The investment in the region has boosted bilateral

trade and other economic activities between Taiwan and

ASEAN countries. Among Taiwan’s exports to ASEAN,

a significant share is made by Taiwanese manufacturers

importing from Taiwan machineries, raw materials,

components, spare parts and semi-finished products

needed for local product assembly for re-exporting to

international markets. However, on the other hand,

growth of imports from Taiwan has slowed down in

recent years, attributing mainly to higher level of

localization and establishment or re-structuring of

regional supply chain by Taiwanese investors in

collaboration with local manufacturers.

In addition, Taiwanese investors have repeated

faced with trade and investment barriers and all kinds of

obstacles in administrative procedures in their operations

in certain ASEAN countries. Lack of harmonization in

technical regulations, customs procedures, product

standards, among others, increase their transaction costs

and reduce their competitiveness.

III. Taiwan’s Response:

Emerging Trends

Taiwan has developed close ties with ASEAN

Member States in the last three decades. The

interconnected trade and investment flows have formed

deep economic interdependence and de facto integration

in the region. Most of all, Taiwanese investments in

ASEAN have enabled the investment-driven trade, or

trade-investment-nexus, between Taiwan and ASEAN

and, and in some cases between China, thus benefiting

both Taiwan and ASEAN in participating in the regional

product networks. However, in response to accelerated

20 東協瞭望 010

development in the ASEAN-centric integration,

including the existing ASEAN+1 FTAs that are

implemented since early 2000s, and the new initiatives of

the RCEP and the TPP currently under negotiation, more

Taiwanese firms are planning or considering relocation

of operations into ASEAN. To be more specific, three

types of relocation are now taking place: relocation from

Taiwan into ASEAN, relocation from China into ASEAN,

and relocation within ASEAN region from more

advanced countries to CLMV countries.

The second trend of the emerging investment

activities is the development of Taiwanese-based

industrial zone or industrial parks in the host countries.

This includes a number of Taiwan industrial zones or

parks under development or in plan in Indonesia,

Myanmar, Vietnam and Cambodia. Taiwan-based

industrial zones would facilitate Small and Medium

Sized Taiwanese companies to invest overseas, and most

of all, facilitate development of sector-specific industrial

clusters in the host countries.

Thirdly, in the past years Taiwanese services sector

has followed the manufacturing industries and their

clients to set foot in ASEAN. The financial services and

logistics and transportation are among the most active

investors, due to maturated domestic market in Taiwan.

Because of the restrictions in services sector in most

ASEAN Member States, most of the service companies

choose to invest in joint venture or through M&A.

In early 2014, President Ma Ying Jeou of Taiwan

announced that Taiwan will try all efforts to join the TPP

and the RCEP in order to help Taiwan industry to

compete with their Korean and Japanese competitors on

a level playing field. The decision is based on the fact

that both the TPP and the RCEP have an open accession

clause that enables new member economies to accede on

a consensus base. However, given the accession clause,

the path to the TPP and RCEP is full of political and

economic barriers.

There are growing concerns that Taiwan will be

excluded and discriminated in the regional integration.

While ASEAN moves toward an economic and political

community, Taiwan has to work with ASEAN and its

Member States to promote a new partnership that would

respond to common interests and shared prosperity.

ASEAN also needs to work with Taiwan in order to

further benefit from Taiwan’s outward investment trends

and unique role in regional/global value chains.

IV. Conclusions and the

Way Forward

ASEAN has played a key role in driving the

economic integration within the region and with external

trading partners surrounding the region. The AEC 2015

Vision is not yet fully fulfilled, but ASEAN has managed

to make significant achievements, particularly the

elimination of tariffs and other forms of non-tariff

barriers among ASEAN Member States and with its FTA

Partner countries. Beyond 2015, ASEAN is going to

expand economic integration to its Dialogue Partner

countries through the negotiations of the RCEP.

