Shaping Governance Narratives through Divergent Migrant Labour Statistics within ASEAN: Evidence from Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand

Abstrak

While ASEAN increasingly relies on migrant labour, the numbers used to describe that reliance are anything but neutral. Yet little work shows how states actively choose among competing datasets to craft regional policy narratives. This article examines how Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand deploy different migrant-labour statistics in ASEAN forums to legitimise control, minimise perceived dependence, or claim policy success. Our objective is to unpack the politics of “strategic counting” and its consequences for regional coordination. Methodologically, we build a discrepancy matrix (2010–2024) comparing UN DESA International Migrant Stock, ILO–ILMS labour indicators, ASEAN Statistical Yearbooks, and national administrative figures; we then code how specific numbers are cited in AFML/ALMM documents and related government statements. We find consistent gaps; often tens of percentage points are driven by definition (foreign-born vs. non-resident vs. registered workers), timing, and inclusion of irregular migrants. Governments repeatedly select the figure that best supports a preferred storyline of competence or limited exposure. These results imply that data harmonisation is not a mere technical fix but a governance challenge: without transparent metadata and agreed definitions, ASEAN cooperation on migrant protection will continue to rest on incompatible evidence bases.