ASEAN regionalism and cross-border research of Philippine higher education: the case of the University of the Philippines Diliman campus

ABSTRACT

By applying New Regionalism Approach, this paper delves into a rather unexplored area of regionalism (higher education) in a less investigated region (Southeast Asia) and state (Philippines). It treads through a relatively recent terrain of bridge-building between higher education and regionalism. Through in-depth interviews and document analysis, the exploratory study investigates how ASEAN regionalism has influenced the cross-border research of a Philippine university. Examining cross-border research sheds light on the dynamics of ASEAN regionalism as research is considered crucial to the formation of a knowledge society, which, in turn, serves as a potent tool to pursue regional and national objectives. The findings of this study demonstrate that the ASEAN higher education regionalism offers vital mechanisms to enhance the university’s research performance and its overall competitiveness in an era of globalisation. However, in spite of these advantages, there are ideational, political and material challenges that pose limits to this potential. The paper argues that cross-border research has not yet been robustly activated as a mechanism for regional and national pursuits, and that the points of collaborations and contestations are still to be addressed adequately to maximise the promises and mitigate the perils of ASEAN higher education regionalism.

KEYWORDS:

• Higher education regionalism
• higher education
• regionalism
• cross-border research
• ASEAN
• University of the Philippines

Acknowledgements

The author wishes to thank Prof. dr. Huib Huyse (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven) and Prof. dr. Jeroen Huisman (Ghent University) for their helpful comments on preparing the manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 Although there is a distinction made between old and new regionalism, Söderbaum (2018) cautions against strict separation, pointing out some continuities and discontinuities between the two.

2 See Appendix 1 for the list of documents analysed.

3 Producing quality research that is published in international peer-reviewed publications and presented in prestigious international conferences is encouraged by the university to make UP ‘more visible in the international research community’ (Paraan 2016, 79) and supported through three major funding programs and incentives: (1) grants for research and creative work, (2) compensation and recruitment packages to strengthen faculty profile, and (3) awards and incentive programs for outstanding researchers; see Paraan (2016) for more details.

4 To contextualise the respondents’ view, see: (a) UNESCO (2021, 684–685): Among middle-income countries in ASEAN, the Philippines has the lowest volume of publications, 2011–2019; the Philippines is the third lowest ASEAN Member State in terms of scientific publications per million inhabitants in Southeast Asia, 2011, 2015, 2019; (b) British Council (2015, 3): The Philippines has the lowest share of world papers among ASEAN countries included in the study (Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia, and Vietnam) although it is the second-highest in terms of Field-Weighted Citation Impact; (c) UNESCO (2014, 147–150): The Philippines has the lowest compound annual growth rate of its publications at 7.3%: Brunei Darussalam: 11.7%, Cambodia: 21.5%, Indonesia: 12.3%, Laos, 21.7%, Malaysia, 21.5%, Myanmar, 12.8%, Singapore, 10,2%, Thailand, 14.5%, and Vietnam, 15.5%; (d) Also see university rankings (see Appendix 2): Although these are problematic and skewed towards research-intensive universities, they signal prestige and reputation (Hazelkorn 2015) which, in turn, put universities like UP Diliman that have less resources for research in a disadvantaged position.

5 Although they include an ASEAN collaborator, many top collaborators of top-ranked universities within ASEAN are with universities outside the region (UNESCO 2021). Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam’s top five collaborators are all outside the ASEAN: Philippines – USA, Japan, China, UK, and Australia; Singapore – China, USA, UK, Australia, and Germany; Thailand – USA, Japan, UK, China, and Australia; Vietnam – USA, Japan, Republic of Korea, Australia, and China. Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia and Malaysia have an ASEAN member state(s) as a top collaborator: Brunei Darussalam’s 1st and 5th top collaborators are Malaysia and Indonesia, respectively, and 2nd–4th collaborators are China, UK, and Australia; Indonesia’s 1st collaborator is Malaysia but its 2nd–5th collaborators are Japan, Australia, USA, and UK; Malaysia’s 1st–4th collaborators are UK, India, Australia and USA, and Indonesia is its 5th collaborator. Cambodia’s top five collaborators are USA, France/Thailand (tie), UK, and Australia; Lao PDR’s 1st and 5th top collaborators are Thailand and Viet Nam respectively while 2nd–4th are UK, USA, and Australia. Myanmar’s top collaborators are Japan, China, Thailand/USA (tie), and UK. See UNESCO (2021) for further details.

6 This finding supports the point of Dhirathiti (2017) that research collaboration in the region has not been a success in the past 21 years.

7 Program calibration in this sense refers broadly to the establishment of quality assurance frameworks within ASEAN. This finding reflects one of the emerging themes covered in British Council (2018, 24), indicating that the area of quality assurance is one of the areas where there is extensive collaboration in ASEAN.

8 For instance, the Administrative Code of 1987 stipulates the following: ‘Recruitment and Selection of Employees.—(1) Opportunity for government employment shall be open to all qualified citizens’ (emphasis by the author) (Executive Order No. 292, 1987).

9 Times Higher Education for instance includes International Outlook – with international-to domestic-student ratio and international-to-domestic staff ratio – as one of the its five categories for assessing each university (Times Higher Education 2018).

10 In 2002, Philippine gross domestic expenditure on research and development (GERD) was only 0.14 (Department of Science and Technology as quoted in Gonzalez (2006)). In 2015 (the latest available data through UNESCO (2021)), Philippine GERD is 0.16 while other ASEAN member states included in the study allocate the following – Singapore: 2.18; Malaysia: 1.30; Thailand: 0.62; Viet Nam: 0.44; Cambodia: 0.12.

11 This aspiration for greater regional cooperation and joint action is evident for instance in the 11th Informal ASEAN Ministerial Meeting on Science, Technology and Innovation (IAMMSTI-11) held virtually on 17 June 2021. ASEAN welcomed two collaborative projects on COVID-19, the ASEAN COVID Genomics Project and ASEAN Anti-COVID-19 Sero-Surveillance Study. The Meeting also highlighted the role of a Platform for Science, Technology and Innovation Information Sharing, specifically on COVID-19 Research & Development ‘for exchanging the latest strategies and plans to deal with the pandemic in respective ASEAN Member States’ (ASEAN 2021, 2).