Therefore, for countries such as Taiwan that does not yet

have an FTA with ASEAN, and may not be part of RECP

in the near future, Taiwan cannot afford to be excluded

from the ASEAN-centric integration. The changing

investment climate in China also drives the investment

activities in ASEAN. The emerging trend of Taiwanese

companies “returning” to ASEAN explains the

importance of ASEAN to Taiwan.

There are different approaches of Taiwanese

companies’ investment plans, including more investment

activities in CLMV countries, development of

Taiwan-based industrial zones or clusters, more frequent

use of M&A, among others. All the investment plans

should be based on knowledge of investment regulations,


careful study and well-schemed business plans and

adequate risk assessment. Most of all, the government

should provide assistance and support to companies

planning to invest in ASEAN and ensure the host

countries will provide adequate investment protection

and facilitation.

Bibliography

ASEAN Secretariat. ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat,

2007.

ASEAN Secretariat. ASEAN Community in Figures 2012. Jakarta: ASEAN Secretariat, 2013.

Available at:

http://www.asean.org/images/2013/resources/statistics/web_ACIF2012_e-publish.pdf

Asian Development Bank. Asian Development Outlook 2014 Update. Manila: ADB, 2014.

Asian Development Bank. 2014. ASEAN 2030: Toward a Borderless Economic Community.

Manila: ADB, 2014.

Fukunaga, Y., and I. Isono. ‘Taking ASEAN+1 FTAs towards the RCEP: A Mapping Study’,

ERIA Discussion Paper Series 2013-02. Jakarta: ERIA, 2013.

Intal, Ponciano, et al, ASEAN Rising: ASEAN and AEC Beyond 2015, Jakarta: ERIA, 2014.

Pal, Pathapratim, Arpita Mukherjee, and Kristy Tsun-Tzu Hsu. Enhancing Trade, Investment and

Cooperation between India and Taiwan. New Delhi: Academic Foundation, 2013.

The Conference Board. 2013 Productivity Brief: Key Findings. New York: The Conference

Board, Inc, 2013.

UNCTAD. World Investment Report 2013– Global Value Chains: Investment and Trade for

Development. Geneva: UNCTAD, 2013.

UNCTAD. World Investment Report 2014– Investing in the SDGs: An Action Plan. Geneva:

UNCTAD, 2014.

22

AASSEEAANN,, AAEECC AANNDD EEMMEERRGGIINNGG IISSSSUUEESS IINN

IINNVVEESSTTMMEENNTT::

WWhhaatt RRoollee ffoorr MMaallaayyssiiaa?? Dr Zakariah Abdul Rashid

Executive Director

Malaysian Institute of Economic Research

Introduction

National policy-makers in ASEAN have

accepted that there are considerable benefits to be

accrued from Foreign Direct Investment (FDI),

especially in manufacturing. FDI has the advantage

that brings with it financial capital, management

know-how, product knowledge, manufacturing and

other processes, distribution networks, brands and

marketing skills. All this saves the recipient

country the time, effort and risks involved in

creating all these requirements for export

competitiveness. FDI also helps to diversify the

economy away from primary production, upgrading

the existing manufacturing sector through raising

productivity, and increasing efficiency through

exposure to greater competition. Further, it is

always the case that there are more employment

opportunities that are created. Therefore, an

important component of the growth strategies of

most ASEAN countries is to attract foreign

investment.

It has been noted that despite numerous

attempts and initiatives to create an appropriate

investment climate for foreign investors, ASEAN

continues to struggle in raising inward FDI beyond

levels achieved prior to the Asian financial crisis

of 1997–98. In fact, looking at ASEAN’s share

of the stock of global FDI over the past three

decade, it can be observed that this share rose to a

peak of more than 5% just before the financial

crisis of 1997. Although this figure has been

rising over the past few years, ASEAN’s stock of

world FDI has not as vibrant as in the pre-1996

levels. In terms of the annual flow of FDI,

ASEAN’s share has ebbed significantly in the

2000s from an average of 8% in the mid-1990s

before recovering to about 6% in 2010.

An area of concern is ASEAN’s declining

proportion of both stock within and flow of FDI

into developing countries. ASEAN accounts for

around 15% of developing countries’ total stock of

FDI for the last decade and this is lower than its

peak of 20% before the financial crisis. Its share of

annual FDI flows has experienced a dramatic

decline, hovering at around 14% in 2010 as

compared to 37% in 1990.

Further, there is increased competition for FDI

in ASEAN. In the 1990s the ASEAN countries

were leaders in pursuing the policy of export -led

growth policies. With the opening up of the

People’s Republic of China (PRC) and following

that of India, there is stiff competition to ASEAN

in claiming the FDI share. The economic rise of the

PRC and India has attracted the attention of

investors eager to take advantage of the massive

economies of scale offered by the huge and rapidly

growing consumer markets in these giants whose

ASEAN, AEC AND EMERGING ISSUES IN INVESTMENT:

What Role for Malaysia? 23

middle classes in particular are enjoying

substantial growth in spending.

In fact, the PRC has overtaken ASEAN in FDI

received in 2010 while its stock of total FDI is also

rising quickly. On the other hand, India still lags

behind ASEAN, but is picking up momentum and

could soon pose a much bigger threat to the

region’s share of world FDI. Further, with the new

government in place in India, with its

outward-looking policies and its assurance to open

up to foreign investment, there is every possibility

that India will join the fray in laying a claim to

FDI.

Indeed, other developing countries have also

started developing export-led strategies by opening

up their industries to foreign investors. Specific

cases are Brazil and the Russian Federation, both

of which have undertaken market reforms and

provided investors with new options and this will

further threaten ASEAN’s share of total FDI.

The AEC Blueprint as a

Catalyst to Raise FDI

Bhaskaran argues that there is a gap between

the capacity to deliver high returns in some key

ASEAN economies and the low investment rates

that they actually achieve. Although returns on

investment have been reasonable, ASEAN is unable

to break out of a downward trend in overall

investment. Using data on comparable rates of

return on investments by US corporations across

the world, Bhaskaran points out that ASEAN’s

return on capital has indeed declined below the

levels in the early 1990s but is still not lower

relative to the world average despite a sharp fall in

the returns premium after the global crisis of 2008.

Analysing the return performance for US

multinational companies (MNCs) in Asia, he shows

evidence that ASEAN has held up well, even as the

PRC and India have improved. He makes the

following points:

First, return on capital is not the sole determinant of

investment decisions;

Second, ASEAN’s fortunes are highly tied to the

global economy: a big decline in world economic

health affects the profits of firms in ASEAN more

negatively than in other economies such as the PRC

and India.

Third, investors demand risk premiums for

investing in ASEAN countries as theoretically there

should not be an outflow of investments if returns

are higher than or matches other economies outside

the region.

These observations suggest that efforts to

enhance the investment climates of the region

should focus on reducing country risks for firms in

ASEAN economies in order to attract and retain

investment.

The AEC was endorsed by ASEAN leaders at

the Bali Summit in October 2003 as one of the

three pillars of the ASEAN Community vision. In

general, the AEC aims to integrate ASEAN into the

global economy and create a single market and

production base where goods, services, capital and

labor flow freely, so that equitable development

can be realized within the region. The successful

construction of the AEC will have tremendous

implications for investment flows into and within

ASEAN by expanding the economies of scale and

scope in the region. In 2007, ASEAN leaders

agreed to push forward the AEC deadline to 2015

and approved the AEC Blueprint, which provides

24 東協瞭望 010

detailed outlines and commitments to achieve the

unified market. The AEC Blueprint has four major

components:

1. Single Market and

Production Base

Free flow of goods including the elimination of

tariffs and non-tariff barriers (NTBs), rules of origin

harmonization and rationalization, trade facilitation,

customs integration (including the ASEAN Single

Window), and standards and technical barriers to

trade (including mutual recognition arrangements,

or MRAs). Trade in goods receives the most

attention, in part because it includes areas relevant

to the entire AEC project (such as customs and

other areas of trade facilitation).

