Three of the world’s most climate-vulnerable nations are in Southeast Asia. Yet when critical decisions are made about global economics, finance, and sustainability, the region’s voice is largely absent. This silence is not due to insignificance, nor is it solely because doors are closed to the region. With a population of over 670 million, a fast-growing economy, and some of the planet’s richest biodiverse ecosystems, Southeast Asia matters. But unless it gets its seat at the table of global policymaking and standard setting, its peoples, economies and future will be shaped by decisions made without them.
Earlier this month, I had the opportunity to address the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors meeting. It was heartening to see sustainability placed squarely at the center of ASEAN’s agenda, a decision as pragmatic as it is essential. Our region stands at the frontline of climate and nature-related crises, which are not only deeply intertwined but also progressing faster than our collective responses.
The stakes are high. According to the WorldRiskIndex 2024, three ASEAN member states – the Philippines, Indonesia, and Myanmar – rank among the top 10 most at-risk from extreme natural events and climate impacts. Climate migration could displace millions. ASEAN possesses the third-largest labor force in the world, which may likely be impacted by heat stress and result in severe productivity losses across industries. Meanwhile, biodiversity loss is not just a conservation issue, it’s an economic and existential one.
And yet, the region holds immense promise. Eight out of 10 ASEAN nations have sufficient renewable energy potential to meet domestic electricity demand. Several could even become net exporters of clean power. With its young, tech-savvy population, growing green economy, and abundant natural capital, Southeast Asia is poised to lead in shaping sustainable futures.
But herein lies the paradox. Despite this significance, ASEAN’s voice remains underrepresented in key global policymaking and standard-setting institutions.
Out of the 25 executive directors at the World Bank, only one is from Southeast Asia; Europe has eight, Africa has four, and the Middle East and Latin America have two each. Out of the 24 executive directors at the International Monetary Fund, again, only one is from ASEAN.
The International Federation of Accountants, comprising more than 180 professional accountancy organizations around the world, which in turn represent millions of accountants in public practice, business, government and education, also has very low representation from ASEAN on its board of directors – one out of 23.
This pattern extends to newer, sustainability-focused bodies, too. The International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), a critical player in shaping the global corporate reporting landscape, currently has no ASEAN representation at all. This is even though ASEAN jurisdictions representing 85 percent of the region’s GDP have already signaled alignment with ISSB standards.
While boards play a fundamental role in governing and setting the strategic direction of these organizations, the balance and composition of their senior leadership teams in terms of regional understanding and exposure are equally important. The agenda, priorities, formulation of principles, policies and standards need to reflect the context and needs of its constituents. From my observation, a well-balanced regional perspective and representation is lacking.
This is not a criticism of the institutions themselves, many of which were established in a different era, under different geopolitical and economic conditions. But the world has changed, and so must the institutions that govern it. Global policymaking and standard-setting bodies need to ask themselves how they reflect the interests of newer major economic regions, sectors, and demographics.
Consider this: ASEAN accounts for 15 percent of the world’s forestland and nearly a third of its mangroves, seagrass, and coral reefs, which are critical to addressing both climate and nature-related disasters. The region is home to the Lower Mekong Basin, a biodiversity and agricultural powerhouse. Over 120 million people in the region depend on marine ecosystems for their livelihoods. But ASEAN is rarely at the table when global policies and standards are set.
It is important to appreciate that the impact of sustainability risks and opportunities that ASEAN may likely face will extend beyond the region. For example, if a key supplier in Southeast Asia that is part of a global value chain is disrupted by extreme weather, or if rice yields in the Lower Mekong Basin collapse due to ecological degradation, the ripple effects will not stay confined to the region. They will be global.
The voice of Southeast Asian businesses and governments (on behalf of their peoples), therefore, needs to be heard and to positively influence global policymaking and standard setting. This is not simply about being included, it is also about taking initiative. ASEAN must actively identify pathways to representation, nominate leaders with global expertise (of which we have many), and engage consistently with international bodies. Its voice is no longer a luxury; it is a necessity. The global table is set. It’s time ASEAN not only be invited to pull up a chair, but also step forward and take its seat.