Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The adoption of the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights has marked a global shift toward holding corporations accountable for human rights violations. Yet, in Southeast Asia, the regional implementation of these norms remains limited. Despite ASEAN’s rhetorical support for human rights, its economic integration agenda led by the ASEAN Economic Community has largely excluded binding human rights obligations. This gap raises a central question: Why has ASEAN failed to embed business and human rights norms into its regional economic governance? This article argues that ASEAN’s fragmented approach is driven by the political economy of its member states, in which economic growth and market liberalization are prioritized over human rights enforcement. Institutional commitments to sovereignty, noninterference, and consensus further entrench this dynamic by shielding powerful business sectors from scrutiny. Drawing on a structural analysis of ASEAN’s institutional design and member state interests, the study explains the region’s persistent accountability gaps. It contributes to debates on regional human rights governance by showing how economic imperatives and elite interests continue to undermine efforts to institutionalize the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights in Southeast Asia.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Karim et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: