Charting ASEAN’s Path to AI Governance: Uneven Yet Gaining Ground
The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its member states’ innovation-friendly approach to artificial intelligence (AI) has been effective in advancing the region toward its goal of becoming a fully digital economy. The current framework aims to ensure that no country is left behind. However, the growing AI-related risks suggest the need for more binding regulations. It may be timely to review existing guidelines and assess which countries are technologically prepared to start implementing enforceable regulations. Singapore has the potential to serve as a governance benchmark, helping pave the way for a region-wide approach through alignment of regulations across ASEAN.
This could enhance the region’s credibility as a technological hub, protect individuals from bad actors exploiting legal gaps, and attract global investment by reinforcing ASEAN’s image as a trustworthy destination for AI development.
AI Regulation: The ASEAN Way
The AI boom of recent years has aligned with ASEAN’s ambition to become a digital economy and digital society by 2025. Yet its key document, the ASEAN Digital Masterplan 2025, makes no mention of AI across its 140 pages. This omission suggests that the potential of AI might not have been fully anticipated during the drafting process.
To catch up, ASEAN has taken an innovation-friendly governance approach. Following the introduction of more compulsory regulatory frameworks globally, ASEAN released the nonbinding Guide on AI Governance and Ethics for the entire region in February 2024. The guide articulates core principles—transparency, fairness, security, reliability, privacy, accountability, and human centricity—which seek to ensure that countries retain agency over AI-driven outcomes.
Its voluntary, adaptable framework enables countries to tailor governance to their specific contexts and degrees of AI readiness. Given the varying levels of domestic AI infrastructure and capabilities across Southeast Asian nations, this nuanced approach allows for greater flexibility to preserve room for AI innovation.
Domestic AI Playbooks
Given ASEAN’s overall innovation-friendly approach, it is unsurprising that no member state has enacted dedicated, binding AI legislation to date. Southeast Asian countries rely on soft law instruments, such as ethical guidelines, governance frameworks, national roadmaps, and readiness assessments to guide the responsible development and deployment of AI.
Brunei
Brunei is actively developing a governance framework rooted in innovation-led principles. It has published its own Guide on AI Governance and Ethics, similar to ASEAN’s approach, which is technology- and sector-neutral. A formal national AI strategy is also in progress under the country’s 2025 Digital Economy Masterplan.
Vietnam
Vietnam’s AI governance emphasizes digital transformation policies and uses binding sector-specific regulations. The National Program for Digital Transformation promotes AI use in various sectors, including education and public administration.
Malaysia
Malaysia is shaping its AI regulations through a combination of ethical, legal, and infrastructure frameworks. The National AI Roadmap (2021–25) promotes responsible AI use across key sectors such as healthcare and smart cities.
Thailand
Thailand’s approach incorporates national planning, legislative development, and sector-specific initiatives. Its National AI Strategy and Action Plan (2022–27) aims to position Thailand as a regional AI hub.
Indonesia
Indonesia relies on adapting existing laws rather than creating new regulatory frameworks for AI. The National AI Strategy (2020–45) sets long-term goals across ethics, talent, and infrastructure.
The Philippines
The Philippines has introduced targeted regulations to steer the responsible growth of AI technologies. The 2021 AI Roadmap aims to boost digital infrastructure and workforce skills.
Myanmar, Cambodia, and Laos
These countries remain in earlier stages of AI governance and do not have dedicated national AI strategies or agencies. Coordinated action, both nationally and regionally, is needed to ensure they are not left behind in AI innovation.
The Curious Case of Singapore
Singapore is recognized as Asia’s smartest city, with its leadership in innovation distinguishing it from its Southeast Asian peers. Given its strong technological foundation, Singapore is well-positioned to lead in shaping binding AI regulations. Its current approach remains flexible and principles-based, balancing innovation and ethical use.
However, Singapore risks setting a negative example in the region if it does not advance binding AI regulations. The country has the capacity to set a regional benchmark for responsible AI governance, which could enhance its reputation as a trustworthy technological hub and attract more international investment.
Conclusion
Southeast Asia’s AI governance reflects a region adapting regulation to its diverse political, economic, and developmental realities. ASEAN’s use of soft law through voluntary guidelines and ethics-based principles shows a pragmatic, innovation-friendly approach. This flexible model enables countries at different stages of development to participate in AI development.
While these efforts are important, once readiness is in place, bolder steps toward binding regulation to address risks should follow. The establishment of firm legal standards could provide essential guidance for the public, private, and academic sectors, helping the region stay resilient amid rapid technological change.
