Thai Labour NGOs during the ‘Modern Slavery’ Reforms: NGO Transitions in a Post‐aid World

Abstract

This article explores how domestic NGOs responded to new opportunities that emerged during the 2015–2020 ‘modern slavery’ labour reforms in Thailand's seafood sector. The analysis takes place against the background of civil society transitions in a ‘post‐aid’ setting. Like NGOs in other middle‐income countries, the Thai NGO sector has struggled to remain relevant and financially viable in recent decades, as international donors have withdrawn from countries with steadily declining poverty rates. As a result of the ‘developmental successes’ of Thailand, the NGO sector needed to rethink its strategies. Examining the modern slavery labour reform process provides an opportunity to understand the strategic choices available to NGOs in the face of several important phenomena: the emergence of new actors such as international philanthropic donors; the growing influence of the private sector in governance matters; and the need for NGOs to balance multiple strategic alliances. The article draws on in‐depth interviews to explore narratives of Thai labour NGO adjustments during the period of the modern slavery reform. The study contributes to a better understanding of how NGOs in post‐aid countries transition and adapt to changing circumstances by embracing new roles as ‘sub‐contractors’ for emerging global philanthropic donors and as ‘partners’ of private corporations.

Towards Shrimp and Prawn Welfare in the Wild‐ Caught Fishing Industry: A Global Review and Recommendations for Research and Policy

“…These workers can be kept in chains or even murdered (Hodal and Kelly 2014;Seo 2018). Local police and politicians are often considered ʺbusiness partnersʺ by traffickers (Hodal and Kelly 2014;Kadfak et al 2023). Many people forced to work aboard Thai fishing vessels are Rohingya men fleeing ethnic cleansing in neighbouring Myanmar (Sylwester 2014;Ruden 2017).…”

“…In contrast, there are many developing countries that struggle to enforce regulations (see country-bycountry analysis below). The enforcement of existing regulations may reduce the number of shrimp caught while also potentially mitigating overfishing and improving human wellbeing (Gillett 2008;Suuronen et al 2020;Kadfak et al 2023). Beyond the inherent value of regulatory capacity in helping to mitigate poverty, environmental degradation, and human rights violations (Tran Thi Phung Ha 2012;Sylwester 2014;Seo 2018;Suuronen et al 2020;Stringer et al 2022), developing a strong regulatory regime may open up further opportunities for targeted shrimp welfare policies in the coming decades.…”

“…The major importing jurisdictions were USA (27%), Japan (22%), China (15%), Myanmar (7%), and the Republic of Korea (6%) (FAO 2023). The USA and the EU (which imports a small volume of Thailandʹs shrimp and a higher volume of other seafood products) have exercised their economic influence to encourage the Thai government to introduce labour reforms (Stringer et al 2022;Kadfak et al 2023).…”

“…These fisheries tend to be characterised by low levels of technological sophistication and comparatively high levels of poverty. Examples include the Vietnam coastal communities, where shrimp fishing is considered a ʺlast resortʺ occupation and poverty is high (Tran Thi Phung Ha 2012), and Thailand, where there have been widespread reports of modern slavery aboard fishing vessels (Kadfak et al 2023). These fisheries tend to be multi-species, and fishers will sell the shrimp alongside other invertebrates and finfish that are also caught (Thanh Viet Nguyen 2011;Cinco et al 2015;Wong and Yong 2020).…”