The International Labour Organization as a Development Actor in Southeast Asia

Abstract

Typically, the International Labour Organization (ILO) is discussed in narrow terms with specific reference to its role in setting labor standards and the success or otherwise of its attempts to convince governments and employers to respect them. Yet over several decades it has also sought to engage in other aspects of the world of work including knowledge production and employment generation through projects more readily associated with international development organizations or even grassroots non-governmental organizations. Although there is by no means a consensus among either scholars or practitioners about the efficacy of these interventions, it is clear that the ILO has managed to embed its concept of ‘decent work’ not only into contemporary discourse concerning the rights of workers and the duties of employers and states to respect them, but also that around economic development. In this chapter, we discuss the extent to which the ILO can be understood as a development actor, how its emphasis on development has evolved over time, and how its development agenda has been pursued by means of various strategic initiatives and programs. Our analysis is grounded in Southeast Asia, which as a region is important in terms of size, population and economic weight but also because of the profound changes in political and economic status experienced by its 11 states. Not surprisingly, the ILO has played an important and sometimes controversial role in reshaping the legal and institutional framework of labor regulation in the post-authoritarian states of Cambodia, Indonesia, Timor-Leste and now Myanmar. Less recognized is the fact that this work is part of an integrated development agenda that has included measures to create opportunities for employment through large-scale development projects, entrepreneurship initiatives and deeper integration into global production networks, increasingly carried out in conjunction with influential member states, most notably the United States of America, and International Financial Institutions (IFIs) including the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. We illustrate these different aspects of the ILO’s role as a development actor with reference to these different post-authoritarian states. Particular attention is paid to Myanmar, where the ILO’s enactment of its development agenda has benefited both from its special status in that country but also from its experiments elsewhere in the region.