The R3A Route represents a collaborative initiative involving the governments of Thailand, Laos, and China aimed at bolstering connectivity along the North-South Economic Corridor, as a vital component of the Greater Mekong Subregion Economic Cooperation Program (GMS). Since its inception in 2008, this endeavor has substantially enhanced the logistical framework between Thailand, Laos, and China. However, it has also revealed an imbalance in the benefit distribution of value chains within the tourism industry. One of the fact that, local stakeholders in each country often leverage their home country’s advantages, leading to the exploitation of counterparts with lower capacity in other nations. This unfair utilization goes against the initial intentions of fostering collaboration among these countries. Given China and its development as a starting point for tourism and its popularity among tourists traveling this route, this study provides a comprehensive analysis of China’s policy and insights of its influences on R3A tourism development in Laos and Thailand. The study constructs a content analysis with an umbrella of stakeholder analysis based on reliable data and is cross-verified through data triangulation. The findings lead to recommendations aimed at making Thai-Lao-Chinese tourism cooperation more sustainable and effective.

Indonesia has experienced problems with refugees in recent years. Despite not being a state party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, Indonesia is still subject to the principle of non-refoulement as a norm that binds all states (jus cogens). This principle is regulated in Presidential Regulation Number 125 of 2016 and Regulation of the Director General of Immigration of 2016 as basic regulations for handling refugees. However, the principle of non-refoulement is not applied absolutely to refugees in Indonesia. The government is in a difficult situation and seems hesitant in taking a legal political stance, to accept or expel the presence of refugees. This research article aims to evaluate the application of the principle of non-refoulement in Indonesian national law. The findings of this research show that the state cannot apply the principle of non-refoulement to refugees in an absolute manner as it will have an impact on national security stability. The legal position of the Presidential Regulation and the Regulation of the Director General of Immigration contradict other regulations, potentially leading to norm conflicts and legal uncertainty. This regulation cannot be applied in all situations. Although this regulation is binding, its application is highly dependent on the needs and urgency of the country. The principle of non-refoulement does not apply to refugees if their presence threatens national security or disturbs public order in transit countries, especially for Indonesia, which has not ratified the 1951 Refugee Convention. Normatively, the application of this principle can be limited by the Constitution, Immigration Law, the theory of state sovereignty, the theory of primordial monism of national law, the principle of selective immigration policy, the principle of immigration essence, and the principle of immigration traffic control. This provision emphasizes that the application of this principle is relative and can be limited based on state sovereignty and national security interests.

When COVID-19 hit all the Asian countries, Indonesia issued various laws and regulations. This study investigates these laws that do not improve the country’s ability to increase its adaptive structuration and foresight-oriented investment. It analyzes all the new laws, which should be based on the requirements of both concepts. It considers that all the laws are intended to defend the Government of Indonesia’s economic performance (GoI). It means that all the established regulations were built on the premise that they only focused on national economic preservation, especially economic growth. In other words, this study stated that the absence of regulations containing adaptive restructuration and foresight-oriented investment would decrease the state’s agility. This absence potentially impacts Indonesia to zcategorize the future as the state’s political failure. It shows evidence that Indonesia could not enforce and empower its structural potential. This study indicates that Indonesia made no foresight-oriented investment to cover the disbursed costs due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Future policies should be improved by including growth opportunities to enhance Indonesia’s agility. This agility could finally be achieved when all the laws issued by the GoI do not contain the praxis.

The paper reports on the results of research on the institution of public-private partnerships in the field of implementation of state youth policy, particularly through socially important social youth projects, including social-entrepreneurial. The study explores social projects that enjoy the full range of support from all subjects in public-private partnerships: the state represented by public authorities, business structures, non-profit organizations, and youth. The authors highlight that the infrastructure of youth policy in the implementation of social-entrepreneurial youth projects needs to be changed conceptually. There is a need to establish comprehensive creative and professional spaces that shape young people’s personalities and practice a future-oriented model of organizing collaborative social projects.