There is much more to share from what ASEAN Member States and our partners shaped together over three days at the Regional Workshop on Strengthening Information Management for Humanitarian Mine Action in ASEAN in Jakarta.
But every journey needs a strong foundation.
The workshop began with a fundamental question:
Why does stronger information management matter for humanitarian mine action in ASEAN, and where can regional cooperation add value?
Across the opening sessions, participants moved from strategic framing to global perspectives and lessons for ASEAN, and then to the technical foundations of effective information management.
ARMAC opened the discussion by framing why regional information management matters in the ASEAN context. Building on this, GICHD guided participants through information management concepts, capacity strengthening and global lessons, before taking the discussion deeper into IMAS 05.10, the information cycle, stakeholder requirements, data quality principles and minimum data requirements, supported by an interactive group exercise.
One message became increasingly clear:
Effective information management is not simply about databases or technology. It is about turning reliable information into better planning, stronger coordination and better-informed decisions.
With this foundation in place, the workshop moved from principles and standards to ASEAN’s national realities.
Session 4: ASEAN Country Dialogue – IM Systems, Challenges and Priority Needs
Moderated by Mr. Shathel Fahs, Global Operation Manager, U.S Army– Humanitarian Demining Program, Session 4 placed ASEAN Member States at the centre of the conversation—not to compare national systems, but to learn from one another’s experiences, achievements, challenges and priorities.
The dialogue brought together:

Mr. Hean Kimsin, Director, Department of Socio-Economic Planning and Database Management, Cambodian Mine Action and Victim Assistance Authority (CMAA), who shared Cambodia’s experience in strengthening its national information management system, including IMSMA Core, national standards, interoperability, data governance and evidence-based planning.

Ms. Mekkhala Sihalath, Database Officer, Information Management Unit, National Regulatory Authority for the UXO/Mine Action Sector in the Lao PDR (NRA), who shared Lao PDR’s experience in managing an information ecosystem supporting operational coordination, reporting and evidence-based decision-making.

Ms. Nwe Nwe Win, Deputy Director, Department of Rehabilitation, Ministry of Social Welfare, Relief and Resettlement, Myanmar, who brought an important perspective on information management for victim assistance, mine risk education, programme coordination and service delivery.

Colonel Allan Manglugay Mangaser, Assistant Chief of Staff for Operations (SC3), Armed Forces of the Philippines, who shared the Philippines’ vision for strengthening its humanitarian mine action institutional framework and developing the information management foundations needed for a nationally coordinated and sustainable system.

Major General Pratuang Piyakapho, Deputy Director General, Thailand Mine Action Center (TMAC), who shared Thailand’s experience in sustaining and strengthening information management for operational coordination, quality assurance and national reporting.

Mr. Nguyen Van Cuong, Deputy Director General, Viet Nam National Mine Action Centre (VNMAC), who shared Viet Nam’s experience and priorities in modernizing national information management, including its transition towards IMSMA Core and stronger evidence-based planning and decision-making.
Different histories. Different operational environments. Different institutional arrangements. Different stages of information management development. Yet many shared priorities.
The dialogue highlighted common needs around data quality, interoperability, governance, institutional coordination, sustainable national capacity, modernization, knowledge management and stronger use of information for decision-making.
It also reinforced an important regional reflection:
Much of the experience, knowledge and practical solutions ASEAN needs already exist within ASEAN.
Across our Member States are valuable experiences in national standards, system modernization, institutional development, data governance, quality management, capacity strengthening and evidence-based decision-making. As reflected in the Session 4 discussion, many of the needs identified by one country already have relevant experience or lessons elsewhere in the region.
The opportunity, therefore, is not to replace national systems or create another layer of reporting. It is to connect what already exists, enable Member States to learn from one another, strengthen national capacities and identify where regional cooperation can add genuine value—while keeping national ownership at the centre. These opening discussions provided an important foundation for the next stage of the workshop—moving from shared experiences and identified priorities towards practical regional cooperation.
How can ASEAN build on what already exists nationally, connect our collective strengths, and shape a practical and sustainable approach to regional information management cooperation?
That conversation continued throughout the workshop—and there is much more to share.
National ownership. Shared knowledge. Stronger capacity. Regional cooperation. Better decisions.