ASEAN SOCIO-CULTURAL COMMUNITY

BLUEPRINT 2025 BASELINE STUDY

BRIEF REPORT

one vision
one identity
one community
ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community
Blueprint 2025 Baseline Study
Brief Report

The ASEAN Secretariat

Jakarta
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) was established on 8 August 1967. The
Member States are Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar,
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Viet Nam.
The ASEAN Secretariat is based in Jakarta, Indonesia.

For inquiries, contact:

The ASEAN Secretariat
Community Relations Division (CRD)
70A Jalan Sisingamangaraja
Jakarta 12110, Indonesia
Phone: (62 21) 724-3372, 726-2991
Fax: (62 21) 739-8234, 724-3504
E-mail: [email protected]

Catalogue-in-Publication Data

ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community Blueprint 2025 Baseline Study (Brief Report)

Jakarta, ASEAN Secretariat, January 2022

360.0959
1. ASEAN – ASCC – Study
2. Sustainable Socio-Cultural - Human Development

ISBN 978-623-6945-85-8 (EPUB)

ASEAN: A Community of Opportunities for All

The text of this publication may be freely quoted or reprinted, provided proper acknowledgement
is given and a copy containing the reprinted material is sent to the Community Relations Division
(CRD) of the ASEAN Secretariat, Jakarta.

General information on ASEAN appears online at the ASEAN Website: www.asean.org

Copyright Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) 2022.

All rights reserved.
FOREWORD

As mandated by the ASCC Blueprint 2025, an ASCC

Results Framework was developed and consulted
with the ASCC Sectoral Bodies in 2018. Following
the endorsement of the ASCC Results Framework,
a Baseline Study has been conducted to provide a
clear reference point on the state-of-affairs of the
implementation of the ASCC Blueprint 2025. The
main activity of the Baseline Study was to collect
and gather data, information, and figures on the
baseline for the Key Performance Indicators listed
in the ASCC Results Framework.

As we continuously work to develop a robust and effective Monitoring and

Evaluation system for the ASCC Blueprint 2025, we have continued to receive
active contribution, support and positive responses from the ASCC Council,
the Senior Officials’ Committee for the ASCC (SOCA) and all fifteen (15) ASCC
sectoral bodies. It is understood that exploring ways of improving work
plans, including looking at how the outputs will eventually lead to the actual
achievement of ASCC objectives, are our collective responsibilities.

Along with this commitment is the issue of data availability and capacity for
data collection as we need good data for evidence-based decision making.
However, let us not forget that at the end of the day, it is the way that the
data are used to influence policies that matter. In the same manner that the
ASCC Blueprint 2025 will only succeed if we have the right combination of
regional initiatives and greater commitment at implementation and policy
coordination at the national level.

I would like to extend my appreciation to ASEAN Member States for the work
and also for the support given through the ASEAN Development Fund in the
development of this report.

KUNG PHOAK
Deputy Secretary-General of ASEAN
for ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community

i
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Consistent with the key monitoring and evaluation (M&E) cycle activities
outlined in the Guide to M&E of the ASCC Blueprint 2025, a Baseline Report
of the ASCC Blueprint 2025 was developed in 2019-2020 upon the adoption of
the ASEAN Results Framework indicators. The Baseline Report establishes the
baseline status for several policy indicators that have been tracking progress
toward an ASEAN Community that engages and benefits its peoples, and
toward developing a community that is inclusive, sustainable, resilient, and
dynamic. The Baseline Report will serve as a reference tool to assess ASEAN’s
progress in realising the ASEAN Community Vision 2025.

The report was a collaborative product of ASEAN Secretariat and National

team at every ASEAN Member States under the guidance of Senior Official
Committee of ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (SOCA). It was made
possible by support from the ASEAN Development Fund.

Sincere appreciation goes to the following for their technical contribution to

this report:
▶ To SOCA leaders and focal points, for invaluable time and efforts to provide
data and information, share insights, review and provide constructive
feedback to the report.
▶ To the ASEAN Secretariat under the leadership of. H.E. Kung Phoak,
Deputy Secretary-General of ASEAN for ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community,
including Director Ky Anh Nguyen of the Sustainable Development
Directorate, Director Rodora T. Babaran of the Human Development
Directorate, ASCC Monitoring and Sectoral Divisions, for the coordination,
facilitation of consultation, and substantive inputs to the draft report; and
▶ Finally, to the consultants of PT. MDF Pacific Indonesia, Mr. Bart van
Halteren, Mr. Koen W. Toonen, Mr. Imam Mulyadi, and Mr. Matthew
Shearing. This report would not have been possible without their expertise
and support.

ii
Contents

FOREWORD i

ACKNOWLEDGMENT ii

ACRONYMS v

1. Study Approach and Objectives 1

1.1 Activity Description 1
1.2 Study Objectives 1
1.3 Relevance of the Study 2

2. Main Findings 5
2.1. Engages and Benefits the People 5
2.1.1. Engaged Stakeholders in ASEAN processes 5
2.1.2. Governance Effectiveness 7
2.1.3. ASEAN Secretariat Contributions 8
2.1.4. Empowered People and Strengthened Institutions 9
2.2. Inclusive 10
2.2.1. Reducing Barriers 10
2.2.2. Equitable Access for All 13
2.2.3. Promotion and Protection of Human Rights 20
2.3. Sustainable 21
2.3.1. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity
and Natural Resources 21
2.3.2. Environmentally Sustainable Cities 22
2.3.3. Sustainable Climate 23
2.4. Resilient 25
2.4.1. A Disaster Resilient ASEAN that is able to Anticipate,
Respond, Cope, Adapt, and Build Back Better, Smarter, and
Faster 25

iii
 2.4.2. A Safer ASEAN that is able to Respond to all Health-related
Hazards including Biological, Chemical, and Radiological-
nuclear, and Emerging Threats 27
2.4.3. A Climate-Adaptive ASEAN with Enhanced Institutional and
Human Capacities to Adapt to the Impacts of Climate Change 32
2.4.4. Strengthened Social Protection for Women, Children,
Youths, the Elderly/Older Persons, Persons with Disabilities,
Ethnic Minority Groups, Migrant Workers, Vulnerable and
Marginalised Groups, and People Living in At-Risk Areas,
including People Living in Remote and Border Areas and
Climate-Sensitive Areas, to Reduce Vulnerabilities in Times
of Climate Change-related Crises, Disasters and other
Environmental Changes. 35
2.4.5. Enhanced and Optimised Financing Systems, Food, Water,
Energy Availability, and other Social Safety Nets in Times
of Crises by making Resources more Available, Accessible,
Affordable and Sustainable 36
2.4.6. Endeavour towards a “Drug-Free” ASEAN 37
2.5. Dynamic 39
2.5.1. Towards a Creative, Innovative and Responsive ASEAN 45
2.5.2. Engender a Culture of Entrepreneurship in ASEAN 50

iv
ACRONYMS

AADMER ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and

Emergency Response
AATHP ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution
ACCSM ASEAN Cooperation on Civil Service Matters
ACDM ASEAN Committee on Disaster Management
ACMP ASEAN Communications Master Plan
ACSS ASEAN Community Statistical System
ACW ASEAN Committee on Women
ACWC ASEAN Commission on the Promotion and Protection of the
Rights of Women and Children
AEC ASEAN Economic Community
AHA Centre ASEAN Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance
AMD ASCC Monitoring Division
AMS ASEAN Member States
APHDA ASEAN Post-2015 Health Development Agenda
APSC ASEAN Political-Security Community
ASCC ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
ASOEN Asean Senior Officials on the Environment
ASPEN ASEAN Strategic Plan on Environment
AWGCW ASEAN Working Group on Chemicals and Waste
CID Culture and Information Division
CPR Committee of Permanent Representatives to ASEAN
CRD Community Relations Division
CSOs Civil Society Organisations
DMHA Disaster Management and Humanitarian Division
DRR Disaster Risk Reduction
DSG ASEAN Deputy Secretary-General

v
 ED Environment Division
EU European Union
EYSD Education, Youth, and Sport Division
FGD Focus Group Discussion
HADR Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief
HD Health Division
ILO International Labour Organisation
ISCED International Standard Classification of Education
KPI Key Performance Indicator
KRA Key Result Area
LCSD Labour and Civil Service Division
M&E Monitoring and Evaluation
MTR Midterm Review
NEET rate Share of Youth Not in Education, Employment, or Training
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
PCPMD Programme Cooperation and Project Management Division
PEGD Poverty Eradication and Gender Division
PoU Prevalence of Undernourishment
ROK Republic of Korea
RVA Risk and Vulnerability Guidelines
SASOP Standby Arrangements and Standard Operating Procedures
SCP Sustainable Consumption and Production
SDG Sustainable Development Goals
SG ASEAN Secretary-General
SLOM Senior Labour Officials Meeting
SOCA Senior Officials Committee for the ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community
SOCCOM Coordinating Conference on the ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community
SOMCA Senior Officials Meeting on Culture and Arts
SOMED Senior Officials Meeting on Education

vi
SOMHD Senior Officials Meeting on Health Development
SOMRI Senior Officials Meeting Responsible for Information
SOMRDPE Senior Officials Meeting on Rural Development and Poverty
Eradication
SOMS Senior Officials Meeting on Sports
SOMSWD Senior Officials Meeting on Social Welfare and Development
SOMHD Senior Officials Meeting on Health Development
SOMY Senior Officials Meeting on Youth
SOP Standard Operating Procedures
SPS Social Protection Strategies
TOR Terms of Reference
UHC SCI Universal Health Coverage Service Coverage Index
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WHO World Health Organisation

vii
viii
1. Study Approach and Objectives

1.1 Activity Description

Over the last several years, ASEAN Member States (AMS) have witnessed
significant progress in the areas of human and sustainable development.
Poverty in the region has declined dramatically, overall living standards have
improved significantly, and the quality of health services and education
has grown substantially. AMS are experiencing the benefits of a growing
workforce, an expanding middle class, and increasing urban development
(e.g., population growth, infrastructure improvements, and lifestyle
advancements). Despite this progress, much remains to achieved by AMS
to eradicate poverty and deliver sustainable socio-cultural and human
development.

The ASCC Blueprint 2025 (hereafter called the Blueprint) is the strategy
and planning mechanism of the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASSC)
to develop and strengthen coherent policy frameworks and institutions to
advance human development, social justice and rights, social protection and
welfare, environmental sustainability and ASEAN awareness, and to narrow
the development gap. The Blueprint is an instrumental tool for fostering
dialogues, boosting regional cooperation between AMS, and addressing a
variety of international conventions. It supports AMS by considering their
intentions and commitments to reach national goals and targets under the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The previous ASCC Blueprint
covered 2009-2015, whereas the ASCC Blueprint 2025 was adopted by ASEAN
Leaders at the 27th ASEAN Summit on 22 November 2015 in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia, and covers the period 2016-2025.

1.2 Study Objectives

The ASCC Baseline Study (hereafter called the Baseline Study) provides
ASEAN Pillars and relevant stakeholders with a clear reference on the state
of the Blueprint’s implementation. The Baseline Study establishes the
baseline status for policy indicators used to track progress toward an ASEAN
Community that engages and benefits its peoples, and toward developing
a community that is inclusive, sustainable, resilient, and dynamic. The
Baseline Study will serve as a reference tool to assess ASEAN’s progress in
realising the ASEAN Community Vision 2025–the core document of ASEAN

1
 that reflects the aspirations of the next generation of ASEAN nationals.
Information generated from the Baseline Study will be translated into
practical communications materials to raise awareness about the ASSC at
the national and regional levels.

1.3 Relevance of the Study

The ASCC Blueprint 2025 is the strategy and planning mechanism for achieving
joint progress by AMS on social and cultural development by 2025. To clearly
measure progress–and to understand social and cultural developments in
AMS, the Blueprint has outlined a Results Framework mechanism to monitor
and assess development results.

