This autoethnomethodology study examined the integration of ASEAN instruments into policy and legislative research by a researcher in the Philippine legislature. Using personal narrative and systematic content analysis of my legislative research outputs, this study examined my perspective and practices as a legislative researcher and a student of ASEAN studies in incorporating ASEAN instruments into my policy research and the legislative processes. Three practices emerged from the analysis: benchmarking and peer comparison; comparing with other country models; and using international models for policy learning. While ASEAN often plays a peripheral role rather than a central one, it provides a useful comparative framework and policy reference. Reflecting on this analysis, I recognized ASEAN’s influence on my legislative research. The three practices show that I incorporate regional and international viewpoints to improve practicality, enriching legislative inquiry beyond just ASEAN instruments or objectives.
Despite extensive awareness of ASEAN, this research revealed a limited explicit reference to ASEAN in most of my knowledge products. In most of the products I analyzed, I made references to ASEAN for comparative analysis and policy learning, using either individual ASEAN member states or broader regional groupings. My experiences with the preparation and during the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Assembly (AIPA) General Assembly stood out as an exception: ASEAN became central to the task, illustrating how the requirements and expectations of the institution can influence the role of ASEAN in research work. My study further revealed that ASEAN is a reference point that appears in the periphery of policy discourse: as a benchmark when evaluating the country’s programs, or to compare the position of the Philippines in international standings.
