6 Analysis from the East-West Center Following a global trend, many states in Southeast Asia have been making use of new technologies to implement digital identification management systems Reducing statelessness through naturalization. Given the scale of statelessness in Southeast Asia, prevention alone will not suffice to reduce it. One solution entails facilitating the acquisition of nationality either through naturalization or recognition of another robust legal status in the countries where affected populations reside. This is particularly true for cases of in situ statelessness, where the only viable solution is the acquisition of the nationality of the country in which people have resided for generations. Effective responses to situations of in situ statelessness, such as in Myanmar and Cambodia, have yet to be developed. Since 2015, Cambodia has embarked on a census among its Vietnamese minority population, although it remains unclear whether this will result in a pathway to Cambodian nationality or a new legal status with better protections than currently available.33 Vietnam provides an example for how situations of long-term refugee populations of undetermined nationality could be resolved. During the 1970s, hundreds of thousands of refugees fled from atrocities in neighboring Cambodia. More than 10,000 refugees, who were not considered nationals by the Cambodian government, remained in Vietnam. After living more than three decades in limbo, the Vietnamese government eventually considered naturalization for the remaining population. After the requirements for documentary proof were eased in 2010, these former displaced populations and their children have been able to acquire Vietnamese nationality.34 Conceiving inclusive digital identification systems. Following a global trend, many states in Southeast Asia have been making use of the spread of new technologies to implement digital identification management systems, often in combination with biometric identifiers.35 This has involved both new national-level digital ID systems, and also systems for specific purposes, such as the provision of social assistance or health services. Some examples in the region include Malaysia’s “MyKad” system for citizens and permanent residents (introduced in 2001) and Indonesia’s national ID system “e-KTP” that records in separate versions both citizens and other residents (launched in 2011). Coverage and eligibility for inclusion in such systems varies across the region. In Cambodia, for instance, most longterm Vietnamese residents remain excluded from the national ID system, although the country is now planning a more ambitious integrated population identification system. There is potential for these new identification systems to assist with expanding the reach of government services, as well as reducing abuse in service provision. However, there are also risks, especially when new digital identification systems are coupled with rules that make proof of legal identity mandatory for accessing rights and services. In contexts with discriminatory laws or practices, such an approach may risk intensifying exclusion from rights and protections for certain populations.36 Discussion and Outlook Statelessness and other legal identity problems remain a widespread problem in Southeast Asia. However, growing interest by states in ameliorating the problem is an acknowledgment of the detrimental effects such exclusion has on economic development, social cohesion, and stability. The initiatives and reforms undertaken during the past decade or so have led to the reduction of statelessness in some states. While the Philippines has thus far been the only state in the region which has aligned itself with relevant international legal frameworks, Thailand and Vietnam both show that determined government action is the key to resolution. However, enhanced efforts at identification are also making more affected populations visible. Persistent problems remain, especially regarding protracted situations of in situ statelessness­—often nurtured by longstanding social exclusion and discrimination, such as in Myanmar and Cambodia—and the continuous growth of intra-regional migration. Addressing these problems calls for upscaling many of the responses identified in this paper, including further awareness-raising to tackle deeply held views about identity and belonging, capacity development among officials and more generous naturalization programs for long-term resident populations without proof of nationality.