Free flow of services through a progressive increase

in sectoral coverage, a commitment to advance

mutual recognition of professional qualifications

and services, and financial services liberalization

through an ASEAN-X formula.

Free flow of investment, particularly FDI, building

on the process initiated by the ASEAN Investment

Area (AIA). The AEC will integrate several

agreements pertinent to FDI, such as investment

protection, and emphasize the cornerstones of the

AIA (i.e., national treatment, investment facilitation

and cooperation, and promotion). This will be done

under the ASEAN Comprehensive Agreement on

Investment (ACIA).

Freer flow of capital, as a means to strengthen

ASEAN capital market development and harmonize

capital market standards and practices in order to

facilitate cross-border transactions. It also envisions

greater capital mobility and liberalization, through

an emphasis on orderly processes and guarantees of

safeguards to maintain stability.

Free flow of skilled labor, especially to facilitate

FDI and trade in services, through MRAs and

concordance of skills and qualifications.  More

rapid liberalization of the 12 priority integration

sectors — wood- based products, automotives,

rubber-based products, textiles and apparels,

electronics, agro-based products, fisheries,

e-ASEAN, healthcare, air travel, tourism and

logistics.

2. Competitive Economic

Region

Establishment of a clear competition policy to

ensure a level playing field in the integrated

ASEAN market.

Consumer protection, including the creation of an

ASEAN Coordinating Committee on Consumer

Protection.

Regional commitments in intellectual property

rights protection, based on the ASEAN IPR Action

Plan (2004–2010) and accession to the Madrid

Protocol.

Infrastructure development to improve transport

links, narrow development gaps, and enhance

regional information infrastructure.

Sectoral cooperation in energy and mining to create

stable supplies and enhance efficiency.

Taxation rationalization, featuring a bilateral

network that would avoid double taxation.

Approaches to e-commerce, to be implemented

through the e-ASEAN Framework Agreement.

3. Equitable Economic

Development

Fostering SME development in ASEAN, with an

emphasis on taking advantage of ASEAN’s

diversity.

Enhancing the goals of the Initiative for ASEAN

Integration launched in 2000, to narrow

development gaps between older ASEAN–6



members and the newer ASEAN members

(CLMV).

4. Integration into the

Global Economy

ASEAN is to work toward “ASEAN Centrality” in

external foreign economic relations (including in

the area of free trade areas and other preferential

arrangements with non-partners).

Enhanced participation in global supply networks,

with a strong dedication to the adoption of best

international practices and standards.  

The AEC Blueprint provides a comprehensive

framework to increase investment because it

contains many mutually reinforcing measures that

will improve the investment climate of individual

countries as well as the region as a whole. For

example, sectoral cooperation will allow

resource-rich but ill-equipped countries to learn

and absorb technology from more developed

members, increasing both its human and capital

stock. A single market and production base will

allow for more efficient allocation of resources via

the phasing out of uncompetitive firms and better

flow of information and also increase potential

economies of scale through a bigger market.

The study by Aldaba and Yap (2009) is useful

in identifying the impacts of FDI flows. First, they

underscore the importance of ACIA. This is a

more comprehensive agreement to foster

investment than previous agreements. It provides

a wide range of investment provisions on

investment liberalization, most-favored-nation

status, national treatment, and investment

protection, promotion and facilitation. With the

initiatives to lift foreign ownership restrictions,

sector restrictions and performance requirements it

can be expected that there will be an increase in

FDI. Also, deeper integration features, such as the

legislation and harmonization of standards,

competition and custom laws, intellectual property

rights and dispute settlement mechanisms, will

improve the region’s investment climate

particularly in services.

