The 48th ASEAN Summit in early May, came at critical moment for Southeast Asia, a region hard-hit by the impacts of the Iran war. Themed “Navigating Our Future Together”, nobody appeared more invested in regional togetherness than the Summit’s host, Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. The Philippines was among the first to declare a national energy emergency; they also reduced the Summit itself from five days to two and took other cost saving measures due to the effects of the fuel-crisis.
Amid overlapping crises across the region, hopes were high for progress on several major initiatives: a Fuel-Sharing Pact, a South China Sea Code of Conduct, and the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement — yet the Summit closed with little resolved on any front.
Much of the commentary around the Summit has focused on ASEAN’s effectiveness and what its stumbles mean for a region navigating the pressures of great power rivalry. But beneath debates about geopolitics and regional cohesion lie deeper questions about Southeast Asia's economic resilience, social stability and development trajectory. So this week, we got three experts to unpack it.
We asked: “What are the key signals from the 48th ASEAN Summit for development in the region?”
The 48th ASEAN Summit in Cebu, Philippines, signalled a region increasingly aware that its future competitiveness, resilience, and stability will depend on how successfully it manages the twin transition toward greener and digital economies.
New 2030 renewable energy targets and the reaffirmation of the ASEAN Power Grid (APG) are encouraging. Existing analyses suggest the APG could reduce regional power capacity needs by up to 37 GW while increasing national GDP by as much as 4.6 percent. Yet, ASEAN still lacks a shared cost-benefit analysis—a critical gap for governments, development partners, and investors seeking clearer risk allocations and bankable financing arrangements. The benefits of this transition must also reach communities bearing environmental costs while seeing limited economic gains.
The same implementation gap is visible on climate action. Commitments to operationalise the ASEAN Centre for Climate Change, advance the Carbon Neutrality Strategy, and mobilise USD210 billion annually are significant. Yet, translating regional frameworks into local action remains difficult. On the digital front, progress under the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement points toward deeper cross-border data flows and interoperable payment systems. However, regional ambitions continue to outpace national delivery capacity.
One missed opportunity was greater discussion of the circular economy, which may prove ASEAN's most politically feasible green transition pathway. As consumption outpaces recycling capacity, investment in packaging, e-waste, agriculture, and textiles could generate significant employment while expanding regional trade opportunities. Agriculture and trade remain equally critical. While there has been progress to improve resilience and diversification, stronger support for smallholders and MSMEs—including digital market access and fintech inclusion—remains an unfinished priority.
ASEAN has largely solved the question of regional ambition. The harder challenge now is execution: mobilising finance, aligning institutions, and ensuring these visions and initiatives deliver tangible gains for over 670 million people in an increasingly uncertain world.
Shameer Khanal is a seasoned international development leader with two decades of field experience across Nepal, Laos, Kyrgyzstan, and Southeast Asia. As Director Cooperation Area for ASEAN at GIZ, he steers multi-donor portfolios spanning circular economy, climate resilience, and peacebuilding — with a signature knack for finance-by-design and the kind of integrated project logic that turns strategy into results. At the Lab, we value his deep regional instincts and his rare ability to make complex ideas land where decisions get made.
Can you imagine if Australians paid as much attention to a Southeast Asian Leaders summit as US politics? Me neither. But we should! Australia has a shared future with Southeast Asia, so ASEAN’s collective choices will always be consequential.
Last week’s ASEAN Leaders Summit in Cebu covered important issues for Indo-Pacific development and stability. The group had to decide how to deal with Myanmar, now nominally under civilian control. There were efforts to normalise relations between Thailand and Cambodia, following the border war that displaced at least 400,000 people. As ASEAN Chair, the Philippines continued to insist that it would meet a deadline of concluding a Code of Conduct in the South China Sea by end of the year. And for Timor-Leste, it was its first meeting as a full ASEAN member.
Most importantly, the meeting took place amidst an energy and food crisis. Projections show that the closure of the Strait of Hormuz will have a devastating effect on economic growth and human development across the region. All ASEAN members have had to take emergency measures with the Philippines declaring a state of emergency. In response, the Summit urged the adoption of an ASEAN Framework Agreement on Petroleum Security. While the proposal has been criticised for lack of detail, the attempt to create a unified response is notable. The question is whether it will be any more successful than during the last global shock of COVID-19.
This year Prime Minister Albanese has visited Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia and Timor-Leste. Perhaps this suggests how much attention we should be paying to what ASEAN Leaders discuss.
Melissa is an Honorary Fellow at the University of Melbourne Asia Institute and a well known leader of public policy think tanks like AP4D and AIIA. She is always fostering new collaborations to tackle complex foreign policy challenges. Her name is well-known in the development and foreign policy community alike. At the Lab, we admire Melissa for her generosity, humility and commitment to fostering young careers. We particularly like that she’s always up for a good laugh.
The ASEAN Summit signalled that regional development is inseparable from geopolitics. Trade, investment, supply-chain connectivity were emphasised as drivers of sustained growth in a more competitive and uncertain international environment. At this time of crisis, it is clear development is no longer a technical matter of poverty reduction or service delivery. It's about resilience, ensuring strategic and member states' capacity to navigate geoeconomic pressure without undermining regional unity.
There were three other signals I think are notable.
First, Timor-Leste’s accession represents a sign that ASEAN committed to regional inclusion and that its credibility depends on narrowing gaps between member states, not merely deepening integration among the strongest economies. For Timor-Leste, membership brings a development opportunity, potentially expanding access to enormous regional markets, institutional support and policy coordination. While Timor-Leste can promote trust, non-alignment and peaceful cooperation within the region.
Second, leaders see digital integration as central to economic growth, particularly through progress on the ASEAN Digital Economy Framework Agreement. Rapid digital expansion comes with risks, including to development—things like cybercrime, online scams, trafficking and illicit financial flows. All this highlights the need for real cybersecurity cooperation, law enforcement coordination, regulatory capacity and protection for vulnerable citizens.
Finally, given global events, energy security is also moving to the centre of ASEAN’s development agenda. The Summit’s focus on APAEC 2026–2030, diversified energy sources, renewable technologies, petroleum security, smart grid digitalisation and civilian nuclear energy shows that energy policy is now a strategic development issue. ASEAN’s new 2030 targets on energy intensity, renewable energy supply and renewable power capacity underline a wider ambition: to build an energy system more resilient to external shocks, more competitive for industry and better aligned with long-term climate and sovereignty objectives.
Nélson Belo is the Founder and Executive Director of Fundasaun Mahien, and Co-Founder of the Institute of Politics and International Affairs (IPIA), a Dili-based think tank focused on policy research and analysis. His public service career includes membership on Timor-Leste's State Supreme Council of Defence and Security and a posting as UN Political Affairs Analyst. Belo's research and writing spans security sector reform, justice, and governance in Timor-Leste, contributing to policy debates at both national and international levels. At the Lab, we admire Nélson's strategic combination of on-the-ground institutional building and rigorous policy thinking.
Niall Almond is a researcher, writer, and analyst with over a decade of experience working at the intersection of development, security, peacebuilding, governance and political economy. His primary experience is concentrated in Timor-Leste and the broader Indo-Pacific, where he has collaborated with civil society, government, multilateral organisations, donors and academia on a wide range of assignments. He is currently a Temporary Policy Officer for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ireland. At the Lab, we value Niall's sharp analytical rigour and his ability to turn research into meaningful impact.
