This paper is a comparative case study that examines the different ways that the European Union (EU) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) implement cultural projects. It contends that one key difference between the two is that the former emphasizes regional commonality in its activities, while the latter highlights the differences among countries. Applying a historical institutionalist perspective, this paper argues that the disparity between ASEAN and EU cultural projects can be explained by historical differences, which are manifested in ideas that were institutionalized when the two organizations were created. For example, since its establishment after the Second World War, the European bloc has been guided by the vision of creating an ever-closer union, which aligned policy preferences towards deepening integration among Member States. On the other hand, the Southeast Asian bloc has consistently maintained the primacy of state sovereignty and, as such, has favored cultural policies that allowed countries to showcase their respective national cultures.

中文翻译：

---

比较东盟和欧盟实施文化项目：历史制度主义分析

本文是一个比较案例研究，考察了欧盟 (EU) 和东南亚国家联盟 (ASEAN) 实施文化项目的不同方式。它认为，两者之间的一个主要区别在于，前者在活动中强调区域共性，而后者则强调国家之间的差异。本文运用历史制度主义的视角，认为东盟和欧盟文化项目之间的差异可以用历史差异来解释，这体现在两个组织创建时制度化的思想上。例如，自二战后成立以来，欧洲集团一直以建立一个更加紧密的联盟的愿景为指导，使政策偏好一致，以深化成员国之间的一体化。另一方面，东南亚集团一贯坚持国家主权至上，因此偏向于允许各国展示各自民族文化的文化政策。