The vision of the AMS is to realise an ASEAN Community that reflects the
following five Vision Statements:
A. ENGAGES AND BENEFITS THE PEOPLE: A committed, participative
and socially responsible community through an accountable and
inclusive mechanism for the benefit of all ASEAN peoples, upheld by
the principles of good governance.
B. INCLUSIVE: An inclusive community that promotes high quality
of life, equitable access to opportunities for all and promotes and
protects human rights of women, children, youths, the elderly/older
persons, persons with disability, migrant workers, and vulnerable
and marginalized groups;
C. SUSTAINABLE: A sustainable community that promotes social
development and environmental protection through effective
mechanisms to meet the current and future needs of the peoples.
D. RESILIENT: A resilient community with enhanced capacity
and capability to adapt and respond to social and economic
vulnerabilities, disasters, climate change as well as emerging threats,
and challenges.
E. DYNAMIC: A dynamic and harmonious community that is aware
and proud of its identify, culture, and heritage with the strengthened
ability to innovate and proactively contribute to the global community.

These five Vision Statements of the Blueprint have been broken down into 18
Key Result Areas (KRAs), analysis of which comprise the subsequent section
and sub-sections of this Baseline Study:

2
 A. Engages and Benefits the People
A.1. Engaged stakeholders in ASEAN processes
A.2. Empowered people and strengthened institutions
B. Inclusive
B.1. Reducing barriers
B.2. Equitable access for all
B.3. Promotion and protection of Human Rights
C. Sustainable
C.1. Conservation and sustainable management of biodiversity and
natural resources
C.2. Environmentally sustainable cities
C.3. Sustainable climate
C.4. Sustainable consumption and production
D. Resilient
D.1. A disaster resilient ASEAN that is able to anticipate, respond,
cope, adapt, and build back better, smarter, and faster
D.2. A safer ASEAN that is able to respond to all health-related
hazards, including biological, chemical, and radiological-nuclear,
and emerging threats
D.3. A climate adaptive ASEAN with enhanced institutional and
human capacities to adapt to the impacts of climate change
D.4. Strengthened protection for women, children, youths, the
elderly/older persons, persons with disabilities, ethnic minority
groups, migrant workers, vulnerable and marginalised groups,
and people living in at-risk areas, including people living in
remote and border areas and climate sensitive areas, to reduce
vulnerabilities in times of climate-change-related crises,
disasters, and other environmental changes
D.5. Enhanced and optimised financing systems, food, water, energy
availability, and other social safety nets in times of crises by
making resources more available, accessible, affordable, and
sustainable
D.6. Endeavor towards a “drug-free” ASEAN
E. Dynamic
E.1. Towards an open and adaptive ASEAN
E.2. Towards a creative, innovative, and responsive ASEAN
E.3. Engender a culture of entrepreneurship in ASEAN

To implement these five Vision Statements, the Blueprint defined 109

Strategic Measures (SM) describing the planned strategic actions to realise
the KRAs.

3
 The ASCC Council is responsible for overseeing the Blueprint’s implementation.
The Senior Officials Committee for the ASCC (SOCA) and Sectoral Bodies are
the principal Bodies responsible for coordinating and supporting matters
that require cross-Sectoral or cross-Pillar collaboration. The Blueprint
employs strategies and approaches to maximise the role of ASEAN’s organs
and Bodies, encourage stakeholder engagement, and enhance capacity-
building mechanisms.

The Blueprint uses a Results-Based Management (RBM) approach with a

Logic Model (a.k.a., the Results Framework) to clarify its operationalisation.
The Logic Model was endorsed at the 26th Meeting of SOCA, held on 15-16 May
2019. The Results Framework specified 32 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
that were prepared and discussed by relevant Sectoral Bodies.

This Baseline Study is a reference point for tracking progress of against the 32
KPIs, organised in sections reflecting the Blueprint’s 18 KRAs.

4
2. Main Findings

A committed, participative, and socially responsible community

through an accountable and inclusive mechanism for the benefit
of all ASEAN peoples, upheld by the principles of good governance.

2.1. Engages and Benefits the People

The first Vision Statement is a call for ASSC to develop a mechanism that
will benefit all of ASEAN’s peoples. It will do so by encouraging regional
cooperation through a multitude of multi-Sectoral and multi-stakeholder
platforms, and by encouraging the participation and inclusion of special
interests and vulnerable target groups so that they will increasingly have
opportunities to participate and make their specific needs and voices heard.

These groups can participate in platforms, engage in Sectoral or thematic

dialogues, and collaborate with other stakeholders, such as governmental
organisations, non-governmental organisations, academic institutions,
civil society organisations, bilateral and multilateral development partners,
regional and sub-regional organisations, and the Private Sector, among
others. These platforms are a key mechanism for engaging stakeholders and
achieving stronger governance and effectiveness, and for strengthening
institutional capacities, policies, and results for various socio-economic
sectors in ASEAN.

2.1.1. Engaged Stakeholders in ASEAN processes

Strengthened engagement, commitment, and the participation of

stakeholders to involve individuals at all levels of ASEAN will identify and
produce solutions and benefits for all of ASEAN’s peoples. AMS have
committed to engage in regional collaboration in a variety of Sectors to
improve the quality of life of ASEAN’s peoples. These collaborations happen
through dialogue in sectoral negotiation and partnership platforms, and
have led to joint declarations, joint statements, and other policy-reinforcing
joint commitments. Depending on the legal nature of such declarations and
statements, individual AMS have been integrating these commitments into
national policies.

5
 KPI 1: Increased engagement i.e. number of negotiation and partnership forums between diverse
stakeholders in ASEAN Member States promoting ASEAN initiatives.

Target: By 2025, increased engagement of the entities listed in Annex 2 of the ASEAN Charter and the list
of accredited stakeholders, and stakeholders in process of being accredited, in promoting ASCC-related
initiatives.

Baseline

2016 2020
2017 2018 2019
(Baseline) (May)
ASEAN accredited stakeholders Parliamentary 1 2 2 2
TBD

Business organizations 19 14 15 15 TBD

Think tanks and
2 2 2 2 TBD
academic institutions
Accredited civil society
53 41 43 44 TBD
organizations
Other stakeholders 4 7 7 9 TBD
ASEAN stakeholders in process of X X X X 14
accreditation (all categories)

Table 1. ASEAN Stakeholders.

Source: CRD List of ASEAN Accredited Stakeholders in 2016 & Matrix of Pending Applications of Entities
Associated with ASEAN.

Baseline Engagement Level:

No. of ASSC Workplans: 15, Baseline 2020.
No. of MoUs Entered into by ASCC: 54 before 2016, 37 Declarations/Statements between 2016-2020.
No. of ASEAN Accredited Stakeholders: 79, Baseline 2016.
No. of ASEAN Stakeholders in Accreditation Process: 14, as of May 2020.

To measure stakeholder engagement, the Baseline Study counted the

number of workplans and memorandums of understanding related to
negotiations and partnership forums for stakeholders to engage, discuss,
and debate Sectoral issues and challenges experienced in the ASEAN region.

It is important for ASEAN that its stakeholders have experiences that reinforce
the value of their collaborations with ASEAN for achieving their organisational
goals. Stakeholders will receive an annual online survey to ascertain the
quality of their experiences.

6
KPI 2a. Level of satisfaction on a scale of 1 to 4 on the quality of engagement in ASEAN of a
representative sample of diverse AMS stakeholders.

Target: Level of satisfaction on the quality of engagement in ASEAN of a representative sample of diverse AMS
stakeholders reaches 2 or higher for all AMS.

Baseline

Figure 1. ASEAN Stakeholder Satisfaction Level (2020).

Source: ASCC Baseline Survey (full results and questionnaires available from AMD).

According to the survey, 59.4% of respondents were highly satisfied, 37.6% were satisfied, 2% were unsatisfied,
and 1% were highly unsatisfied with their ASEAN engagements. Meanwhile 42.6% of respondents reported
that their satisfaction with ASEAN was unchanged and 57.4% reported that their satisfaction had increased
compared to previous years.

Since there was no data for KPI 2a in 2016, an inaugural survey was conducted
in September 2020 to establish a baseline year. As of October 2020, 101 diverse
organisations covering a variety of areas have submitted responses. Ninety-
seven percent rated as satisfactory or highly satisfactory the quality of their
ASEAN engagements.

2.1.2. Governance Effectiveness

Strengthened collaboration, dialogue, and consensus among stakeholders

influences effective governance in AMS and improves implementation of
national-level policies. The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators
(WGI) annually report progress on aggregate and individual governance
indicators for over 200 countries. One WGI indicator, government
effectiveness, used as KPI 2b for the Baseline Study, captures perceptions of
the quality of public service, the quality of the civil service and the degree of
its independence from political pressure, the quality of policy formulation and

7
 implementation, and the credibility of the government’s commitment to such
policies. AMS scores for governance effectiveness ranged from -2.5 (weak)
to 2.5 (strong). Although there were differences in Governance Effectiveness
between AMS, the ASEAN average was 0.245 in 2016 and improved in 2017
and 2018.

KPI 2b: Maintained or increased Government Effectiveness measured under the World Governance
Indicators.

Target: Narrowed gap between the top group and the remaining ASEAN Member States in comparison with
the baseline year 2016.

Baseline:

Government Effectiveness for AMS :

Based on https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/ Based on AMS report on KPI Cat. 1

AMS 2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2018
Brunei Darussalam 1.08 1.14 1.25 1.08 1.14 1.25
Cambodia -0.69 -0.66 -0.57 -0.69 -0.66 -0.57
Indonesia 0.01 0.04 0.18 0.01 0.04 0.18
Lao PDR -0.40 -0.38 -0.67 -0.4 -0.38 -0.67
Malaysia 0.87 0.83 1.08 0.87 0.83 1.08
Myanmar -0.98 -1.05 -1.07 -0.98 -1.05 -1.07
Philippines -0.01 -0.05 0.05 -0.01 -0.05 0.05
Singapore 2.21 2.22 2.23 2.21 2.22 2.23
Thailand 0.34 0.38 0.35 0.34 0.38 0.35
Viet Nam 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01 0
Average 0.24 0.25 0.28 N/A N/A N/A

Table 2. ASEAN Member States World Governance Indicator Scores.

Source: https://info.worldbank.org/governance/wgi/ and AMS Report on KPI Cat.1

2.1.3. ASEAN Secretariat Contributions

The ASEAN Secretariat (ASEC), in its role as the convening and coordinating
authority for negotiating and partnership forums, has organised its work in
outcome documents, programs, projects, and activities, all of which led to
memorandums of understanding and resolutions in a variety of Sectors. It is
assumed that ASEAN will enhance its effectiveness, relevance, and impact as
an international organisation by increasing its activity and engagement with
stakeholders, leading to more MoUs and policy changes at the AMS level.

8
KPI 3: Increased number of ASEAN outcome documents, programs, and activities under the ASCC,
developed or implemented with stakeholder engagement.

Target: Increased number of ASEAN outcome documents, programs, and activities under the ASCC, developed
or implemented with stakeholder engagement.

Baseline:

Baseline is 2020.

Outcome Activities
Sectoral Body Programs
Documents To Be Implemented Ongoing Completed
ASOEN 12 5 97 121 29
COP-AATHP 7 8 21 28 0
ACDM 14 6 20 39 15
SOMRI 7 15 0 21 1
SOMCA 6 7 14 30 0
SOMSWD 8 8 23 14 21
SOMRDPE 8 8 14 5 15
ACW 11 6 14 7 8
ACWC 24 8 15 10 14
SOMHD 17 20 5 63 36
ACCSM 2 6 9 10 25
SLOM 7 4 5 37 31
SOMS 1 4 6 30 0
SOMY 4 4 14 26 5
SOM-ED 6 5 6 18 42

Table 3. Outcome Documents, Programs, and Activities by Program Area, 2016 to 2020.
Source: CRD Tool 1 (Framework for Reporting on ASCC Sectoral Body Implementation, List of Outcome
Documents of ASCC 15 Sectoral Bodies 2016 to Sept. 2020).

2.1.4. Empowered People and Strengthened Institutions

Participating government authorities and stakeholders in AMS have

committed, through ASEAN membership, to strengthen their institutional
capacities for regional- and national-level policy formulation, empower
ASEAN’s peoples, and strengthen ASEAN institutions. Through national-level
qualitative reporting, AMS inform ASEAN of their institutional capacities,
number of ASCC-related programs, and accredited stakeholders.

