54
Strategic Review of Thailand’s International Development Cooperation Report for United Nations Joint Team in International Cooperation Mark Miller and Werapong Prapha 8/19/2013
Strategic Review of Thailand’s International
Development Cooperation Report for United Nations Joint Team in
International Cooperation
Mark Miller and Werapong Prapha
8/19/2013
2
Contents List of Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................ 3
1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 10
1.1 Setting the Scene ........................................................................................................................ 10
1.2 Objective and methodology ........................................................................................................ 11
2. Defining Thailand’s Approach to International Development ............................................................ 12
3. Policy Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Overarching Government Policies .............................................................................................. 15
3.2 International Cooperation Strategies ......................................................................................... 18
3.3 Strategic Framework for ‘International Development Cooperation’ ......................................... 19
3.4 Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................................................ 20
4. Analysis of Institutional Arrangements for Working with External Partners...................................... 22
4.1 Bilateral Cooperation .................................................................................................................. 22
4.2 Regional and International Cooperation Frameworks ................................................................ 23
4.3 International Organisations ........................................................................................................ 24
4.4 Partnerships with Domestic Stakeholders .................................................................................. 25
4.5 Recommendations: .................................................................................................................... 26
5. Institutional Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 28
5.1 Coordination of Thailand’s Development Cooperation .............................................................. 28
5.2 Information Management .......................................................................................................... 32
5.3 Monitoring and Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 34
5.4 Development of Organisational Capabilities and Staff Development ........................................ 36
6. Financing Analysis ............................................................................................................................... 38
6.1 Official Development Assistance ................................................................................................ 38
6.2 Other external capital flows ........................................................................................................ 44
6.3 The National Budget and International Development................................................................ 45
7. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................... 47
References .................................................................................................................................................. 49
Annex 1: List of Key Interviewees ............................................................................................................... 51
Annex 2: Participants in Workshop on Development Cooperation, 20 June 2013 .................................... 52
3
List of Acronyms
ADB Asian Development Bank
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
BOT Bank of Thailand
CLMV countries Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar and Vietnam
EGAT Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand
EXIM bank Export-Import Bank of Thailand
GDP Gross Domestic Products
GIZ Deutche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit
IDC International Development Cooperation
IOs International Organisations
JICA Japan International Co-operation Agency
KFW KfW Entwicklungsbank (the German development bank)
LIC Lower Income Country
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MIC Middle income country
MOA Ministry of Agriculture
MOD Ministry of Defence
MOFA Ministry of Foreign Affairs
MOI Ministry of Interior
MOL Ministry of Labour
MONRE Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
MOPH Ministry of Public Health
MOT Ministry of Transport
NEDA Neighbouring Countries Economic Development Cooperation Agency
NESDB National Economic and Social Development Board
NESDP National Economic and Social Development Plan
NGO Non-governmental Organisation
NHSO National Health Security Office
ODA Official Development Assistance
ODI Overseas Development Institute
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
OECD-DAC OECD Development Assistance Committee
OHEC Office of Higher Education Commission
TICA Thailand International Development Cooperation Agency
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNESCAP United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
UNFPA United Nations Population Fund
UNJT-IC UN Joint Team on International Co-operation
UNPAF United Nations Partnership Framework (2012 – 2016)
4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This strategic review offers a timely opportunity to look at whether Thailand’s existing approach to
international development cooperation is meeting the evolving development needs of both Thailand
and its partners. In order to do this, the strategic review examines Thailand’s development policy, the
institutions in place to implement that policy and also the financing that is available for its
implementation.
1) Policy Analysis
The Royal Thai Government has two overarching statements of national policy: the Policy Statement of
the Council of Ministers and the 11th National Economic and Social Development Plan. Both of these
documents outline a number of areas where international cooperation will be used to meet Thailand’s
own development needs, including infrastructure, trade, green growth, foreign policy, security and human
capital development. At the sector level, a number of ministries and agencies have also developed
strategies on how international cooperation can contribute towards the achievement of their specific
sector policy objectives.