Second, the establishment of AEC and the

improvement of trade flows will significantly raise

the level of vertical FDI in the region. This is

because the development of complex networks due

to the fragmentation of production and trade in

parts and components will dominate intra-regional

trade and investment.

Third, a larger market will prove more

attractive for foreign MNCs. The effect of

regional integration through AEC will create a

larger market, which will attract MNCs to invest in

the region. It can be expected that regional

integration may affect FDI by generating growth,

although the causation for the positive relationship

between FDI and economic growth is uncertain.

Finally, Aldaba and Yap (2009) draw on

evidence from elsewhere to show that regional

agreements tend to have a positive impact on FDI.

They point out that the EU, NAFTA and Mercosur

have had a positive impact on FDI inflows and

indeed that economic integration in these regions

promoted investment.

The AEC Blueprint is meant to and will

encourage the integration of ASEAN. It is

comprehensive and it has disciplines that will

encourage member states to show progress in key

areas. However, there are challenges. These are

26 東協瞭望 010

of a political nature arising from vested interests

and fear of competition. The main problem,

however, is the fact that ASEAN member states

come from diverse levels of economic development;

and there are historical factors, territorial disputes

and misunderstandings that sometimes hinder

cooperation.

Despite the shortcomings, it is important to

realize that such top-down initiatives such as the

AEC encourage bottom-up integration processes,

which will allow the region to emerge increasingly

like a single market over time. Indeed, as far as the

private sector is concerned they are always

interested in investment; and will welcome a

more closely interlinked ASEAN. They have

realized the need to provide support to the AEC’s

ambitious plans in order to tap into the value of

economic integration.

For instance, Air Asia is working toward its

goal of a single ASEAN aviation authority by

setting up an office in Jakarta to engage with the

ASEAN Secretariat. CEOs from major private

sector companies like CIMB Bank, Bangkok Bank,

Air Asia and the Ayala Group have jointly

launched the ASEAN Business Club (ABC) in

order to engage in ASEAN community building

efforts. The advantage of regional integrations is

seen, for example, in Singaporean and Malaysian

banks and telecommunication firms have invested

heavily in the region. Siam Cement is gearing up to

invest 75% of its 2012–16 investment fund to

acquire assets in ASEAN countries. As

Bhaskaran points out, even companies outside

ASEAN have started to take notice of ASEAN as

an integrated region. He cites the example of

Shin Shin-Etsu Chemical, Japan’s largest chemical

producer, which has invested US$64 million to

build two chemical plants in Viet Nam with the

hope of serving a large base of customers in the

region.

ASEAN as a Single Market

and Production Base

One of the four primary objectives of the

coming ASEAN Economic Community is to

become a single market and production base with

five core elements: the free flow of goods, services,

investment, and labor, and the freer flow of capital.

In turn, the objective of the ASEAN

Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA) that

came into effect on 29 March 2012 is to bolster

ASEAN investment by establishing a free, open,

transparent and integrated investment regime for

domestic and international investors throughout the

ASEAN member states that supports the economic

integration of the region before and after the

ASEAN Economic Community integration in 2015.

The ASEAN Secreariat published the ACIA

Guidebook in 2013 which details the strengths and

benefits of the Agreement for potential investors.

Two earlier ASEAN investment frameworks,

the ASEAN Investment Area agreement (AIA) and

the Investment Guarantee Agreements (IGA), make

up the foundation of the ASEAN Comprehensive

Investment Agreement. The ACIA improves on

the two earlier agreements in a number of areas by

means of:

Adopting international best practices that help

protect investors and their investments and

providing increased protections

Following recent trends in international investment

practices that encourage less restrictive investment

regimes



Including portfolio investment and intellectual

property as well as broader definitions of investors

and investments

Allowing third-country nationals to benefits from

the ACIA

Encouraging a higher level of transparency in

investment rulemaking

Adopting Investor-State Dispute Settlement

mechanisms (ISDS) and promoting alternative

dispute resolution methods.

