This paper considers the problems surrounding the implementation of road infrastructure plans in a policy perspective. As the main pillar of regional connectivity, road networks provide the link across national markets, foster strong and sustainable economic growth, help meeting people’s basic needs, and promote trade and competiveness. It is argued that planning, implementing, and managing good transportation infrastructures poses a series of challenges that require competence, good governance, and the availability of funds. Such problems become more complex when road projects encompass different states and become transnational. The regional dimension of connectivity involves both opportunities and risks; a cooperative attitude by all parties is viewed as the best ingredient to achieve a positive balance. Since most countries cannot still rely on domestic resources, the paper stresses the role of virtuous policies in directing capital flows from abroad towards the infrastructural projects of Southeast Asia.

Intra-regional trade serves as a key growth engine for East Asian economies. Accompanying the rapid growth of bilateral and intra-regional trade ties, the East Asian economies are becoming increasingly connected and interdependent. Infrastructure connectivity plays a crucial role in bridging different areas of the East Asian region and enabling them to reap the full socioeconomic benefits of economic cooperation and integration. Nevertheless, further improvement of infrastructure in the region faces major challenges due to the lack of effective mechanisms for coordination and dialogue on regional integration through funding infrastructure projects, as well as the serious trust deficit among member states that has arisen from the on-going territorial and historical disputes.

Japan’s investment in the domestic construction industry has fallen to less than half its peak in 1992. Given the country’s declining population, Japanese construction companies must go global to remain profitable. To what extent the Japanese government and Japanese companies can contribute to meeting the growing infrastructure needs in the region is unclear as Japanese companies have long been operating primarily in Japan. The Japanese government has in recent years passed a series of new laws that encourage private sector participation in financing, building and operating public infrastructure. Through involvement in such public projects, Japanese companies have developed the skills and technologies to build a variety of infrastructures that are resilient to natural disasters and adaptable to various geographical conditions and social and economic development. But the major challenge for Japanese companies is to transform their business model drastically from one that relies on the domestic market to one that contributes to the social and economic development of third countries.

The increase in world carbon emissions is always in line with national economic growth programs, which create negative environmental externalities. To understand the effectiveness of related factors in mitigating CO₂ emissions, this study investigates the intricate relationship among macro-pillars such as economic growth, foreign investment, trade and finance, energy, and renewable energy with CO₂ emissions of the high gross domestic product economies in East Asia Pacific, such as China, Japan, Korea, Australia and Indonesia (EAP-5). Through the application of the Vector Error Correction Model (VECM), this research reveals the long-term equilibrium and short-term dynamics between CO₂ emissions and selected factors from 1991 to 2020. The long-term cointegration vector test results show that economic growth and foreign investment contribute to carbon reduction. Meanwhile, the short-term Granger causality test shows that economic growth has a two-way causality towards carbon emissions, while energy consumption and renewable energy consumption have a one-way causality towards carbon emissions. In contrast, the variables trade, foreign direct investment, and domestic credit to the private sector do not have two-way causality towards CO₂ emissions. The findings reveal that economic growth and foreign investment play significant roles in carbon reduction, which are observed in long-term causality relationships, while energy consumption and renewable energy are notable factors. Thus, the study offers implications for mitigating environmental concerns on national economic growth agendas by scrutinizing and examining the efficacy of related factors.

Purpose: This research aims to examine the influence of intellectual capital disclosure and the geographical location of universities on the sustainability of higher education institutions in Southeast Asia. Design/methodology/approach: This research is quantitative and uses secondary data obtained through the annual reports of universities that have the Universitas Indonesia Green Metric Rank. This research uses two stages of data analysis techniques, namely the content analysis stage to determine the number of Intellectual Capital disclosures and the hypothesis testing stage. The analysis tool uses the SPSS version 23 application. The population of this research includes all universities in Southeast Asia that are included in the UI Greenmetric World University Rankings. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling technique, which resulted in 86 analysis units of higher education institutions in Southeast Asia. Findings: The research results prove that the geographical location of universities has a negative and significant influence on Universitas Indonesia Green Metric’s performance in Southeast Asia and human capital has a positive influence on UIGM’s performance in Southeast Asia. However, the structural capital and relational capital components do not affect the UIGM performance of universities in Southeast Asia. Originality/value: The originality of the research is the use of higher education sustainability variables with UIGM proxies and modified IC indicators for universities and geographical areas that have not been widely used to see whether there are fundamental differences in the disclosure of intellectual capital for higher education institutions in Southeast Asia.