TICA has also developed a draft strategic framework on how international cooperation strategies can
be used to more effectively contribute to development. Many of the strategies outlined are in keeping
with latest international thinking on effective development cooperation. Bilaterally, it stresses that its
support for development should be demand-led and based on principles of partnership. Reference is
made to the Paris Declaration on Effective Aid. Multilaterally, it outlines Thailand’s to serve as a regional
knowledge hub and work as a problem solver to tackle regional and global problems. Thailand has also
many partnerships agreements in place with other bilateral donors and multilateral organisation with
whom Thailand provides triangular cooperation.
There is not however, at present an overarching policy on international development which articulates
Thailand’s goals for development support in terms of the gains to socio-economic development of other
countries. Different actors have different views on how they can best meet the interests of their partners
and the interests of their citizens through their engagement in international development. Thailand’s
development cooperation is likely to be more effective if it articulates its own distinctive view on its clear
goals for international development that can guide dialogue with partners on how it can address specific
development challenges on a long-term sustained basis.
It is also important that Thailand comes to common agreement on the parameters of how it wishes to
define its contribution to development. Although views differ on what constitutes ‘international
development cooperation’ in Thailand, it is often understood in relatively narrow terms as aid that is
provided to support countries less wealthy than Thailand.
By focusing only on initiatives eligible to be recorded as aid, there is a risk that the government
overlooks other international cooperation strategies that do not necessarily require the transfer of
resources, but can serve to achieve its objectives on international development. This might include
5
influencing policy in partner countries based on Thailand’s own knowledge of development, building
regional consensus on development issues or facilitating knowledge exchange. Given Thailand’s likely
financial constraints in providing aid, these may be relatively cost effective alternatives to influencing
international development. Thailand also risks underestimating its contribution to development in the
region by understanding international development cooperation solely in terms of the size of aid
provided. Both the public and private sectors in Thailand are already playing a significant role in the
region’s development through a much broader range of mechanisms, both financial (e.g. foreign
investment and remittance flows) and non-financial (e.g. removal of tariffs for LDC imports)
2) Institutional Arrangements for Working with External Partners
Bilateral Cooperation. Demands for Thailand’s bilateral support emerge from a wide range of institutions.
While this multi-layered relationship can potentially be a great strength in building strong relationships,
there are very real risks that if support is uncoordinated that demands for cooperation may not be aligned
to Thailand’s capacity to effectively provide such support. Where support is uncoordinated, there is also
a risk that the number of projects and areas of cooperation proliferates. Effective bilateral technical
cooperation also depends upon long-term strategic engagement and planning. While for certain
countries, technical cooperation might reasonably serve primarily as a tool of diplomacy, for key strategic
partners there should be clear strategies in place as to how technical cooperation will meet the capacity
needs of partners.
Cooperation frameworks for policy advocacy. Cooperation frameworks are seen as an opportunity for
Thailand to advocate and foster consensus on certain policy goals. As part of the ASEAN cooperation
framework, for example, agreements will be put in place on trade liberalization policy, on financial
integration and the movement of labour. At the international level, the Thai government is working closely
with UNESCO in the education sector to promote ‘Education for All’ initiative. The effective use of
cooperation framework depends upon having clearly articulated policy positions in line with the domestic
policy agenda.
Cooperation frameworks for knowledge exchange. Thailand is actively seeking to promote itself as a
regional knowledge hub. If these ambitions are to gain support and recognition in an international
development context, there is a need to understand what might be some of the skills and knowledge gaps
constraining development in the region; what existing mechanism are in place to support regional
knowledge exchange; where Thailand has the capacity, personnel and facilities to fill those gaps; what the
international development community has learnt about effective peer-to-peer learning.