Liberalization, Protection, Facilitation, and

Promotion are the ACIA’s four pillars, and to

achieve the end goal of the ASEAN Economic

Community by 2015, its guiding principles

include:

Achieving a free and open investment environment

in the region through progressive investment

liberalization and improving the transparency and

predictability of investment rules, regulations and

procedures conducive to increased investment

Benefiting domestic and international investors and

their investments based in ASEAN and providing

enhanced protection to investors and their

investments

Promoting the ASEAN region as a whole as an

integrated investment area that has favourable

conditions for domestic and international

investment

Maintaining and according preferential treatment

among Member States with no back-tracking of

commitments made under previous agreements

Granting special and differential treatment and other

flexibilities to Member States with no back-tracking

of commitments made under previous agreements

Openness to expand the scope of the ACIA to cover

other sectors in the future

The overall goal of the ASEAN

Comprehensive Investment Agreement is to

establish a free, open, transparent and integrated

investment regime for domestic and international

investors throughout the ASEAN region, and the

ACIA’s benefits include investment liberalization,

non-discrimination, transparency, investor

protections, and Investor-State Dispute Settlement.

Therefore, the benefits will be as follows:

a. Investment Liberalization

The Agreement liberalizes cross border

investment in five sectors: manufacturing,

agriculture, fishery, forestry, mining and quarrying,

and the services incidental to each. Each ASEAN

member state submitted a list of reservations for

these sectors, and anything not on the list is subject

to national policy, liberalized and open to ASEAN

investors. Each member state is then responsible

to reduce or eliminate their reservation list in

accordance with the three phases of the Strategic

Schedule of the AEC Blueprint.

To help promote the ASEAN rgion as an

integrated investment area that has favourable

conditions for domestic and international

investment, all member states agree through the

ACIA to:

Create the necessary environment to promote all

forms of investment and new growth areas in

ASEAN

Promote intra-ASEAN investment, particularly

investments from ASEAN-6 (Brunei, Indonesia,

Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand)

into the less developed ASEAN countries

Nurture the growth and development of Small and

Medium Enterprises

28 東協瞭望 010

Promote joint investment initiatives focusing on

regional clusters and production networks

b. Non-Discrimination

Equality in treatment for ASEAN investors

and their investments is another important function

of the ACIA. The Agreement’s National

Treatment and Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment

principles obligate the ASEAN member states to

not discriminate and treat ASEAN investors less

favourably than either local or foreign competitors.

Under National Treatment, an ASEAN country

agrees to treatment investors from any ASEAN

country no less favourably than it would treat its

investors in the admission, establishment,

acquisition, expansion, management, conduct,

operation and sale or other disposition of

investments in its territory. Under

Most-Favoured-Nation Treatment, all ASEAN

investors must be treated equally and this includes

investors from non-ASEAN countries. In

addition, member states cannot impose any specific

nationality requirements on senior management

unless there is an official published reservation,

and if a member state requires the board of

directors in a foreign company to be of a particular

nationality or be residents, it cannot impair the

ability of the investor to control its investment.

The ACIA also guarantees no performance

requirements and cannot impose conditions like

minimum local contents, export requirements, or

trade balancing requirements.

c. Transparency

Another of the ACIA’s guiding principles is to

improve the transparency and predictability of

investment rules, regulations and procedures

conducive to increased investment. These

include:

Harmonized investment policies that lead to

investment policy convergence

Streamlined and simplified procedures for

investment applications and approvals

Dissemination of information on rules, regulations,

policies and procedures affecting investors and their

investments within ASEAN

d. Investor Protection

The ACIA also provides enhanced protection

to investors and their investments including fair

and equitable treatment, full protection and

security, no unlawful expropriation, compensation

in cases of strife, and free transfer of funds. The

ASEAN member states have agreed to give all

covered investments under the ACIA fair and

equitable treatment, to not deny justice in any legal

or administrative proceedings according to the

principles of due process, and that the host country

will not make arbitrary decisions and follow it

rules and regulations.

