The principal means by which countries can seek to exit or to supplement the benefits of their version of the EAEM is to increase domestic consumption.
Such methods are in fact contradictory to the EAEM, which offers subsidized costs to investors and hence depresses the need for adding value.
The willingness of certain states to inflict educational regimes of limited efficacy as a means of restricting the ability of the working classes to contemplate radical political change might be compromised by this and states will need to consider (preferably transparently and on a democratic basis) whether they are willing and capable of leaving the EADM as well as the EAEM.
All of these factors are subject to change in the transition from EAEM to a different approach to economic growth.
Second, there are changes to the pattern of comparative and competitive advantages across the region and this impacts upon the nature of the EAEM as enacted in Southeast Asia and manifested in the form of opening and closing of facilities and changing migration patterns resulting from them.