Although KPI 4 (Table 4) is a national-level indicator that requires detailed

reporting on specific capacities, its purpose is to promote ASEAN identity. As
comprehensive national-level data was not available for the Baseline Study,
measuring results at the regional level required using proxy data, assuming

9
 that increased activity at the regional level would have a positive impact on
institutional capacity at the national level.

KPI 4: Increase institutional capacities for AMS through policies, measures, and initiatives that raise
awareness of ASEAN Community building and public engagement.

Target: Increased awareness of ASEAN integration by 2025, demonstrated by improved results identified by
the Poll of ASEAN Awareness.

Baseline:

Media Type 2016

2017 2018 2019
(Baseline)
Programs 2 2 2 2
TV programs 855 731 - 275
Infotainment programs 7 7 8 8
TV advertorial plugs - - 50 -

Table 4. Programs, Stories, Etc., Promoting ASEAN Identity Produced and Disseminated, by Year.
Source: CID Records.

2.2. Inclusive

An inclusive community that promotes high quality of life, equi-

table access to opportunities for all and promotes and protects
human rights of women, children, youths, the elderly/older persons,
persons with disabilities, migrant workers, and vulnerable and
marginalised groups.

2.2.1. Reducing Barriers

Under the Blueprint, reducing barriers relates to promoting an inclusive society

that benefits from adequate social protections. This is particularly important
for strengthening the resilience of poor, marginalised, and vulnerable groups,
and is considered a key element in the worldwide promotion of human well-
being and sustainable economic development.

Social Protection

Strengthening social protection has been a central focus for ASEAN Summit
and Ministerial meetings. Social protection policies help vulnerable groups
prevent, mitigate, or cope with shocks and negative impacts on their
livelihoods. In addition to increased social resilience, progress on social

10
protection KPIs under the Blueprint is expected to lead to increased equality
in labour markets, which have been affected by challenges coming from
poverty, exploitation, marginalised and vulnerable groups, and labour mobility.
Such policies target assisting the poor, people at risk, or vulnerable groups
such as persons with disabilities, older people, youth, women, children, the
undernourished, victims of disasters, migrant workers, and other vulnerable
families and communities.

The Baseline Study established starting measurements for four KPIs (Table 5)
that track the Blueprint’s progress on social protection policies:
• KPI 5a: Number of AMS with institutionalised Social Protection Strategies
(SPS), as endorsed by the Asian Development Bank (ADB).
• KPI 5b: Increased proportion of identified target groups in AMS compared
to the respective total number of people receiving social protection
benefits.
• KPI 7: Increased regional policies, strategies, and programs mainstreaming
the promotion and protection of Human Rights for identified target
groups in AMS, as demonstrated by KPI 7b, the proportion of target groups
receiving social protection benefits.

These KPIs were developed in accordance with the Regional Framework and
Action Plan to Implement the ASEAN Declaration on Strengthening Social
Protection. Adopting the definition of the Asian Development Bank, the
Social Protection Strategy (SPS) covers five elements:
1. Labour market policies and programs designed to generate employment,
improve working conditions, and promote efficient operations.
2. Social insurance programs to cushion the risks associated with
unemployment, ill health, disabilities, work-related injuries, and old age.
3. Social assistance and welfare service programs for vulnerable groups with
inadequate means of support, including single mothers, the homeless, or
physically or mentally challenged people.
4. Micro- and area-based schemes to address vulnerability at the community
level, including micro-insurance, agricultural insurance, social funds, and
programs to manage natural disasters.
5. Child protection to ensure the healthy and productive development of
children.

11
 KPI 5a: Number of AMS with institutionalized Social Protection Strategies (SPS), as endorsed by
the ADB.

Target: Implementation of institutionalized SPS by all 10 AMS.

KPI 5b: Increased proportion of identified target groups in AMS receiving social protection benefits.

Target (Proposed by Baseline Team): All 10 AMS by 2025 will have an increased ratio of actual to potential
beneficiaries of social protection programs.

KPI 7: Increased number of regional policies, strategies, and programmes mainstreaming the
promotion and protection of Human Rights for identified target groups in AMS.

KPI 7b: Proportion of target groups receiving social protection benefits.

Target (Proposed by Baseline Team): All 10 AMS by 2025 can demonstrate mainstreamed Human Rights
that protect all identified groups through an increased proportion of target groups receiving social protection
benefits.

Baseline

Indicator 5a Indicator 5b Indicator 7b

SPI by Social Insurance, Social Assistance, Total Social SPI Breadth (% SPI Depth
and Labour Market Programmes Protection Of Potential (Benefits of
Country Expenditure, Beneficiaries Beneficiaries
Social Social Labour Market
as % GDP Provided with as % of GDP
Insurance Assistance Programs Ratio
Benefits) Per Capita)
Ratio Ratio
Brunei
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Darussalam
Cambodia 0.1 0.5 N/A 0.8 42.5 1.3
Indonesia 1.4 0.6 0.1 2.1 90.4 2.3
Lao PDR 0.7 0.1 N/A 0.8 33.5 2.3
Malaysia 4.3 0.1 N/A 4.2 9.1 48.7
Myanmar 2.7* N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Philippines 1.8 0.8 N/A 2.9 117.6 2.2
Singapore 4.8 1.1 0.3 5.3 103.2 6
Thailand 1.7 0.5 N/A 4.1 96.3 2.29
Viet Nam 3.6 0.4 0.1 6.3 90.3 4.6

Table 5. Social Protection Indices for AMS, 2015.

Source: https://spi.adb.org/spidmz/
* Data as of 2018

To establish a baseline for KPI 5a, a proxy was applied by referring to the ADB
Social Protection Indicator (SPI) by Social Insurance, Social Assistance, and
Labour Market Programs.1 The objective of the SPI is to have an internationally
comparable database of government-financed social protection programs

1 https://spi.adb.org/spidmz/

12
that tracks expenditures, coverage, size of benefits, and the distributional
impacts on poverty and gender.

The proportion of target groups receiving social protection benefits (KPI 5b)
is tracked by the ADB through the SPI ‘breadth’, which measures the ratio
of actual to potential beneficiaries of social protection programs. Baseline
figures were established for 2015.

ADB SPIs are also a concrete measure reflecting strengthened mechanisms

that promote and protect the Human Rights of target groups that contribute
to increased equitable treatment for all (KPI 7b). It is measured through the
SPI ‘depth’ (social protection benefits of each actual beneficiary as % of GDP
per capita).

2.2.2. Equitable Access for All

In the ASEAN region, unequal access to basic services, such as health care
and education, have contributed to widening inequalities, especially in
income and wealth. There is a high return on investments in human capital
development–such as nutrition, access to health services, quality education,
life-long learning, jobs, and skills for people–that will contribute significantly
to stronger social and economic progress.

The KPIs in Table 6 that track increased access to basic services are:
• KPI 6a: Decreased prevalence of undernourishment (%).
• KPI 6b: Nutrition indicators:
- Reduced prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age.
- Reduced prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age.
- Reduced prevalence of underweight in children under 5 years of age.
- Reduced prevalence of overweight in children under 5 years of age.
• KPI 6c: Average years of total schooling among people aged 15-24, as
well as those aged 25 and above.
• KPI 6d: Increased coverage of essential health services, regardless
of household income, expenditure, wealth, place of residence, or
gender.
• KPI 6e: Proportion of population living in slums, informal settlements,
inadequate housing, or danger zones as defined by national laws,
policies, or regulations.

13
 KPI 6a: Decreased prevalence of undernourishment (%)

Target: Decreased gap between the lowest and highest percentage in ASEAN countries.

Baseline

AMS PoU value 2016

Brunei Darussalam 3.1
Cambodia 17.2
Indonesia 8.6
Lao PDR 16.7
Malaysia 2.6
Myanmar 10.6
Philippines 13.5
Singapore NA
Thailand 7.8
Viet Nam 9.4
Average 10.11

Table 6. Prevalence of Undernourishment (PoU) in AMS.

Source: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SN.ITK.DEFC.ZS.
(The gap between the highest and lowest figures for AMS as per the 2016 baseline is 14.6% [Cambodia, 17.2%;
Malaysia, 2.6%]).

Undernourishment

Reducing undernourishment (KPI 6a, Table 6) is a core contributor reducing

poverty in the ASEAN region. Good nutrition is the cornerstone for survival,
health, and development. Well-nourished children perform better in school,
grow into healthy adults, and in turn give their children a better start in life.

Nutrition

The status of nutritional values in AMS, with a goal of reducing the impact
of malnutrition, will be measured by KPI 6b, which addresses the second
Sustainable Development Goal (SDG): ending hunger, achieving food security,
improving nutrition, and promoting sustainable agriculture:
i. Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 years of age
Stunting is low height for age. Stunting is caused by chronic a nutrient
deficiency or illness.
ii. Prevalence of wasting in children under 5 years of age.
Wasting is defined as a low weight for age. Wasting is caused by acute
food shortages or disease and is correlated with under-5 mortality.

14
iii. Prevalence of underweight children under 5 years of age.
The prevalence of underweight children under five years of age is defined
as the percent of children aged 0 to 59 months who weigh less than two
standard deviations below the median weight for their age group in the
international reference population.
iv. Prevalence of overweight children under 5 years of age.
The prevalence of overweight in children is defined as the percent of
children less than five years who are overweight for their age, e.g., the
number of children aged 0 to 59 months whose z-score is over two
standard deviations above the median weight-for-height specified by the
WHO Child Growth Standards.

These KPIs are monitored by national Ministries of Health and UNICEF.

ASEAN stakeholders, dialogue partners, and AMS have developed several
initiatives to achieve these KPIs, including addressing health implications in
the pursuit of economic progress and political stability. The relevance of the
link between health and economic progress can be seen when looking at
the consequences of the global COVID-19 pandemic. Health interventions in
the Food and Agricultural Regulatory Sectors are of critical importance to
ensure nutrition security. Efforts to localise and implement activities that are
nutrition-specific and nutrition-sensitive should be undertaken, according to
the needs of each AMS and the region as a whole. Implementing programs
to ensure healthy lifestyles must be enhanced as ASEAN further consolidates
its inclusive, people-oriented, and people-centered community-building
process.

15
 KPI 6b: Nutrition indicators: reduced prevalence of stunted, wasting, underweight and overweight
children under 5 years of age.

Target: Decreased gap between the lowest and highest percentage in ASEAN countries.

Baseline

AMS Stunting (%) Wasting (%) Underweight (%) Overweight (%)

Brunei Darussalam 19.7 (2009) 2.9 (2009) 9.6 (2009) 8.3 (2009)
Cambodia 39.8 (2010) 11.4 (2010) 23.9 (2014) 1.9 (2010)
Indonesia 36.4 (2013) 13.5 (2013) 19.9 (2013) 11.5 (2013)
Lao PDR 35.5 (2015) 9.7 (2015) 25.5 (2015) 2.5 (2015)
Malaysia 20.7 (2016) 11.5 (2016) 13.7 (2016) 6.4 (2016)
Myanmar 29.1 (2016) 7 (2016) 18.9 (2016) 1.4 (2016)
Philippines 33.1 (2015) 6.8 (2015) 21.4 (2015) 3.3 (2015)
Singapore 4.4 (2000) 3.6 (2000) 3.3 (2000) 2.6 (2000)
Thailand 11.27 (2016) 5.75 (2016) 6.7 (2016) 3.59 (2016)
Viet Nam 24.3 (2016) 6.2 (2016) 13.8 (2016) 5.5 (2016)
Average 28.65 7.89 18.18 4.74

Table 6. Nutrition indicators: reduced prevalence of stunted, wasting, underweight and overweight children
under 5 years of age

Source: KPI Category 1, as reported by AMS

Access to Basic Services

Increased access to basic services includes increased access to education–a

key driver for community building and socio-economic prosperity in the
ASEAN region. AMS have shown a strong commitment to the importance
of education, for its contribution to nation building and for its importance in
developing the intellect and morality of youth. Education’s role in promoting
political and social harmony is widely valued. There has been a shared
commitment to expand educational opportunities available to young people
in AMS, notably in the context of achieving the SDGs. Education is seen as
foundational for building a more economically integrated ASEAN.