International Organisations. Increasingly Thailand is partnering with international organisations in
triangular frameworks to supplement the financial contributions of these organisations with its technical
know-how and knowledge to share on its development successes and challenges. There are a number of
examples of where Thailand is actively promoting its own goals for regional development and leveraging
the resources of international organisations (both financial and technical) to support the achievements
of these goals. At present, such initiatives are isolated and so there is a need to share learning of how
such initiatives can be set up effectively. As demand for triangular cooperation grows, there may be
6
benefits in the government reviewing the strategic alignment of partners with Thailand’s own
international development objectives.
Domestic Partnerships. Strengthening partnerships between government and other domestic
stakeholders is viewed by the government as a key strategy to promote development. There are a number
of existing examples where government has partnered with domestic organisations, for example national
NGOs or private consultancy firms, to effectively promote its development cooperation agenda. Domestic
development partners may also have specific skills that leave them better placed to provide technical
support than the government.
Institutional Arrangements for Improved Ways of Working within Government
Coordination of high-level development policy. It the government is to a present a more consistent
government-wide approach to development, there may be benefits in appointing a cross-government
committee to advise on the planning of international development policy and its ongoing implementation.
This could be done through a new committee or building it into the mandate of an existing committee.
Coordination of development finance and technical cooperation. At a country level, Thailand is not
currently able to present and overall package of support being provided for development. By improving
the exchange of information between NEDA, EXIM bank and TICA of planned aid commitments, the
government would be better placed to present a unified package of support to country partners.
Inter-ministerial Coordination. There is a recognition that international cooperation could be made
considerably more effective by ensuring that the efforts of individual departments within ministries are
better coordinated. The Ministry of Public Health has set up a committee on international cooperation
with Directors General present from each department that could serve as a useful model. This type of
committee have been used as a means to integrate strategies, share information and identify where
greater value can be added through department working together. These committees are supported by
bureaus for international cooperation acting as a secretariat.
Recording Official Development Assistance (ODA). There is a perception within line agencies that existing
reporting on ODA is primarily for external stakeholders rather than to inform government development
policy. This impression is reinforced by the difficulty ministries face in accessing timely information. There
is also a lack of clarity and agreement on what should be recorded as ODA. Focusing information
management solely on financial contributions has the potential to underestimate Thailand’s contribution
to technical cooperation; as much of the support that Thailand provides for development cooperation is
not directly financed by the Thai government. Further, the size of financing of activities does not
necessarily equate to the impact those activities have and so consideration should be given recording
outputs as well as inputs. The processes for recording ODA could also be clarified both between ministries
and within ministries.
Development Cooperation Learning and Knowledge Management. From the interviews conducted, it is
clear that much experiential knowledge of international development cooperation exist, but no formal
mechanisms with which to record and share that knowledge are available.
7
Monitoring and Evaluation. Similarly, TICA’s strategic framework has emphasised the importance of
putting in place monitoring and evaluation systems. While some monitoring systems are in place for
investment projects financed through concessional loans, no formal mechanisms exist for the systematic
capture of evaluation of technical cooperation programmes.
3) Financing Analysis
Official Development Assistance (ODA) as a percentage of GDP is low and declining: in 2012, it was
recorded as THB1.1 billion (USD37 million equivalent) which is approximately 0.01% of GDP. As a
proportion, this is lower than certain middle-income countries (for example China and India), but
consistent or higher than others (for example Malaysia, Argentina and Chile). In 2011, 42% was channelled
towards international organisations, 31% for concessional loans and grants for infrastructure projects and
26% for technical cooperation. Support for technical cooperation crosses a wide number of sectors, but a
larger share is utilized in social sectors with education, health and social development combined
accounting for 48% of the technical cooperation funds. Lao PDR has received the largest share of bilateral
funds as a result of continued support from NEDA for infrastructure projects.
Foreign direct investment and remittance flows to Thailand’s neighbours are considerably greater than
ODA. As of 2011, Lao, Cambodia, Myanmar and Viet Nam received an estimated USD1,898 million in
foreign direct investment, USD 394 million in remittance flows and USD 21 million in ODA. Government
policies that affect the size and quality of foreign investment can influence foreign job creation and
government revenues. Labour and migration policies that affect remittance flows can also affect
household incomes in recipient countries.
