APEC is currently facing a few challenges: APEC has been excessively focusing on regional economic integration, APEC tends to be marginalized due to increasing sentiments of regionalism in the region as shown by the increasing number of FTA/RTAs and lastly, APEC has no binding force on the member economies due to its nature of voluntarism. The speakers made suggestions to improve the above-mentioned challenges for the future of APEC. Dr. Alan Oxley suggested that APEC should follow the traces of OECD since OECD is the best model as a predecessor for APEC. We can expect to get enormous benefit and learn lessons from its similar structure. Next, Dr. Liao Shaolian suggested that there should be more emphasis on Ecotech improvement. Coherence and effectiveness should be considered in Ecotech in order to offer more support and benefits for developing member economies. Professor Neantro Saavedra-Rivano asked the conference to rethink the identity issue. The different economic status of member economies generates individual interpretation on the definition of APEC, which results in ambiguous definition and leads to identity crisis. Lastly, Dr. Jae-Sung Lee introduced and emphasized security issues, possibly the last pillar of APEC. As there are growing concerns of regional security, it is inevitable (editor’s note- what do you mean by inevitable?) to separate the economic cost and human security, especially after September 11. Moreover, as the importance of regional security increases, there are overlapping memberships among the regional cooperating agreements, such as ARF, ASEAN, ASEM, and so on. This phenomenon can actually help build cooperation in terms of regional security matters. APEC has evolved and is as relevant now as it was in 1989. Many of the reasons that drove its creation remain valid today. Economically, APEC is the most dynamic region in the world. With its reform, it will remain as essential and effective part of the regional and international architecture for economic cooperation.