However, there are still differences between education systems in AMS, which
to a large extent reflect differences in economic development. While language
differences do not relate to economic development, the role of English as a
common language in the region, especially among young people, is striking.
There are also differences between AMS related to historical development.
Higher education systems across the region most obviously reflect these
different national legacies.

16
Increasing access to quality primary and secondary education, as reflected
through KPI 6c (Table 8), also concerns the need for improved educational
quality, including higher performance standards, more opportunities
for lifelong education, and more widespread provision of professional
development support. This KPI illustrates improvements in accessibility
education in AMS and will be measured by tracking:
• Average years of total schooling for people aged 15 to 24.
• Average years of total schooling for people aged 25 and above.

KPI 6c: Average years of total schooling among: (i) aged 15 to 24, and (ii) aged 25 and above.

Target: Increased numbers compared to the Baseline.

Baseline

Source: http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/69706# Source: AMS report

Mean years of Expected years of Mean years of Expected years of
AMS schooling (2016) schooling (2016) schooling (2016) schooling (2016)
Brunei
9.1 14.5 9.1 14.5
Darussalam

Cambodia 4.7 11.3 4.7 11.7

Indonesia 8 12.9 7.98 12.8

Lao PDR 5.2 11.2 5.2 11.2

Malaysia 10.2 13.7 10.2 13.7

Myanmar 4.9 10 N/A N/A

Philippines 9.3 12.7 9.3 12.7

Singapore 11.5 16.3 11.65 16.1

Thailand 7.6 14.3 7.6 14.3

Viet Nam 8.1 12.7 8.49 11.45

Average 7.86 12.96 8.2 13.2

Table 8. Expected Years of Total Schooling, Average Years of Total Schooling, Ages 25 and Above, by AMS.
Source: http://hdr.undp.org/en/indicators/69706# and AMS Report

Universal Health Coverage

The ASEAN Community is striving toward full coverage of essential health

services for every household. According to the WHO, universal health
coverage (UHC) ensures that all people and communities receive essential
health services, without experiencing financial hardship. UHC is central to the
health-related targets of the SDGs.

17
 Access to essential services is a means to progress toward UHC, and is
measured by the UHC Service Coverage Index (SCI). The UHC SCI covers four
essential health service areas: reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child
health; infectious diseases; non-communicable diseases; and service capacity
and access among the general and most disadvantaged populations [SDG
3.8.1].

KPI 6d: Increased coverage of essential health services, regardless of household income,
expenditure, wealth, place of residence, or gender.

Target: Eighty percent UHC service coverage index for individual AMS populations.

Baseline

AMS SCI

Baseline 2017

Brunei Darussalam 81

Cambodia 60

Indonesia 57

Lao PDR 51

Malaysia 73

Myanmar 61

Philippines 61

Singapore 86

Thailand 80

Viet Nam 75

Table 9. UHC Service Coverage Index (SCI) for Essential Health Services, on a Scale of 0 to 100, by AMS.
Source: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SH.UHC.SRVS.CV.XD

Baseline: 3 AMS [30%] scored 80 or above in UHC SCI.

People Living in Slums

Spatial inequalities are generally expressed as the segregation of certain

population groups, and can take the form of poverty as well as inadequate
life conditions. Moreover, rapid urbanisation, if not well managed, leads to
an increased incidence of informal settlements and poverty. Therefore, to
improve policies, it is necessary to identify and quantify the slums of a city. A
prosperous and inclusive city can reduce spatial inequalities (SDG 11, UNStats).

18
The proportion of a population living in slums, informal settlements,
inadequate housing, or danger zones is comprised of people living in
households lacking at least one of five conditions: access to improved
water, access to improved sanitation facilities, sufficient living area (e.g, not
overcrowded), durable housing, and security of tenure (SDG 11 metadata,
UNStats).

KPI 6e: Proportion of population living in slums, informal settlements, inadequate housing, or
danger zones, as defined by national laws, policies, or regulations.

Target: Decreased proportion as compared to the baseline, for each AMS.

Baseline

Source: https://www.sdg.
org/datasets/indicator-
11-1-1-proportion-of- Source: AMS Reports on KPI
urban-population-living- Category 1
in-slums-percent-6/
data?orderBy=sources
2016 2016
AMS
(Baseline) (Baseline)
Brunei Darussalam N/A N/A
Cambodia 47.7 1.60
Indonesia 30.9 21.8 (2014)
Lao PDR 20.8 31.4 (2014)
Malaysia N/A N/A
Myanmar 56.6 41 (2014)
Philippines 43.5 38.3 (2014)
Singapore N/A N/A
Thailand 24.6 25 (2014)
Viet Nam 14.4 N/A
Average 34.1 N/A
Table 10. Proportion of Urban Population Living in Slums, Informal Settlements, or Inadequate Housing, by
AMS.
Source: https://www.sdg.org/datasets/indicator-11-1-1-proportion-of-urban-population-living-in-slums-
percent-6/data?orderBy=sources and Source: AMS Reports on KPI Category 1

19
 2.2.3. Promotion and Protection of Human Rights

Rights of Migrant Workers

The ASEAN Committee on the Implementation of the ASEAN Declaration on

the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers (ACMW) has
been working to implement the ASEAN Consensus on the Protection and
Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers. This requires that AMS develop
an action plan aligned with the Consensus and to work to implement the
Consensus from 2018 to 2025. Progress on the action plan will be regularly
reported at ACMW Meetings.

KPI 7: Increased number of regional policies, strategies, or programmes mainstreaming the

promotion and protection of Human Rights for identified target groups in AMS.

KPI 7a: Development and implementation of an action plan to implement the ASEAN Consensus
on the Protection and Promotion of the Rights of Migrant Workers.

Target: All activities in action plan to be completed by 2025.

Baseline

2016
2017 2018 2019
(Baseline)
Number/(percent) of projects* implemented or
completed under action plans for ASEAN Consensus on
(0%) 0 (0%) 3 (8%) 5 (13%)
the Protection and Promotion of The Rights of Migrant
Workers

Ongoing/regularly implemented projects* 0 0 10 (26%) 15 (40%)

Planned projects 0 0 25 (66%) 18 (47%)

Total projects from action plan at year end 0 0 38 (100%) 38 (100%)
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities
are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which they
began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as
‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 11. Completed Projects Under Action Plan, as % of Total Planned.

Source: LCSD Records.

20
2.3. Sustainable

A sustainable community that promotes social development and

environmental protection through effective mechanisms to meet
the people’s current and future needs.

2.3.1. Conservation and Sustainable Management of Biodiversity

and Natural Resources

Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity and Natural Resources

AMS have been well endowed with a unique biodiversity and natural resources
base, which, if managed in a sustainable manner, can drive sustainable
development in the region. If conserved and used wisely, natural resources
and biodiversity can boost economic and tourism development, aid research
and technological advancement, and protect against the impact of climate
change. Sustainable development can be supported by strengthening
regional cooperation; boosting capacity building to promote sustainable
terrestrial, marine, and coastal ecosystem management; and preventing and
controlling forest and land fires resulting in transboundary haze pollution.

Over the years, there has been a considerable increase in the number
of initiatives, resources, and support dedicated to conservation and the
sustainable use of biodiversity and natural resources in AMS.

KPI 8: Increased number of regional initiatives regarding conservation and the sustainable use of
biodiversity and natural resources in AMS.

Target: Increased number of regional initiatives regarding conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity
and natural resources in AMS.

ASEAN Activities* on Conservation and Sustainable Use of 2016 2017 2018 2019
Biodiversity and Natural Resources in AMS (Baseline)
Ongoing 7 8 10 20
Completed 11 11 8 10
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which
they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 12. Ongoing and Completed ASEAN Activities on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity and
Natural Resources in AMS.
Source: Environment Division Records.

ASEAN’s work under KPI 8 (Table 12) can be measured by counting ASEAN
regional initiatives on conservation and the sustainable use of biodiversity

21
 and natural resources in AMS, including regional initiatives, policies to address
marine pollution and plastic debris at the source, and indicators under the
Roadmap on ASEAN Cooperation Toward Transboundary Haze Pollution
Control with Means of Implementation.

2.3.2. Environmentally Sustainable Cities

The population of ASEAN in 2016 reached 634.5 million people, 48.2% of who
reside in urban areas. This trend may continue to increase, following growth
in the rates of development for new cities, rural-urban migration, rising
affluence, and the expectations of the people.2 Against this backdrop–and
taking into account the changing environment, e.g. climate change, pollution,
et.al.–cities in ASEAN are facing numerous challenges to stay environmentally
sustainable and livable.

Various programs have been implemented by ASEAN cities to tackle those

challenges and improve environmental performance. The ASCC Blueprint
2025 outlined ASEAN’s commitments to ensure that cities and urban areas
are environmentally sustainable while meeting people’s social and economic
needs. Currently, ASEAN’s Environmentally Sustainable Cities (ESC) Indicators
focus on clean land, clean water, clean air, and soon, green space.

KPI 9: Increased number of regional initiatives to promote or achieve environmentally sustainable

cities in AMS.

Target: Increased number of regional initiatives.

ASEAN Projects* on Environmentally Sustainable 2016

2017 2018 2019
Cities (Baseline)
Ongoing 1 0 1 1
Completed 2 5 1 2
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which
they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 13. Ongoing and Completed ASEAN Projects on Environmentally Sustainable Cities.
Source: Environment Division Records.

2 https://environment.asean.org/awgesc/

22
2.3.3. Sustainable Climate

Nationally Determined Contributions to Reduce Greenhouse Gas

Emissions

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are commitments by the

Parties to the Paris Agreement, including the governments of AMS, to reduce
national greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change. Under the
Paris Agreement, Parties are requested to communicate or update their
NDCs by 2020.

The action plans of relevant ASEAN working groups or Sectoral bodies served
as an action blueprint for addressing the impact of climate change in ASEAN,
ensuring effective cooperation between AMS, and providing information on
projects and activities related to:
• Adaptation and Resilience.
• Mitigation.
• Technology Transfer.
• Climate Finance.
• Cross-Sectoral Coordination and Global Partnerships.

ASEAN cooperation on climate change has expanded since the baseline in

2016, as indicated in Table 14. An increase and expansion of the number and
type of activities covered by ASEAN’s regional climate actions have been
noted.

KPI 10: Enhanced capacity of each AMS to achieve its individual Nationally Determined Contribution
(NDC).

Target: Each AMS achieves significant results against its individual target, set as an NDC.

ASEAN climate-change related projects or activities* 2016

2017 2018 2019
to achieve individual NDCs, as implemented by AMS. (Baseline)
Ongoing 1 0 0 5
Completed 3 4 4 9
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which
they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 14. Ongoing and Completed ASEAN Climate-Change Related

Projects/Activities to Achieve NDCs as Implemented by AMS.
Source: Records Environment Division.

23
 Sustainable Consumption and Production

Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP) covers the use of services

and related products that responds to basic needs and creates a better
quality of life. SCP minimises the use of natural resources, toxic materials,
waste emissions, and pollutants over the lifecycle of a service or product, so
as not to jeopardise the needs of further generations. Integrating sustainable
consumption, production strategies, and best practices into national and
regional policies– through public-private partnerships and CSR activities,
among other things–will promote the adoption of environmentally sound
technologies.

Policies that can be counted under this indicator, KPI 11 (Table 15), include
the principles or course of actions implemented by AMS or ASEAN (e.g., laws,
regulations, guidelines, directives, strategies, et. al.) to promote sustainable
consumption and production practices. Institutional arrangements include
formal or informal organisational setups (e.g., multi-sectoral, multi-agency
body, national/regional network, etc.) that facilitate effective coordination
and the implementation of policies.

As the issue of SCP is closely connected with the emerging priority of

promoting circular economies, there has been increased interest and
support in implementing SCP-related projects and activities. While activities
in 2016 were limited to capacity building and preliminary research on waste
management, initiatives toward the end of the implementation period of the
ASCC Blueprint 2016-2020 will increase in number and variety.

KPI 11: Establish policies and institutional arrangements that incorporate Sustainable Consumption
and Production (SCP) initiatives, including green jobs, in AMS.