The national budget supports international development cooperation both through investments it
provides to institutions such as NEDA and TICA responsible for administering a large part of the
government’s ODA, although there is no dedicated programme in the budget on ‘international
development cooperation as such’. However, the budget does have a number of strategic priorities such
as mobilizing foreign policy and international relations, the promotion of ASEAN integration and
promoting regional transport and information connectivity, where domestic investments are part of
efforts to support regional and international development with mutual benefits for both Thailand and its
partners.
4) Key Recommendations
Recommendations for setting the overall strategic direction of development cooperation
It is recommended that the Thai government develops a master-plan that articulates a common,
government position on what its objectives are in the field of international development
Parameters should be agreed on what tools it wishes to consider with regard to the achievement
of the goals set out in the master plan. Consideration should be given to looking beyond aid
instruments.
8
The master-plan should serve as a guide to support the prioritisation of technical cooperation in
fewer, larger programmes.
The master-plan should then act as basis for
o Developing sector-based strategic plans in key priority sectors
o Developing country strategies for priority countries that outline opportunities where
Thailand’s own international development strategy is aligned to country needs.
o Reviewing the alignment of international and domestic partners and Thailand’s own
strategy to identify priority partners for supporting the achievement of the development
goals.
A situation analysis could also be undertaken that reviews how Thailand’s ambitions to be a
knowledge hub could address specific sector and country development priorities and the
potential partners to support those ambitions.
Recommendations for institutional structures and coordination
Consideration should be given to forming a cross-ministerial grouping to oversee the
development and implementation of a cross-government international development policy. This
could involve creating a new commission or building into the mandates of existing relevant
committees (e.g. the Economic and Technical Cooperation Committee).
Large ministries would also benefit from similar commissions in order to support inter-ministerial
policy coordination.
At a country-level, mechanisms could be put in place to better coordinate country strategies and
plans for key partners.
If TICA is to ensure that proposed technical cooperation is aligned with the strategic priorities of
ministries, then consideration should be given to identifying certain sector focal points who can
liaise with relevant agencies.
Recommendations for organisational capabilities and capacity
There are a number of systems improvements that could be put in place relatively easily that would
support improved effectiveness of existing programming. These include:
Information management
Information should be exchanged on planned support for development cooperation from key
agencies (e.g. NEDA, OHEC) as well as recording ODA retrospectively. This would lead to improved
coordination and also enable Thailand to present a full package of coordinated support to
partners.
The information received from ministries should be organized in such a way that it shows cross-
government support for technical cooperation in sector-based and country-based reports to
better communicate internally and with partners a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to
development cooperation.
9
Clear guidance should be developed on those activities that should be recorded in the database
on development cooperation. This guidance should encourage recording more comprehensive
information on the cooperation activities undertaken including triangular cooperation
arrangements financed by third parties.
Focal points for information management should be identified in each ministry and a small
number of specialists identified in TICA to support and train focal points on recording information.
Monitoring and Evaluation
It would be useful to develop an annual report that reviews the progress of major technical-
cooperation projects against a number of agreed metrics (with country partners) that could then
be used in conjunction with the development of future plans and strategies.
Thailand should conduct some evaluations of its flagship technical cooperation programmes
including, for example, the scholarship programme.
Thailand should invite its priority partners to provide feedback on its overall country
contributions at formally recorded annual review meetings.
