Search results

One of the main issues encompassing Na-Oogst (NO) tobacco agribusiness is farmers' dissatisfaction toward manufactured tobacco selling price. In general, a little trust is built among NO tobacco agribusiness actors. This condition can be seen from the lack of partnership offered by tobacco companies. Efforts to socialize the partnership cannot be implemented optimally because an assumption about the farmer groups' less role exists. Ideally, farmer groups are institutions that should be able to connect farmers as NO tobacco producers and product recipients companies. These conditions certainly contribute to the achievements of overall tobacco agribusiness. Based on the description, this study aimed at: (a) describing institutions involved in NO tobacco agribusiness, (b) identifying roles of the institutions and coordinations formed in NO tobacco agribusiness chain, and (c) analyzing the effectiveness and institutional strengthening efforts to support better tobacco agribusiness chain. The results showed (i) there were institutions in the level of farmers, traders, and companies contributing to the supply chain of NO tobacco, (ii) direct and indirect roles of institutions affected the coordination among agribusiness actors, and (iii) the effectiveness of institutional coordination has not met the expectations and strengthening efforts at key institutions, especially the government, are needed.

This paper analyses the important of regional investment agreements for promoting international trade in ASEAN countries. To visualize the above idea, this work will explain the roles of regional investment agreements to serve investment, trade facilitation and to protect regional investment interests. It is argued that regional investment agreements can serve as a vehicle for dialogue, coordination on and to response regional issues including regulatory harmonization, infrastructure development, and collaboration among members to facilitate investment. The paper shows how regional agreements will commit to eliminate barriers on substantially trade and investment, create positive welfare gains, the productivity and stimulus to growth in the region. This paper also analyses the effect of the establishment of an ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) by 2015 to the regional investment policies. AEC aiming at transforming ASEAN into a single market and production base with a highly competitive economic region, equitable economic development, free movement of goods, services, investment, skilled labor, and freer flow of capital, will likely accelerate regional integration and cooperation in the investment sectors fully integrated into the international trade. Then, this work demonstrates the implementation of regional investment cooperation into the formal instruments/agreements of investment policy architecture promoting and protecting cross border investment among nationals of ASEAN member states, such as ASEAN Investment Guarantee Agreement (IGA), the ASEAN Investment Area (AIA) and ASEAN Comprehensive Investment Agreement (ACIA). However, it is realized that the ASEAN members may resist and protest against the regional investment agreements because of conflicting their national interest. The paper proposed that the regional inv stment agreements need to be strengthened by harmonization and structural adjustment due to the member's resistance and protest. This idea may spark challenge because each member has fundamental differences on the nature and character of legal and economic systems reflecting different political systems, economic and social cultures in accordance with the philosophy of life values and national interests of each country. To overcome the challenge, this paper argues that ASEAN member countries need to unilaterally and collectively come up with structuring trade and investment policy harmonization to move ahead and reap the benefits from regional investment agreement as a common tool for contesting their interest in international trade. In addition, pre agreed flexibilities to accommodate the interests of all ASEAN countries may eliminate the problem.

Global surveys indicate that massive disillusionment with economic globalisation, upheld by the liberal order, which is ignored by governments in European, Asian and Latin American countries, has paved the way for the ascent of nationalist forces. This trend is also visible in Indonesia. President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) has consolidated power against opponents who exploit nationalist, populist and religious causes. On the international front, Jakarta has been actively engaged within a variety of multilateral organisations where liberal institutionalist agendas are enforced. Therefore, it is worthwhile considering the influence of internal and external environments on Jokowi's economic policy which is getting increasingly nationalistic. This article argues that nationalist economic practices have emerged as the Jokowi government's response to domestic and international challenges which can have an impact on its perceived legitimacy. The discussion proceeds in five steps. To begin, this article presents a comparative perspective to understand the position of Indonesia in the developing international political economic context. This is followed by an overview of the definition of economic nationalism and its connections to domestic politics and foreign relations. The third section is about the Indonesian government's efforts to put economic nationalism into effect. The next two parts investigate how the inside and outside dynamics generate Jokowi's inward-looking policies. The conclusion emphasises what can be learnt from the Indonesian case.