Target: Increased number of ASEAN-level activities and programs supporting AMS in building SCP policies
and institutional arrangements.

Baseline

2016
2017 2018 2019
(Baseline)
ASEAN-level activities supporting AMS in building SCP
3 4 3 7
policies and institutional arrangements
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which
they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 15. ASEAN-Level Activities Supporting AMS in Building SCP Policies and Institutional Arrangements.

24
2.4. Resilient

A resilient community with enhanced capacity and capability to

adapt and respond to social and economic vulnerabilities, disas-
ters, and climate change as well as emerging threats and chal-
lenges

2.4.1. A Disaster Resilient ASEAN that is able to Anticipate,

Respond, Cope, Adapt, and Build Back Better, Smarter,
and Faster

Environmental Risk and Vulnerability

The ASEAN region, largely due to geographical factors, has a history of

frequent natural disasters that have caused tremendous economic and
human losses. From earthquakes and tsunamis in Indonesia, to floods in the
Mekong delta, to droughts and typhoons, the region has been disaster prone.
Since disasters often have regional impacts, adequate levels of preparedness
and prevention are required at the regional and sub-regional level. ASEAN
has achieved this through the ASEAN Agreement for Disaster Management
Emergency Response (AADMER), a legally binding regional agreement that
commits AMS to promoting regional cooperation and collaboration to reduce
disaster losses and strengthen joint emergency responses to disasters in the
region.

Fostering and monitoring progress toward risk and vulnerability reduction

starts with the existence of action plans designed to increase capacity and
promote implementation aligned with the ASEAN Risk and Vulnerability
Guidelines (RVA) at the ASEAN and national levels. AMS are at various levels
of implementation for such action plans (KPI 12, Table 16).

25
 KPI 12: Regional and National Action Plans designed to increase capacity and promote
implementation that are aligned with the ASEAN Risk and Vulnerability Guidelines (RVA).

Target: For every AMS, RVAs have been deployed–at least at Level 2 for all AMS–to help officials create risk-
reduction strategies that identify vulnerabilities, devise mitigation strategies, and ultimately reduce disaster
losses.

Baseline

AMS RVA Level of Achievement

(Data collected by DMHA through AMS self-assessments)
Brunei Darussalam 2016: National action plan in place to increase capacity and promote implementation
aligned with three RVAs: National Standard Operating Procedure (NASOP) 2012,
Brunei Darussalam Strategic National Action Plan for Disaster Risk Reduction
(SNAP) 2012- 2025, and Development of Disaster Management Strategic Policy
Framework (DMSPF) 2018.
Cambodia Sectoral Body Climate Change Adaptation Plan covers RVA issue.
Indonesia N/A
Lao PDR N/A
Malaysia 2020: Malaysia developed a National Risk Register for Natural Hazards to inventory
historical disasters and project future hazards.
Myanmar 2019: Adopted Management Plans and a National Earthquake Preparedness and
Response Plan. 2017: Adopted Action Plan on Disaster Risk Reduction.
Philippines N/A
Singapore Whole-of-Government Integrated Risk Management (WOG-IRM) framework
adopted in 2004
Thailand 2015: The National Disaster Risk Management Plan on DRR, put in place by
the Department of Disaster Prevention and Mitigation and Ministry of Interior,
addressed the RVA issue.
Viet Nam N/A

Table 16. Level of Implementation and Alignment with Risk Vulnerability Assessments, by AMS.
Source: National Midterm Review Reports.

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster

Relief (HADR)

A multi-faceted, multi-disciplinary, multi-sectoral approach is essential for

addressing disaster risk reduction, preparedness, and early response for
disasters, and for setting the basis for establishing coordination mechanisms
to achieve a substantial reduction inf disaster losses in the region. ASEAN
activity can be measured by monitoring the number of resolutions resulting
from cross-Sectoral platform consultations. Resolutions include joint-
declarations, statements, and substantial decisions evolving from cross-
Sectoral discussions, meetings, forums, and workshops. Similarly, a good
proxy indicator would be counting the number of cross-Sectoral consultation
platforms that aim to synergise DRR and HADR efforts in AMS (KPI 13, Table
17).

26
KPI 13: Increased number of resolutions as a result of cross-Sectoral consultations to synergize
Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) and Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) in
AMS, aligned with the ASEAN Agreement on Disaster Management and Emergency Response
(AADMER).

Target: Maintained or increased number of cross-Sectoral consultation platforms compared to the baseline.

Baseline

2016 2017 2018 2019

(Baseline)
Resolutions in cross- 1 1 1 1
Sectoral consultation (Declaration on (Endorsement (Establishment (Plan of Action of
meeting reports, by year One ASEAN One of Work Plan on of the ACSCC on the ASEAN DRFI
Response) Strengthening ASSI) Phase 2 Project).
Institutional
and Policy
Framework on
DRR-CCA)
Cross-Sectoral consultation 3 3 4 4
platforms synergizing (TWG on CIMIC, (TWG on CIMIC, (TWG on CIMIC, (TWG on CIMIC,
Disaster Risk Reduction JTF on HADR and JTF on HADR and JTF on HADR, JTF on HADR,
and Humanitarian ACSCC on DRFI) ACSCC on DRFI) ACSCC on DRFI ACSCC on DRFI,
Assistance and Disaster and ACSCC on and CSCC on
Relief in AMS ASSI) ASSI)

Table 17: Resolutions and Consultations on DRR and HADR in AMS.

Source: Records DMHA.

Abbreviations:
ACSCC: ASEAN Cross Sectoral Coordination Committee
DRFI: Disaster Risk and Financing Insurance
ASSI: ASEAN Safe School Initiative
TWG: Technical Working Group
CIMIC: Civil-Military Coordination

2.4.2. A Safer ASEAN that is able to Respond to all Health-related

Hazards including Biological, Chemical, and Radiological-
nuclear, and Emerging Threats

Strengthening the resilience of ASEAN means ensuring preparations at

different levels. The Health Sector should be prepared to deal with shocks and
disasters, including by fostering a capability for early warnings, surveillance,
response, preparedness, mitigation, and other core capacities. The quality
of health systems is imperative for a well-functioning ASEAN economy and
socio-cultural community. To this end, the WHO Joint External Evaluation
(JEE) has been a voluntary, collaborative, and multi-Sectoral process to assess
a country’s capacity to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to public health
risks, whether natural, deliberate, or accidental. The JEE helps countries

27
 identify the most critical gaps in their human and animal health systems to
prioritise opportunities for enhanced preparedness and response.

Thirteen core capacities have been assessed: (1) national legislation, policy
and financing; (2) coordination and national focal point communications; (3)
surveillance; (4) response; (5) preparedness; (6) risk communication; (7) human
resources; (8) laboratory capability; (9) points of entry; (10) zoonotic events; (11)
food safety; (12) chemical events; and (13) radio/nuclear emergencies.

Background information for interpreting the scores is available in the JEE

reports for each AMS, which also supplied source data for the baseline scores
in Table 14.

28
KPI 14: Improved national core capacities in line with the International Health Regulations (IHR)
Framework, in response to health-related hazards.

Target: Each AMS meets at least Level 4 of the IHR core capacities.

Baseline

Scores: 1=No Capacity, 2=Limited Capacity, 3=Developed Capacity, 4=Demonstrated Capacity, 5=Sustainable Capacity.

BN KH ID LA MY MM PH SG TH VN
Baseline N/A 2016 2017 2017 N/A 2017 2018 2018 2017 2016
National Legislation, Policy, and Financing
Legislation, laws, regulations,
administrative requirements,
policies, or other government N/A 3 3 3 N/A 2 2 5 5 3
instruments are sufficient for
IHR implementation (2005)
State can show domestic
legislation, policies, or
administrative arrangements N/A 3 3 4 N/A 2 2 5 4 3
that are adjusted and aligned
in compliance with IHR (2005)
IHR Coordination, National Focal Point Communications, and Advocacy
Functional mechanism for
coordination/integration
N/A 4 3 4 N/A 2 2 5 4 4
of relevant sectors in IHR
implementation (2005)
Real Time Surveillance
Indicator- and event-based
N/A 4 3 4 N/A 4 3 5 4 4
surveillance systems
Interoperable, interconnected,
electronic real-time reporting N/A 3 3 3 N/A 2 3 4 4 3
system
Integration and analysis of
N/A 3 2 4 N/A 3 4 5 4 3
surveillance data
Syndromic surveillance
N/A 4 4 4 N/A 3 3 4 4 3
systems

29
 KPI 14: Improved national core capacities in line with the International Health Regulations (IHR)
Framework, in response to health-related hazards.

Target: Each AMS meets at least Level 4 of the IHR core capacities.

Scores: 1=No Capacity, 2=Limited Capacity, 3=Developed Capacity, 4=Demonstrated Capacity, 5=Sustainable Capacity.

BN KH ID LA MY MM PH SG TH VN
Baseline N/A 2016 2017 2017 N/A 2017 2018 2018 2017 2016
Emergency Response Operations
Capacity to activate emergency
N/A 2 3 2 N/A 2 3 4 3 2
operations
EOC operating procedures and
N/A 1 2 1 N/A 1 3 4 3 3
plans
Emergency operations program N/A 1 3 3 N/A 2 3 5 3 3
Case management procedures
implemented for IHR relevant N/A 1 3 2 N/A 2 N/A 4 3 3
hazards
Preparedness
Developed and implemented
national multi-hazard public
N/A 1 3 2 N/A 1 3 5 4 2
health emergency preparedness
and response plan
Priority public health risks and
N/A 1 2 2 N/A 1 2 4 2 2
resources mapped and utilized
Risk Communication
Risk communication systems
N/A 2 3 2 N/A 1 3 5 4 3
(plans, mechanisms, etc...)
Internal and partner
communications and N/A 3 3 3 N/A 3 2 4 4 3
coordination
Public communications N/A 3 4 3 N/A 3 3 5 4 3
Communication engagement
N/A 3 4 3 N/A 2 3 4 4 2
with affected communities
Dynamic listening and rumor
N/A 3 4 2 N/A 2 2 5 4 3
management
Workforce Development
Human resources available to
implement IHR core capacity N/A 2 3 3 N/A 3 2 5 4 3
requirements
FETP or other applied
epidemiology training program N/A 3 4 3 N/A 3 5 5 5 4
in place
Workforce strategy N/A 2 3 2 N/A 3 2 5 3 3
In-service trainings available
2
(only for Philippines)
National Laboratory System
Laboratory testing for detection
N/A 4 4 4 N/A 3 4 5 4 3
of priority diseases
Specimen referral and transport
N/A 2 4 3 N/A 3 3 5 4 3
system
Effective modern point-of-
care and laboratory-based N/A 2 3 3 N/A 2 3 5 4 3
diagnostics
Laboratory quality system N/A 2 3 2 N/A 3 3 5 3 3

30
KPI 14: Improved national core capacities in line with the International Health Regulations (IHR)
Framework, in response to health-related hazards.

Target: Each AMS meets at least Level 4 of the IHR core capacities.

Scores: 1=No Capacity, 2=Limited Capacity, 3=Developed Capacity, 4=Demonstrated Capacity, 5=Sustainable Capacity.