Knowledge management and training
Much of the knowledge that the government has on development cooperation is not formally
captured. It would be useful to put in formal structures to capture information on:
o Latest international development trends,
o The development needs of specific countries,
o Guidelines on good practise for both bilateral and triangular cooperation
Thailand should proactively use its international partners to support it to address its existing skills
gaps in technical cooperation
10
1. Introduction
1.1 Setting the Scene
Thailand has a relatively successful track record of development. As of 2011, the country reached Upper
Middle Income Status with GNI almost doubling and considerable reductions in poverty levels over the
previous ten years.1 Although, Thailand continues to face some development challenges of its own, the
Royal Thai Government has for a number of years been working to strengthen its support for international
development. In particular, Thailand has a track-record of actively promoting the socio-economic
development of the neighbouring “CLMV” countries (Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Viet Nam) and
technical cooperation has also extended to both the wider region and beyond. In order to administer this
support, in 2004, a Royal Decree was promulgated to establish the Thailand International Development
Cooperation Agency (TICA) under the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to promote international development
cooperation between Thailand and its partners. In 2005 the Neighbouring Countries Economic
Development Cooperation Agency (NEDA) was also established as an independent public body
responsible for financing investment projects in neighbouring countries.
The environment in which Thailand is offering support for international development has changed
markedly since the establishment of these organisations. The “CLMV” countries to which Thailand has
traditionally provided financial and technical support are rapidly growing. Although there are still large
income differentials with these countries, incomes with Thailand are slowly converging. These countries
are graduating from lower-income country (LICs) to middle income country (MICs) status and are
increasingly looking to reduce their dependence on traditional aid financing. They have significantly
greater choice for accessing financing and technical support than would have been the case even ten years
ago. The development challenges these countries are facing is also evolving with significant drops in
absolute poverty levels, but often growing inequality, environmental pressures and continued challenges
in job creation. The rapidly changing needs of Thailand’s partners require that the government re-
evaluates the relevance of its contributions to their development.
The onset of the ASEAN Economic Community in 2015 will also see much closer political and economic
integration in the region, bringing with it both development opportunities and risks. Traditional models
of development cooperation that characterize rich countries providing resources to poor countries are
seemingly less relevant to Thailand, who is positioned as a middle income country in a regional grouping
with neighbours as diverse as Singapore and Myanmar. Thailand’s policies on trade, investment, regional
governance, technology, migration, defence and the environment will influence not only Thailand’s
development but also that of its regional partners. Threats to development including public health crises,
environmental pressures, economic crises or security threats will often require trans-national responses.2
1 http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2011/08/02/thailand-now-upper-middle-income-economy 2 See for example the Centre for Global Development’s Commitment to Development Index that looks at how a range of policies affect countries beyond their borders http://international.cgdev.org/publication/commitment-development-index-2012
11
Increasingly, Thailand’s contribution to development will not just be judged by the aid that it provides,
but also how its policies help or impede addressing issues that cross national borders.
The international landscape for development is also changing. Emerging donors are developing their
own distinctive approaches to development that do not conform to traditional models. Traditional
distinctions made between aid and other forms of commercial finance are viewed as redundant in this
framework with commercial investment, grants and technical support often being ‘bundled’ in a single
package of support.3 There is also growing appreciation of the value of south-south cooperation in human
capital development: it is clear that countries value the practical experience of learning from countries,
which have recently faced many of the same development challenges. Increasingly, many of the most
pressing development challenges, such as climate change and tax evasion, are also recognised as global
problems that require global responses. Many traditional bilateral donors and international organisations
are being forced to re-evaluate their roles in this changing landscape. As international organisations
reconsider their operations and approaches in the region, the demands on Thailand for technical
cooperation and support are likely to grow. Without prioritisation, Thailand’s own capacity to provide
such assistance will become even more stretched.
1.2 Objective and methodology
Given these trends, this strategic review offers a timely opportunity for the Thai government to reassess
what Thailand’s role on international development might be, as a middle-income country in a fast
growing and changing region and how it can most effectively play that role. In order to do this, the
analysis looks at five key research questions:
How is Thailand’s approach to international development defined?
How is Thailand’s policy on international development articulated in its policy framework?
How can Thailand work more effectively with external partners to better serve the development
needs of partner countries and Thailand?
How can Thailand improve the internal institutional mechanisms for coordination, management
of information and monitoring and evaluation of development cooperation?
Is Thailand’s development financing guided by existing policy and institutional responsibilities?