e. Investor-State Dispute Settlement

Another valuable component of the ACIA is its

Investor-State Dispute Settlement mechanisms

(ISDS) and the promotion of alternative dispute

resolution methods. ASEAN investors can

resolve disputes by using domestic courts and

tribunals, through international arbitration

including ICSID, UNCITRAL, and other agreed

rules, and by means of alternative dispute methods:

mediation, conciliation, and consultation &

negotiation. A disputing investor must show that

it incurred a loss or damage by reason of or arising

out of the breach of the host ASEAN member state

of its obligations under ACIA relating to the



management, conduct, operation or sale or other

disposition of a covered investment. For any

disagreements about ACIA interpretation other

than investment disputes, all parties must use the

existing ASEAN State-to-State dispute settlement

mechanism under the ASEAN Protocol on

Enhanced Dispute Settlement Mechanism.

Trade Agreements and

ASEAN

ASEAN has achieved formidable economic

development since 1990. In all ASEAN member

states (AMS), both poverty rate and gap are

reducing substantially and the share of the middle

income class is also rising. This is possible due to

significant economic progress and transformation

with high growth particularly in 1985-96, which

was considered as the region's golden

decade. However, the growth moderated in

2000s. Indeed, AEC has been instrumental in

bring about this development.

However, there are still many challenges such

as the prevalence of large number of poor and

vulnerable people in most AMSs, mixed record of

income inequality and still much to be desired with

respect to the level of competitiveness.

AEC thus promises many hopes, which can be

realized provided that it is fully functioning. But

what matters most is to keep the ambition and

momentum of the economic community transcend

2015 target. For this, ASEAN does not need to

reinvent the wheel for the regional grouping vision

transcending 2015, the 1997 ASEAN vision 2020,

has provided the necessary impetus. ASEAN

vision of 2020 sees the region as concert of

robustly growing middle income and high income

AMSs, an economic community of dynamic

development, which is not only inclusive, resilient,

sustainable and people-centred but also strong,

outward-looking and globally engaged.

Built upon the vision, ASEAN beyond 2015

envisages by 2030 the "ASEAN Miracle" will be

realized, wherein ASEAN economy will achieve

sustained high growth, eliminating dire poverty

and the prevalence of middle class population. It

will also be competitive and dynamic, making it

highly attractive to investors. The region will also

be markedly more resilient.

The ASEAN Miracle can be realized provided

it puts in place a strong foundation and is

supported by the necessary pillars. One of the

pillars to achieve ASEAN miracle is the region has

to be globally engaged wherein it will be well

integrated into the global economy, drives further

regional integration in East Asia, and raises

ASEAN's voice internationally. As globalization

is inevitable and the region is gradually integrated

into the world economy, ASEAN certainly not only

needs to develop a coherent approach towards

external economic relations but also sets a strategy

to enhance participation in global supply network.

The most outstanding attempt to achieve

regional integration that is linked to the wider

global market is the Regional Comprehensive

Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement. RCEP

is a framework that builds on the existing

ASEAN+1 FTAs and it allows the participation of

all AMS. An open accession clause allows the

participation of ASEAN FTA partner to participate

at the pace that they choose and it allows for other

external partners to join subject to the mutual

approval of all AMS.

30 東協瞭望 010

Further, RCEP takes the ASEAN-way in that it

is based on a consensus approach, with all AMS

agreeing to any decision that is taken. This

provides flexibility in convergence to desired goals,

while also acknowledging the different levels of

development and the divergence in backgrounds

and interests. Nevertheless, there is a common

interest among all AMS to raise the level of growth,

development and

「邁向東協經濟共同體：投資自由化、保障與 最新投資趨勢」國際 … ·...

Documents

「邁向東協經濟共同體：投資自由化、保障與最新投資趨勢」國際 … ·...