BN KH ID LA MY MM PH SG TH VN
Baseline N/A 2016 2017 2017 N/A 2017 2018 2018 2017 2016
Points of Entry
Routine capacities established
N/A 3 4 3 N/A 2 4 5 4 3
at points of entry
Effective public health response
N/A 2 4 2 N/A 2 3 4 3 2
at points of entry
Zoonotic Diseases
Surveillance systems in place
for priority zoonotic diseases/ N/A 2 3 3 N/A 3 3 5 4 4
pathogens
Veterinary or animal health
N/A 3 3 3 N/A 3 3 5 4 4
workforce
Established and functional
mechanisms for responding
N/A 3 2 3 N/A 2 2 5 4 3
to infectious and potential
zoonotic diseases
Food Safety
Established mechanisms for
multi-Sectoral collaboration
ensuring rapid response to N/A 2 3 2 N/A 2 2 5 3 3
food safety emergencies and
foodborne disease outbreaks
Chemical Events
Established and functioning
mechanisms for detecting and
N/A 2 2 1 N/A 1 3 4 4 2
responding to chemical events/
emergencies
Enabling environment for
management of chemical N/A 1 3 1 N/A 1 2 5 4 2
events
Radiological/Nuclear Emergencies
Established and functioning
mechanisms for detecting and
N/A 2 3 1 N/A 1 2 3 4 3
responding to radiological/
nuclear emergencies
Enabling environment
for managing radiation N/A 2 3 1 N/A 1 2 3 4 2
emergencies

Table 18.: National Core Capacities in Line with IHR Framework, for All Health-Related Hazards.
Source
https://www.who.int/ihr/procedures/mission-reports-south-east-asia/en/
https://www.who.int/ihr/procedures/mission-reports-western-pacific/en/
https://www.who.int/ihr/publications/WHO-WHE-CPI-REP-2018.25/en/

31
 2.4.3. A Climate-Adaptive ASEAN with Enhanced Institutional
and Human Capacities to Adapt to the Impacts of Climate
Change

National Adaptation Plans for Climate Change Adaptation

The impact of climate change increasingly threatens the ASEAN Community

and other countries around the world. National Adaptation Plans (NAPs)
allow countries to identify their climate change adaptation needs. The NAP
process was established under the Cancun Adaptation Framework (CAF)
and enables Parties to the UNFCCC to formulate and implement NAPs as
a means of identifying medium- and long-term adaptation needs and to
develop and implement strategies and programs to address those needs. It is
a continuous, progressive, and iterative process that follows a country-driven,
gender-sensitive, participatory, and fully transparent approach.

KPI 15a under the Blueprint builds a bridge between the SDGs and the
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR). An increasing number
of national governments are adopting and implementing national and local
DRR strategies, which the Sendai Framework calls for, and this will contribute
to sustainable development from an economic, environmental, and social
perspective.

32
KPI 15a: Enhanced capacity of AMS to implement National Adaptation Plans (NAPs) for climate
change that are aligned with the UNFCC and that are country driven, gender sensitive, participatory,
and transparent.

Target: All AMS adopt and implement NAPs for climate change that are aligned with the UNFCC and that are
country driven, gender sensitive, participatory, and transparent.

Baseline

BN KH ID LA MY MM PH SG TH VN
NAP adopted by
Y Y Y Y Y
government
Year adopted 2006 2018 2012 2011 2016
Draft ongoing
N - Y - - - Y Y
(yes/no)
NAP under active
implementation N Y Y N Y Y Y N N
(Yes/No)
NAP implementation
complete (yes/no)
Score progress markers (scoring done by Environment Division, based on NAP achievements under
UNFCCC):
Score Definition
Comprehensive achievement attained, with a commitment and capacity to sustain effort at all
5
levels
Substantial achievement attained, with some deficiencies in commitment, financial resources, or
4
operational capacities
Some institutional commitment and capacities for achieving NAP goals, but progress is neither
3
comprehensive nor substantial
Achievements are incomplete, and while improvements are planned, commitment and capacities
2
are limited
1 Minor achievements with few signs of planning or forward action to adopt and implement a NAP

AMS BN KH ID LA MY MM PH SG TH VN
Score

Table 19. AMS Capacity to Implement National Adaptation Plans for Climate Change Adaptation Aligned
With UNFCC.
Source: Environment Division/AMS.

Disaster Risk Reduction

Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) is a tangible endeavor that functions as a bridge

between the development and humanitarian communities in ASEAN. Many
stakeholders, including civil society and the Private Sector, are increasingly
aware and taking measures to reduce disaster risks and climate change.

33
 KPI 15b: Proportion of local governments adopting and implementing local climate change
adaptation and disaster risk-reduction strategies that are country driven, gender sensitive,
participatory, and transparent.

Target: DRR implementation progress in individual AMS is regularly monitored against seven global targets
and 38 global indicators of the Sendai Framework on DRR.

Baseline

Brunei Darussalam National government adopted local climate change adaptation and disaster risk
reduction strategies that were country driven, gender sensitive, participatory, and
transparent.

Cambodia N/A

Indonesia N/A

Lao PDR N/A

Malaysia Malaysia is developing climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction
strategies to be adopted by federal and local governments. While the National Policy
and Resilient Strategies for Disaster Risk Reduction are not finalized, several states
have produced local strategies.

Myanmar SOMRDPE Myanmar is implementing a Resilient Community Development Project,

including key activities such as developing climate and disaster resilient community
infrastructure, developing resilient livelihood activities for poor men and women,
and boosting the institutional and organizational capacity of communities and local
governments.
The National Disaster Management Committee under the Ministry of Social Welfare,
Relief, and Resettlement developed the Myanmar Action Plan on Disaster Risk
Reduction in 2017.
The Myanmar Climate Change Master Plan (2018-2030) was formulated and adopted
to mainstream prioritized Sectoral short-, medium- and long-term actions identified
in the Myanmar Climate Change Policy and Strategy by the Environmental
Conservation Department under Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental
Conservation. The plan calls for Myanmar to achieve climate resilience and pursue a
low-carbon growth pathway to support inclusive and sustainable development by
2030.

Philippines N/A

Singapore N/A

Thailand Thailand’s National Disaster Prevention and Mitigation Plan–a framework for
disaster risk reduction–has been deployed at the sub-national level and integrated
with provincial and local government plans.

Viet Nam N/A

Table 20. Local Governments that Adopted and Implemented

Local Climate Change Adaptation or Disaster Risk Reduction Strategies.
Source: National Midterm Review Reports.

KPI 15b builds a bridge between the SDGs and the Sendai Framework for
DRR to achieve SDG Indicator 13.1.2. An increasing number of national
governments have been adopting and implementing national and local
DRR strategies, according to the Sendai Framework. DRR will contribute

34
significantly to sustainable development from an economic, environmental,
and social perspectives.

The baseline for progress for KPI 15b was measured by monitoring relevant
AMS activity under Target E of the Sendai Framework, which recorded the
number of countries with regional and local disaster risk reduction strategies
by 2020. Ideally, AMS should continue to adopt monitor the adoption and
implementation of climate change adaptation and disaster risk reduction
strategies at the sub-national level until 2025.

2.4.4. Strengthened Social Protection for Women, Children,

Youths, the Elderly/Older Persons, Persons with Disabilities,
Ethnic Minority Groups, Migrant Workers, Vulnerable and
Marginalised Groups, and People Living in At-Risk Areas,
including People Living in Remote and Border Areas
and Climate-Sensitive Areas, to Reduce Vulnerabilities
in Times of Climate Change-related Crises, Disasters and
other Environmental Changes.

Adaptive Social Protection

Adaptive Social Protection is a new integrated approach that can help address
the challenges of adaptation and climate-risk management. Adaptive Social
Protection programs are flexible and intended to protect poor households
from climate and other shocks before they occur, through predictable
transfers, building community assets, and other programs that cope and
scale up in response to extreme events. Adaptive Social Protection systems
include programs that support vulnerable households and communities in
building resilience to climate-related and other shocks and that aim to reduce
adverse environmental impacts. It integrates social protections, disaster risk
management, and climate change adaptation.

ASEAN will establish platforms to address Adaptive Social Protections for

target groups living in at-risk areas and encourage the compilation of risk and
vulnerability assessments to strengthen social protections in AMS.

35
 KPI 16: Increased number/percentage of Member States implementing adaptive Social Protection to
reduce vulnerabilities in times of climate-change related crises, disasters, and other environmental
changes.

Target: By 2025, increased number/percentage of interagency partnerships and/or dialogues among partners
[in AMS] to implement adaptive Social Protection to reduce vulnerabilities in times of climate change related
crises, disasters, and other environmental changes.

Baseline

2017
2018 2019
(Baseline)
Countries approving Adaptive Social Protection policies N/A N/A N/A
Countries with approved Adaptive Social Protection budget
N/A N/A N/A
allocations
ASEAN-level activities* supporting AMS implementation of
1 3 N/A
Adaptive Social Protection (weak proxy)
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in
which they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were
completed.

Table 21.Countries Approving Adaptive Social Protection Policies and Budget Allocations, by Year.
Source: DMHA Records, preferably DMHA, will need to collect data from AMS.

No official record is available on the number of countries that have already

approved Adaptive Social Protection policies or associated budget allocations.
However, the ASEC has initiated regional- and country-level activities to
strengthen the links between social protection and disaster risk management,
including through developing the ASEAN Guidelines on Disaster Responsive
Social Protection (DRSP) since 2017 (jointly with SOMSWD and SOMHD).

2.4.5. Enhanced and Optimised Financing Systems, Food,

Water, Energy Availability, and other Social Safety Nets
in Times of Crises by making Resources more Available,
Accessible, Affordable and Sustainable

Social Protection

Social protection is key to the realisation of SDG 1, ending poverty in all its forms
everywhere, via implementation of universal and national social protection
programmes to ensure that no one is left behind. AMS have endorsed the
ASEAN Declaration on Strengthening Social Protection. ASEAN supports
this process through promoting cross-Sectoral/cross-Pillar coordination
and by optimising financing mechanisms, to help ensure the continuation
of programs that provide food, water, energy, and other social safety nets in

36
times of crises across the region. Progress on this indicator, KPI 17, can be
measured by a count of the number of initiatives ledby ASEAN Divisions in
the region and by AMS to enhance and optimise financing systems for food,
water, energy, and social safety nets in times of crises.

KPI 17: Increased number of regional initiatives to enhance and optimize financing systems, food,
water, energy, and social safety nets in times of crises that are aligned with the principles and
indicators in the Regional Framework and Action Plan to implement the ASEAN Declaration on
Strengthening Social Protection.

Target: By 2025, inclusion of budget in AMS funding to coordinate food, water, energy, and social safety nets
in times of crises that are aligned with the Regional Framework and Action Plan to implement the ASEAN
Declaration on Strengthening Social Protection.

Baseline

2016 2017 2018 2019

(Baseline)
1 1 2 3
(ADRFI) (ADRFI) (ADRFI and (ASEAN DRFI and development of Disaster
study on Responsive Social Protection Guidelines, and project
SGBV in on ‘Scaling-up FbF/EWEA and Disaster Responsive
disasters) Social Protection with innovative use of climate risk
information for disaster resilience in ASEAN’)
Table 22. Regional Initiatives to Enhance and Optimize Financing Systems,
Food, Water, Energy, and Social Safety Nets in Times of Crises, by Year.
Source: Records DMHA, and www.socialprotection.org.
Abbreviations: DRFI (Disaster Risk and Financing Insurance), SGBV (Sexual and Gender-Based Violence, FbF/
EWEA (Forecast-based Financing/Early Warning Early Action).

2.4.6. Endeavour towards a “Drug-Free” ASEAN

Drug Abuse and Drug Trafficking

Drug abuse and drug trafficking pose a threat to the security and stability
of the ASEAN region. Eliminating or reducing illicit drugs in ASEAN requires
a well-coordinated approach and should address issues such as promoting
public awareness, strengthening law enforcement and international
cooperation to address illicit production and trafficking, and engaging
communities to eliminate illicit drug crop production.

Working collaboratively across ASEAN’s Pillars on policy formulation and the

development and implementation of prevention programs will contribute to
the enhancement of community awareness and social responsibility on the

37
 ill effects of dangerous drugs. This includes prevention and surveillance in
schools and educational institutions. In the Health Sector, drug use should
be adequately regulated in the context of treatment and in formulating and
implementing prevention programs that are limited to clinical settings and
health promotion.

KPI 18: Increased number of jointly coordinated cross-Pillar dialogues or forums on drug use and
rehabilitation in AMS.

Target: By 2025, increased number of projects or activities on drug use and rehabilitation, to sustain a multi-
dimensional or holistic approach that builds on lessons learned from past plans, and that is aligned with the
current ASEAN Health Sector Work Program and the ASEAN Work Plan on Securing Communities Against
Illicit Drugs 2016-2025, in coordination with ASOD.