The research for this report is based on a combination of sources including:
1. A series of interviews and discussions held with personnel from the Royal Thai Government (see
Annex 1)
2. Comments and contributions at a workshop held on development cooperation (see Annex 2 for
list of participants)
3. Available and relevant Royal Thai Government policy documents
4. Data compiled by TICA on official development assistance
5. Relevant international literature on effective development cooperation
3 ODI (2012)
12
2. Defining Thailand’s Approach to International Development
Different development actors have different perspectives on both the objectives of development
cooperation (economic growth, human development, job creation etc.) as well as the processes and
tools that best promote those objectives. For many years, the predominant focus of multilateral agencies
and traditional bilateral donors has been on poverty reduction and the related achievement of the
Millennium Development Goals. In order to achieve these objectives, these agencies have predominantly
focused on the role of aid and how it can be used more effectively to achieve targeted goals (see for
example the 2005 Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness).
Many emerging donors are bringing their own distinctive approaches to development, both in terms of
the motivation underpinning cooperation and also the tools of cooperation being used. For example,
given its ongoing development needs, China recognizes as its primary responsibility to contribute to the
development of its own population. The Government’s White Paper on Development articulates first how
they will use domestic and foreign policy to achieve their development goals, and second how its approach
to cooperation will lead to mutual development benefits and prosperity of other countries.4 China also
focuses on a different set of instruments to achieve its goals. While many traditional donors have focused
on the role of Official Development Assistance, the Chinese government would see commercially
motivated market-based loans, technical support and grant money as an overall package of development
cooperation. In this paradigm, terminology such as ‘ODA’ and even ‘international development
cooperation’ would be deemed largely foreign concepts.
These different perspectives on development are also reflected in the national institutional structures
that oversee development. In China, where policy for international development is rooted in the national
development strategy, overall oversight for development policy and financing is with the State Council,
the highest policy authority. Given the strategy is focused primarily on supporting mutual growth and
investment; development financing is largely administered by the Ministry of Commerce. This is in
contrast to the United States and Australia for example, where development policy is administered by
USAID and AusAID respectively whose names clearly suggest a strong focus on aid.
Defining Thailand’s own Development Model
The draft strategic framework on International Development Cooperation of TICA (in keeping with its
institutional alignment to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs) is predominantly focused on technical
cooperation and aligned to goals on strengthening international relations. For example, the vision
stresses the importance of international recognition from working as an effective development partner.
The framework emphasizes an approach to development that looks in broad terms at how the
4 For example “China should develop itself through upholding world peace and contribute to world peace through its own development. It should achieve development with its own efforts and by carrying out reform and innovation; at the same time, it should open itself to the outside and learn from other countries. It should seek mutual benefit and common development with other countries in keeping with the trend of economic globalization, and it should work together with other countries to build a harmonious world of durable peace and common prosperity. This is a path of scientific, independent, open, peaceful, cooperative and common development” (http://english.gov.cn/official/2011-09/06/content_1941354.htm)
13
government can use international cooperation strategies to promote mutual benefits for Thailand and
other parties. The framework, for example, refers to Thailand’s potential role as a knowledge hub as well
as a ‘problem solver’ for regional and international problems. It also stresses principles of horizontality
and working with partners, rather than in terms of donor and recipient.
For most parties interviewed in Thailand, international development cooperation was perceived in
more narrow terms about providing technical assistance to improve social welfare in countries less
wealthy than Thailand. ‘International development cooperation’ (IDC) was perceived by many as distinct
from ‘international cooperation’ (IC) with IDC understood as benefitting poorer countries, while IC is
understood to be about using international relations to promote benefits for Thailand. As such, during
research, it was suggested by certain actors that they had resources available for promoting international
cooperation, but not international development cooperation, which was deemed the responsibility of
TICA.
