Abstract:Thailand has witnessed very uneven spatial outcomes of economic policies pursued in the country since the 1970s. This partially resulted from top‐down, place‐based approaches favoring the already prosperous regions. Therefore, in order to bridge the territorial economic divide in the country, an alternative policy framework is needed to promote bottom‐up, place‐based initiatives led by local governments. As a starting point, we surveyed a stratified sample of local governments in Thailand to document and class… Show more
“…In promoting national economic development, it is essential to note that local governments in Thailand do have a strong potential and desire to serve as an engine of national growth. Approximately 90% have already formulated and implemented some local economic development policies [26], even without the central government's budget allocations or technical support. This exemplifies the cultural practices of central government administration that have undermined local governments' decentralization process and fiscal autonomy.…”
We contrast place-based economic development strategies (PBEDS) in Thailand and in economically advanced countries. Through government initiatives, PBEDS focuses on improving economically underdeveloped areas' economic conditions. Thailand's PBEDS began in 1959 to develop the impoverished Northeast region, focusing on agricultural improvements. Since 1970, infrastructure and industrial development zones have been the main strategies to attract foreign investment for export-oriented growth. In economically advanced countries, the primary purpose of PBEDS is to reduce regional economic disparity. However, as they are implemented in Thailand, they increase regional inequality as development is concentrated in and around Bangkok. Thailand's latest PBEDS is the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC) project in three eastern provinces. The national government oversaw the EEC and granted the EEC Office special powers to streamline investment approvals, although local governments have no formal role. We contrast Thailand's top-down PBEDS with approaches in other countries that emphasize local decision-making and leveraging regional assets. Thailand's policies focus on national growth, while international evidence suggests that locally-led PBEDS more effectively address regional disparities and increase national output. Thailand should empower local governments, coordinate with them, and invest in poorer regions. At the same time, the EEC may promote growth, but its centralized approach risks misaligning with local needs. A balanced strategy accounting for local contexts could better lift Thailand economically.
“…In promoting national economic development, it is essential to note that local governments in Thailand do have a strong potential and desire to serve as an engine of national growth. Approximately 90% have already formulated and implemented some local economic development policies [26], even without the central government's budget allocations or technical support. This exemplifies the cultural practices of central government administration that have undermined local governments' decentralization process and fiscal autonomy.…”
We contrast place-based economic development strategies (PBEDS) in Thailand and in economically advanced countries. Through government initiatives, PBEDS focuses on improving economically underdeveloped areas' economic conditions. Thailand's PBEDS began in 1959 to develop the impoverished Northeast region, focusing on agricultural improvements. Since 1970, infrastructure and industrial development zones have been the main strategies to attract foreign investment for export-oriented growth. In economically advanced countries, the primary purpose of PBEDS is to reduce regional economic disparity. However, as they are implemented in Thailand, they increase regional inequality as development is concentrated in and around Bangkok. Thailand's latest PBEDS is the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC) project in three eastern provinces. The national government oversaw the EEC and granted the EEC Office special powers to streamline investment approvals, although local governments have no formal role. We contrast Thailand's top-down PBEDS with approaches in other countries that emphasize local decision-making and leveraging regional assets. Thailand's policies focus on national growth, while international evidence suggests that locally-led PBEDS more effectively address regional disparities and increase national output. Thailand should empower local governments, coordinate with them, and invest in poorer regions. At the same time, the EEC may promote growth, but its centralized approach risks misaligning with local needs. A balanced strategy accounting for local contexts could better lift Thailand economically.
“…Overly intense government supervision limits benefits to participants [37], while developing common goals and promoting stakeholder cooperation improve efficiency [41]. This requires a study of local approaches to adjust development strategies to suit their different environmental conditions [42].…”
Spatial restructuring and regional economic development are closely associated with sustainability. Despite the considerable literature on urbanization’s impact on sustainable economic development and urban expansion, few studies have explored how FDI-led spatial restructuring affects the sustainability from a local people perspective. To fill this gap, in-depth interviews were conducted with 516 residents of Aras special economic zones in Iran to assess the impacts and responses to economic shifts and spatial restructuring resulting from the Belt and Road Initiative since 2013. Using the DPSIR framework and sustainability index as an evaluation tool, we assessed the degree of sustainability and viable uplift at the regional level. The Genetic Algorithm (GA) was also utilized to determine optimal values based on local approaches. Results indicate that regional heterogeneity, excessive state pressure, and development imbalances impact the study area. The findings enrich the theory of sustainability and can guide the formulation of spatial restructuring, decision-making, and policies at different stages of regional development. In addition to financial progress, people-centered development planning using local approaches should be a component of the development of special economic zones.
Recognising the increasingly urban character of Southeast Asian politics, our introduction to this special issue explores the varied patterns of government–business relations found across the region. In some urban centres, businesses form collusive rent-seeking relations with mayors and other politicians; in others, they support governance reform and urban renewal. In beginning to unpick this variation, we briefly highlight what we can learn from literatures on national-level government–business relations and subnational politics – emphasising that local-level government–business relations commonly diverge in significant ways from those at the national level. Next, we survey the articles that follow through three themes: relative strengths of local government and business across distinct urban settings; changes over time in the presence and efficacy of development coalitions spanning government and business; and recent innovations in government–business ties in certain cities. We end by calling for increased research into this important but poorly understood topic.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.