Baseline

2016 2017 2018 2019

(Baseline)
Projects/activities* on drug use and 3 projects/ 3 3 3
rehabilitation in AMS jointly coordinated activities
by the Health and Security Cooperation on mental
Divisions health

Project/activities* contributing to Health 2 projects/ 2 2 2

Sector priorities on mental health and HIV/ activities on
AIDS supporting a drug-free ASEAN HIV/ AIDS

*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in
which they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were
completed.

Table 23. Jointly Coordinated Cross-Pillar Dialogues or Forums on Drug Use and Rehabilitation in AMS.
Source: Health Division Records.

38
2.5. Dynamic

A dynamic and harmonious community that is aware and proud of

its identity, culture, and heritage with the strengthened ability to
innovate and proactively contribute to the global community

ASEAN Communications Strategy

The ASEAN Communication Master Plan 2018-2025 (ACMP II) is one of ASEAN’s
communication strategies. It provides a framework for communicating to
key audiences messages about the organisation, development, and vision of
ASEAN and the ASEAN Community. It is intended to aid local development
and implement detailed communication strategies by the ASEAN Community
Pillars and AMS.

Strengthened communications have the purpose of increasing involvement

from institutions and people at the national level. An additional purpose is
to engender a collective sense of pride in ASEAN heritage and achievement
and to demonstrate the range of opportunities and benefits offered by the
ASEAN Community.

39
 KPI 19a: Increased number of information and communication platforms, programs, and audiences
to support ASEAN integration with target groups based on the ASEAN Communication Master
Plan (ACMP), Phase II, across Pillars.

Target: Improvement on results from similar 2012 and 2016 surveys, against multiple criteria measuring
communication and information access across ASEAN and tracking changes in awareness of and familiarity
with the ASEAN Community.

Baseline

2016 2017 2018 2019

Information and communication N/A N/A 7 6
platforms supporting ASEAN
integration with target groups
based on ACMP, Phase II, across
Pillars
Programs supporting ASEAN Programs 2 2 2 2
integration with target groups
based on ACMP, Phase II, across
Pillars. Measured by Indicator 4:

No. of programs, news items, or

stories promoting ASEAN identity
produced and disseminated per
year
TV programs 855 731 - 275
Infotainment
7 7 8 8
programs
TV
advertorial - - 50 -
Plugs
Size of audience supporting
ASEAN integration with target 6,048,981 10,291,765 8,349,654 9,714,373
groups, based on ACMP, Phase II,
FB: 618K FB: 681k FB: 727K FB: 769K
across Pillars
IG: 6.7K IG: 25K IG: 72K IG: 100.5K
Measured by Indicators 23a and b:
TW: 65K TW: 90K TW: 72K TW: 118K
A. No. of visitors seeking
information on the ASEAN Li: N/A LI: N/A LI: 25K Li: 41K
website (including, if available,
repeat visitors, and page views)

B. Traffic from ASEAN social

media to promote and
disseminate information on
ASEAN and its activities

Table 24. Information and Communication Platforms, Programs, and Audiences

Supporting ASEAN Integration with Target Groups.
Source: CID Records.
Abbreviations: FB=Facebook; IG=Instagram; TW=Twitter; LI=LinkedIn.

40
Online Platforms

ASEAN is experiencing a digital revolution. A clear rise in connectivity and

computing power is apparent in the region. This development is at the heart
of social, economic, and cultural innovation and development. The digital
transformation has opened a range of opportunities for ASEAN’s peoples, as
well as for micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs, see KPI 31).
Access to online platforms can encourage product and service innovation,
improve market intelligence, ease access to talent, facilitate access to
financing, and ultimately enhance competitiveness in local and global
markets.

In parallel, ASEAN is witnessing a trend of youths leaving rural areas and

traditional activities, such as agriculture, to live in urban centers. Targeting
rural MSMEs as part of efforts to enhance adoption of digital tools (e.g., the
Internet of Things), might increase productivity in many different sectors, and
might also attract more individuals and new firms to move to small towns or
regions, thus creating a more appealing ecosystem for young people, while
addressing (youth) migration.

Currently, ASEAN’s social media platforms that are most popular among
youth are its website and its channels on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, and
YouTube. To contribute to youth-specific challenges, ASEAN will monitor and
increase its presence on online platforms to promote the ASEAN Community
to ASEAN youth.

KPI 19b: Increased number of online platforms to promote ASEAN Community to ASEAN youth
(SOMY KPI).

Target: Increased number of active online platforms compared to baseline year.

Baseline

2016 2017 2018 2019

Online platforms promoting ASEAN Community N/A N/A 7 8
to ASEAN Youth.

Table 25. Online Platforms to Promote ASEAN Community to ASEAN Youth.

Source: EYSD Records.

41
 Digital Natives

Building an open and adaptive ASEAN with a common identity and identifiers
requires strengthened communications using media such as print, broadcast,
multimedia and online platforms, and a particular focus on youth, who are
digital natives.

KPI 19c: Digital natives–the percent of people aged 15 to 24 with five or more years of online
experience.

Target: Increase in average ASEAN figure compared to baseline year.

Baseline

ASEAN Digital Natives as Percent of Population, 2013

Brunei Darussalam 9.1 - 14.0
Cambodia 0.1 - 3.0
Indonesia 0.1 - 3.0
Lao PDR 0.1 - 3.0
Malaysia 9.1 - 14.0
Myanmar 0.1 - 3.0
Philippines 0.1 - 3.0
Singapore 9.1 - 14.0
Thailand 6.1 - 9.0
Viet Nam 6.1 - 9.0

0.1 - 3.0%
3.1 - 6.0%
6.1 - 9.0%
9.1 - 14.0%
Table 26. Digital Natives as Percent of Population, by AMS, as of 2013.
Source: ITU, https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/publications/mis2013/MIS2013_without_
Annex_4.pdf, page 142.

Media Platforms

An increased number of media platforms assumes that outreach to the

peoples of ASEAN will increase and raise awareness of ASEAN. A media
platform is a service, site, or method that delivers media to an audience. Its
functions are to deliver, but also sometimes to allow for feedback, discussion,
or sharing. Various media types include TV, radio, print, and the internet.

42
Potential reach indicates the number of potential viewers that have been
exposed to ASEAN’s media coverage.

KPI 20: Increased number of media platforms that have raised ASEAN awareness in ASEAN and
AMS.

Target: Increased awareness of ASEAN integration by 2025, demonstrated by improved results identified by
the Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Baseline

2016
2017 2018 2019
(Baseline)
Number of media
platforms raising ASEAN Media exposure 110.1 151.6 100.2 78.1
Awareness in ASEAN (in thousands)
and AMS
Potential reach 20.6-58.6 3.5-39.9 2-15.7 6.4-49.3
(in billions)

Table 27. Media Platforms Raising ASEAN Awareness in ASEAN and AMS.
Source: CID indicated during consultations it would define media platforms in more detail. Data to be
received from CID.

KPI 21: Increased number of programs, news items, or stories promoting ASEAN identity produced
and disseminated per year.

Target: Increased awareness of ASEAN integration by 2025, demonstrated by improved results identified by
the Poll of ASEAN Awareness.

Baseline

Media Type 2016 2017 2018 2019

(Baseline)
Programs 2 2 2 2
TV programs 855 731 - 275
Infotainment
7 7 8 8
programs
TV advertorial plugs - - 50 -

Table 28. Programs, News Items, or Stories Promoting ASEAN

Identity Produced and Disseminated, per Year.
Source: CID Records.

43
 Awareness and Perceptions of ASEAN

It is important to monitor awareness and perceptions of ASEAN to understand

its relevance and quality of service delivery. SOMRI has been conducting
the Poll on ASEAN Awareness, comprised of components that have been
formulated to:
1. Track changes in awareness of and familiarity with the ASEAN
Community.
2. Gather views of ASEAN’s peoples on current regional issues.
3. Generate reliable data on perceptions of ASEAN’s peoples across
Sectors.
4. Set a benchmark for future ASEAN perception and awareness surveys.
5. Provide input to develop ASEAN’s future communications or outreach
initiatives, as well as to collect people’s feedback on some of ASEAN’s
selected priorities.

44
KPI 22: Increased ASEAN awareness based on the results of the Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Target (KPI 22): Increased understanding or knowledge of ASEAN integration by 2025, demonstrated by
improved results identified by the Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Target (KPI 24): Increased visibility and benefits of ASEAN integration by 2025, demonstrated by improved
results identified by the Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Baseline

Regional Level Indicator Civil Society General Public (All Age

Business
2018 Organisations Groups)
I have heard of ASEAN 100% 100% 96%
I know what ASEAN
is in general, and
69% 72% 40%
when and why it was
established
I know about the
ASEAN Community and 22% 38% 23%
its three Pillars
I know the policies and
the impacts that ASEAN
has brought to my 39% 39% 40%
business/country in the
past 2 years
I know how ASEAN
plans to build a
46% 49% 47%
stronger region in the
future

Table 29. Level of Understanding or Knowledge of ASEAN Integration.

Source: Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Baseline (2018) Very Negative Negative Neutral Positive Very Positive

Business 0% 1% 42% 51% 6%
Civil Society 1% 1% 44% 50% 4%
General Public 0% 1% 16% 51% 32%

Table 30. General Perceptions of ASEAN, as per Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

Source: Poll on ASEAN Awareness.

2.5.1. Towards a Creative, Innovative and Responsive ASEAN

Visitors Seeking Information on ASEAN

As ASEAN becomes more innovative, responsive, and competitive, more

people will seek information from its website, perceive the benefits of
ASEAN integration, utilise more intra-ASEAN networks, and support research
and development to further innovation in AMS. KPI 23b, in Table 32, offers

45
 a baseline measure of the number of visitors seeking information on the
ASEAN website, as documented by ASEC’s Community Relations Division.

While KPI 19a (Table 24) measures a baseline for the total number of
visitors, KPI 23b measures the reach of ASEAN’s social media (i.e., Facebook,
Instagram, LinkedIn, and Twitter) campaigns to promote ASEAN activities
and programs and disseminate information about ASEAN as documented by
ASEC’s Community Relations Division. While citizens of ASEAN countries use
a wide variety of social media platforms, Facebook remains ASEAN’s platform
with the largest number of monthly active users.

KPI 23b: Increased traffic from ASEAN website and social media promoting ASEAN activities and
disseminating information on ASEAN.

Target: Ten percent increase by 2025 over 2018-2019 baseline in number of followers on ASEAN social media
platform.

Baseline

2016-2017
Regional Level Indicator 2017-2018 2018-2019 2019-2020
(Baseline)
Traffic from ASEAN social media FB: 618K FB: 681k FB: 727K FB: 769K
promoting or disseminating IG: 6.7K IG: 25K IG: 72K IG: 100.5K
information on ASEAN and its TW: 65K TW: 90K TW: 102K TW: 118K
activities LI: N/A LI: N/A LI: 25K LI: 41K

Table 32. Followers on ASEAN Social Media Platforms.

Source: CRD Records.
Abbreviations: FB=Facebook, IG=Instagram, TW=Twitter, LI=LinkedIn.

ASEAN Research and Development

Research and development are strategic measures stipulated in the ASCC

Blueprint 2025 in order to achieve a creative, innovative, and responsive
ASEAN. Research and development are strong drivers for sustainable
development in the region. Across the board, research conducted by
academic institutions, or research institutes funded by the government or
private sector leads to new knowledge that contributes to finding solutions
to the challenges experienced in the ASEAN region. R&D strengthens
knowledge, education, competitiveness, skills, technology, human resources,
communities, entrepreneurship, and much more.

ASEC is well placed to encourage research, innovation, and development to

support sustainable development, particularly for ASEAN-wide challenges,

46
such as climate change, COVID-19, or other transboundary challenges. KPI 25
(Table 33) tracks collaborative research and innovation programs, assuming
that an increase in their number will stimulate sustainable development of
the ASEAN region with tremendous benefits.

KPI 25: Maintained or increased number of ASEAN-wide collaborative R&D activities on research,
innovation, and development to create an innovative and responsive ASEAN.

Target: Relative increase compared to baseline (2016).

Baseline

2018
2016 2017 2019
(Baseline)
Collaborative R&D activities* HD Directorate: 56 projects
on research, innovation, and Sustainable Development
development conducted by Directorate: 49 projects
ASEAN
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in which
they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were completed.

