International investment agreements are treaties aimed at attracting foreign investment by providing protection for such investment in the host country. Over 3,200 of such agreements exist globally, including over 300 by ASEAN countries. These agreements also give investors the right to directly challenge their hosts for compensation, in case of breach. They therefore significantly affect the host country’s space in the conduct of public welfare policy, which includes safeguarding the environment, public health or financial stability. This is why there has recently been a wave of critique against the current investment agreement regime. This policy-oriented article highlights current issues relating to international investment agreements. Drawing examples from treaty-making experiences of ASEAN countries, the article shows how these countries attempt to protect their public policy space, most prominently through the inclusion of safeguard clauses into these agreements. However, this does not completely eliminate risks of litigation, and some ASEAN countries have taken more extreme measures by disengaging themselves from such agreements.

This paper aims to explore whether the demand-oriented approach is able to explain the Thai economy from the 1980s onwards. In particular, it is going to empirically test whether the Balance of Payments Constrained Growth Model – the so-called Thirlwall’s law – can estimate Thai economic growth rates from 1980 to 2010. Not only does the paper prove that Thirlwall’s law can explain the Thai economy, but it also shows that the extended Thirlwall’s law is better than the original model. The results suggest that international trade is important for the economy because it can relax the balance of payments constraints and hence lead to economic growth. However, engaging in international trade is not equivalent to free trade. Policymakers need to keep in mind that resistance to free trade in order to develop some crucial industries may yield better long-run ability to meet export demand.

Globalization is typically understood as a process embracing complex economic, technological, socio-cultural and political forces which leads to progressive international integration at various levels. However, this increased interaction and interconnectedness experienced some significant drawbacks due to the global financial crisis (GFC). Although theory stresses that globalization stimulates the emergence of global financial markets leading to a significant transformation of global capital markets, the GFC clearly illustrated that the way forward is a bumpy one. Moreover, the substantial regulatory responses to the GFC led to the establishment of a complex new regulatory environment in the areas of banking and securities regulation in particular. Against this background, the contribution of this article intends to analyze this multiple transformation process by providing creative and provocative considerations on how adjustment screws could serve as a role model for future financial regulation.

The objective of this article is to analyze the development in mitigation of “financing constraints” in Thai banking system for both corporate and household sectors since the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997, which was a great turning point for the economic and banking system. The issue concerning financing constraints for business firms and households is considered as one of the most significant financial problems, causing the economy to be in a suboptimal equilibrium. This study found that the issues pertaining to financing constraints for business firms and household have been eased owing to several reasons. Banking innovations have been boosted due to changing competition landscape, and transformation of business goals under the restructuring of Thai laws and new economic conditions. Emergence of such innovations reflects right puzzles between risk management, operational procedures and IT, marketing and communications, as well as sales and service channels putting together, thereby assisting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the household sector to gain better access to financing, either in dimension of quality, quantity and pricing. This is in line with the empirical evidence indicating that the changing cost of borrowing for entrepreneurs during the recent period was partly due to the development of financial system, competition among Thai banks and development of business banking innovations. All these factors assisted small firms which have enhanced their potential to access financial capital, closing the gap between them and bigger firms. Nevertheless, the different economic and financial conditions leave the issue open-ended for all the concerned institutions in determining the “appropriate” policy design to encourage the corporate and household sectors to access credits from banks under appropriate terms and conditions without affecting the long-term economic stability for the future challenges.