Table 33. Collaborative Activities on Research, Innovation, and Development Conducted by ASEAN.
Source: ASCC Analysis Division, Lists of Research Projects in the Sustainable Development and Human
Development Directorates.

ASEAN Global Competitiveness

The growth of ASEAN as an economic, political, social, and cultural block

offers the promise of its emergence as an important contributor to the
global economy. The ASEAN region has grown stronger at a time when the
global economy is experiencing a digital transformation, with technological
advancements redefining the way we work and live, and with environmental
and environmental health threats on the rise. In this context, the World
Economic Forum releases its Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) annually.

The GCI, used by this Study to provide a baseline for KPI 26a (Table 34), reflects
the institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity
of an economy, which in turn influences the level of prosperity that an
economy can achieve. It assesses the enabling environment (institutions,
infrastructure, ICT, macroeconomic stability), human capital (health, skills),
markets (product market, labour market, financial systems, market size), and
innovation ecosystem (business dynamism, innovation capability).

Monitoring ASEAN’s competitiveness in comparison with the rest of the

world provides important insights into the quality of the ASEAN block as a

47
 whole, as well as into the opportunities for interaction with other blocks and
countries around the world.

KPI 26a: Increased competitiveness as measured by the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI).

Target: Narrowed gap between AMS on the GCI.

Baseline

Competitiveness 2016 2017 2018 2019

(Measured by GCI)
Brunei Darussalam 58 46 62 56
Cambodia 89 94 110 106
Indonesia 41 26 45 50
Lao PDR 93 98 112 113
Malaysia 25 23 25 27
Myanmar N/A N/A N/A N/A
Philippines 57 56 56 64
Singapore 2 3 2 1
Thailand 34 32 38 40
Viet Nam 60 55 77 67

Table 34. Global Competitiveness Index Rankings for AMS.

Source:
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR2016-2017/05FullReport/TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2016-2017_FINAL.pdf
https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitiveness-report-2017-2018
https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-competitveness-report-2018
http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf

Creative Industries

ASEAN+3 and the European Union dominated the export of creative goods
during the 2002-2015 period. It is clear that an expanded creative industry
in ASEAN will increase the chance of the industry receiving assistance and
expanding potential markets.

The creative industries–which include advertising, architecture, arts and

crafts, design, fashion, film, video, photography, music, performing arts,
publishing, research & development, software, computer games, electronic
publishing, and TV/radio–are the lifeblood of the creative economy. They are
also considered an important source of commercial and cultural value.

ASEAN uses UNCTAD statistical data that analyses the trade in creative
goods and services using the Harmonised System (HS) and BPM6 (Balance
of Payments and International Investment Position Manual).

48
KPI 27: Increased number of intra-ASEAN networks and activities supporting creative industries.

KPI 28: Increased number of participants in networks.

KPI 29: Increased number of activities or participants related to creative industries.

Target: Increased numbers compared to previous measurement periods.

Baseline

2016
2017 2018 2019
(Baseline)
Indicator 27: Intra-ASEAN
networks and activities* 1 0 1 0
supporting creative industries
Indicator 28: Participants in intra-
ASEAN networks and activities X X X X
supporting creative industries
Indicator 29: Activities/
participants related to creative N/A N/A N/A N/A
industries
*Using standard ASEAN definitions, projects or activities are counted as ‘ongoing’ once, in the year in
which they began, once each year they were ongoing, and once as ‘completed’ in the year they were
completed.

Table 35. Intra-ASEAN Networks and Activities, Participants in Networks, and Activities/Participants Related
to Creative Industries.
Source: CID Data.

Award-Winning ASEAN Films

The film industry plays an important role in fostering the ASEAN Socio-Cultural
Community. Films, which include audiovisual images as well as animation, are
an effective mechanism for translating the ASEAN Community’s message
in a meaningful and reflective way while appealing to the emotions of the
viewer. Film mirrors the cultural lives of people and reflects their heritage,
values, and traditions. With advancements in technology, the film industry
has expanded into different platforms and formats, and is no longer confined
to cinema or theatres. Film is accessible through personal and portable
internet devices, TV, cable TV, and DVDs. Outreach to the ASEAN population
through these media is an excellent pathway to raise awareness of ASEAN.
The awards given by prominent film festivals to ASEAN filmmakers (KPI 30,
Table 36) can serve as a proxy when measuring the degree of strengthened
support for creative industries that raise awareness of ASEAN.

49
 KPI 30: Increased recognition for ASEAN films at the international level.

Target: Increased numbers in comparison to the baseline (2016).

Baseline

2016
2017 2018 2019 2020
(Baseline)
Busan Film
1 1 0 1 0
Festival
Berlin Film
1 0 0 0 1
Festival
Cannes Film
0 0 0 0 0
Festival
Total 2 1 0 1 1

Table 36. Number of ASEAN Films Receiving Awards at Major Festivals, by Year.
Source: Https://www.biff.kr/eng/html/archive, https://berlinale.de/en/archive. https://festival-cannes.com/
en/69-editions

2.5.2. Engender a Culture of Entrepreneurship in ASEAN

ASEAN is working to establish a stronger environment, supported by

legislation and financing, to enable a culture of entrepreneurship, focused on
youths, persons with disabilities, women, and vulnerable and marginalised
groups. This will help to create a more inclusive society that is dynamic
and contributes to the social and economic and development of ASEAN
communities (KPI 31A, Table 37). Strengthened implementation of national
legislation, policies, and programs demonstrates the improved engagement
of entrepreneurship in AMS (KPI 32, Table 37).

Micro-, Small-, and Medium-Enterprises (MSMEs)

Micro-, small-, and medium-enterprises (MSMEs) are key contributors to the

economic and social development of AMS. MSMEs play an important role in
job creation and income generation, particularly for low-income populations
and the most vulnerable, such as youths, persons with disabilities, women,
and other marginalised groups. MSMEs contribute to fostering economic
growth, social stability, and developing a more dynamic Private Sector.

Many MSMEs are family-run businesses with one to three employees. The
majority of MSMEs operate in the informal sector, which limits access to
finance from formal financial institutions, such as banks–a factor that
restricts economic growth. As a result, MSMEs often rely on personal savings
and informal sources of finance to start or expand their businesses.

50
To establish a baseline for the ASCC Blueprint for KPIs 311 and 32, data
has been taken from the “2015 ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC)
Scorecard: Main Report”.

KPI 31: Increased access to finance, skill training, markets, and technology for MSMEs disaggregated
by youth, persons with disabilities, women, and vulnerable and marginalised groups, and as
demonstrated by:

KPI 31a: Availability and implementation of legislation, policies or programs for the promotion of
entrepreneurship skills for women, youth, elderly/older persons, and persons with disabilities.

and

KPI 32: Implementation of national legislation, policies, or programs in AMS dedicated to

supporting entrepreneurship among youth, persons with disabilities, women, and vulnerable and
marginalised groups.

Target:

KPI 31a: AMS can demonstrate, by 2020, increased access to finance and training for MSMEs,
disaggregated by gender, youths, persons with disabilities, and vulnerable and marginalised
groups, using the ASEAN Institutional Framework on Access to Finance for MSMEs.

KPI 32: AMS can demonstrate, by 2025, increased access to finance and training for MSMEs, using
the ASEAN Institutional Framework on Access to finance for MSMEs.

Baseline

Elderly/ People with

Women Youth
Older Persons Disabilities

Brunei ✓ ✓ ✓
Darussalam

Cambodia ✓

Indonesia ✓ ✓ ✓

Lao PDR ✓ ✓ ✓

Malaysia ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Myanmar ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Philippines ✓ ✓ ✓

Singapore ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Thailand ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Viet Nam ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Table 37. Availability of Legislation, Policies, or Programs Promoting Entrepreneurship Skills for Women,
Youth, Elderly/Older Persons, and Persons With Disabilities.
Source: 2015 ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community (ASCC) Scorecard: Main Report

51
 Participation of Youth and Adults in Formal & Non-Formal Education and
Training

A key driver for development in the ASEAN region is the participation of

youth and adults in formal and non-formal education and training. Formal
education and training is defined as education provided by systems of
schools, colleges, universities, and other formal educational institutions that
comprise a continuous ladder of full-time education, beginning at the ages
of 5 to 7 and continuing to 20 or 25 years old. In some countries, the upper
parts of this ladder are organised programs of joint part-time employment
and part-time participation in the regular school and university system.

Non-formal education and training is defined as organised and sustained

learning activities that do not correspond exactly to the above definition of
formal education. Non-formal education may take place both within and
outside educational institutions and cater to people of all ages. Depending
on the national context, it may cover educational programs to impart adult
literacy, life skills, work skills, and general culture.

52
KPI 31b: Participation of youth and adults (including those with disabilities) in formal and non-
formal education and training in the previous 12 months, by gender.

Target: Increased participation of youth and adults (including those with disabilities) in formal and non-formal
education and training in the previous 12 months by gender, as per baseline year.

Baseline

Year Baseline
Brunei 2014 Both gender average: 1.53
Darussalam No data for females in UIS database. However, if 1.53 is average and the male average
is 1.48, then the female average should be 1.58 and male: 1.48
Cambodia - N/A
Indonesia 2014 Both genders average: 0.76
Female: 0.68
Male: 0.84
Lao PDR 2017 Both genders average: 0.7
Female: 0.68
Male: 0.72
Malaysia - N/A
Myanmar 2015, Both genders average: 2.13 (2015), 0.35 (2017)
2017 Female: 2.14 (2015), 0.32 (2017)
Male: 2.12 (2015), 0.39 (2017)
Philippines - N/A
Singapore 2015 Both genders average: 56.62
Female: 52.92
Male: 60.38
Thailand 2016 Both genders average: 0.46
Female: 0.50
Male: 0.41
Viet Nam 2015 Both genders average: 0.17
Female: 0.13
Male: 0.20

Table 38. Participation of Youth and Adults (Including Those with Disabilities) in Formal and Non-Formal
Education and Training in Last 12 Months, by Gender.
Source: UNESCO
http://tcg.uis.unesco.org/4-3-1-participation-rate-of-youth-and-adults-in-formal-and-non-formal-education-
and-training-in-the-previous-12-months-by-sex/
http://data.uis.unesco.org/index.aspx?queryid=3441

Youth Not in Education, Employment or Training

The share of youth not in employment, education or training (youth NEET rate)
serves as a broader measure of potential youth labour market entrants than
the youth unemployment rate. It includes discouraged youth workers as well
as those who are outside the labour force due to disability and engagement
in household chores, among other reasons.

53
 The NET rate is associated with the potential to address a broad range of
vulnerabilities among youth. It touches on unemployment, early school
leaving/drop out, and labour market discouragement. These are all issues that
warrant important attention by AMS, as young people are adversely impacted
by economic crises. The NEET rate is an important measure contributing to
SDG 8, promoting sustained, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth, full
and productive employment and decent work for all.

KPI 31c: Proportion of youth (aged 15-34 years), including those with disabilities, who are not in
education, employment or training (NEET).

Target (Proposed by Baseline Team): Lower share of NEET youth as compared to the baseline.

Baseline

Baseline 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Brunei Darussalam 17.1963 N/A N/A 19.9661 20.7159 20.0919
Cambodia 0.0626 N/A N/A 6.0904 N/A N/A
Indonesia 22.3542 22.9189 22.4792 21.4487 21.7076 20.4927
Lao PDR N/A N/A N/A 42.0752 N/A N/A
Malaysia 12.7700 N/A 11.6899 11.8000 12.4700 N/A
Myanmar N/A 18.6198 N/A 17.3830 13.6012 14.9269
Philippines 23.3483 22.8426 22.2227 21.6986 19.8901 18.7626
Singapore 3.5999 3.5999 4.0999 4.5 4.3000 3.5999
Thailand 13.3243 13.5911 14.9658 15.5852 14.7818 14.8799
Viet Nam 9.7268 9.8840 9.4699 9.7019 8.3052 14.5800

Table 39. Proportion of Youth (Aged 15-34 Years), Including Those With Disabilities,
Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET).
Source: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/sl.uem.neet.zs

54
 g
n .or
.a sea
w
ww

@ A S E A N