In contrast to the approach taken by China, for example, economic cooperation, is seen as enhancing
Thailand’s economic prospects, but is not perceived as ‘development’ cooperation. Development is
understood predominantly as a charitable transaction. The involvement of the private sector in
development would be understood in terms of its corporate social responsibility, rather than its potential
to create jobs through market-based foreign direct investment. Similarly, EXIM Bank, who support Thai
companies to invest in neighbouring developing countries are not considered as part of Thailand’s
development model unlike in China or Korea.
Underneath an umbrella of economic cooperation, NEDA’s vision is to provide ‘economic development
cooperation’. This is primarily done through the provision of concessional loans to neighbouring countries
for infrastructure projects; however, technical assistance is also provided in relevant economic sectors
including trade facilitation and infrastructure development.
Figure 1: Thailand's existing ‘development model’
High level foreign policy and international
economic cooperation
International Cooperation
Cooperation strategies of line ministries that
support international relations (e.g. OHEC’s promotion of ASEAN
International Development Cooperation (‘Technical
Cooperation’ administered by TICA)
Economic Cooperation
Economic Development Cooperation
(Concessional Loans for Infrastructure)
(NEDA)
Cooperation strategies that
support economic cooperation
objectives (e.g. international trade
14
Conclusions and Recommendations
For Thailand to effectively influence the development of other countries, there needs to be a clear and
unified position on Thailand’s ‘development model’, in other words what Thailand is looking to achieve
through its development cooperation and the tools being used to achieve those goals. At present in
Thailand, it seems there is not a consistent understanding of the objectives of what development
cooperation might be and how it should be defined.
Given this lack of clarity, it would be useful for Thailand to develop a comprehensive master-plan on
international development that articulates clearly Thailand’s own distinctive model of how it is
supporting international development and the benefits for both Thailand and partners. This should aim
to provide a unified view that draws from existing overlapping strategies for economic cooperation,
international cooperation and international development cooperation. While there are some emerging
characteristic features of Thailand’s approach (e.g. strengthening regional connectivity, positioning itself
as a regional hub of learning etc.) more could be done to clearly outline why international development
matters for Thailand and how it tends to support it.
15
3. Policy Analysis
3.1 Overarching Government Policies
The Royal Thai Government has two overarching statements of policy, from which all government
strategies are drawn: the 11th National Economic and Social Development Plan prepared by the National
Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) and the Policy Statement of the Council of Ministers
that is developed by the Office of the Prime Minister. These are considered in turn.
a) The 11th National Economic and Social Development Plan
Thailand’s own approach to development influences the development of other countries: most
markedly that of its immediate neighbours, but also countries in the wider ASEAN region and beyond.
Thailand’s planned approach to national development is most recently articulated in the 11th National
Social and Economic Development Plan (NESDP), which runs from 2012-2016. The development plan is
based on six strategic pillars:
o Creating the just society
o Developing a lifelong learning society.
o Strengthening of the agricultural sector and security of food and energy.
o Restructuring the economy toward quality growth and sustainability.
o Creating regional connectivity for social and economic stability.
o Managing natural resources and the environment toward sustainability.
Most obviously, the strategic pillar for the creation of regional connectivity is outward looking and has
implications for both the development of Thailand, but also its neighbours in the region. Strategies for
improving regional cooperation cut across a wide range of sectors (see Box 1)
Box 1: Strategic pillars for improved connectivity require cooperation across a number of sectors
Cooperation on infrastructure networks
Develop connectivity in transport and logistics systems under regional cooperation frameworks.
Cooperation on trade and investment
Develop investment bases by improving competitiveness in the region.
Accelerate utilization of free trade agreements currently in effect.
Use Thailand as a business base for foreign investors in the Asian region
Cooperation on green growth
Promote constructive international cooperation to support economic growth in ethical and
sustainable ways
Cooperation on international governance
16
Constructively engage in regional and international cooperation frameworks to provide alternatives
in foreign policies in the international arena.
Support non-profit international organisations for regional development.
Strengthen domestic development partners at the community level.
Cooperation on human capital development
Prepare for the ASEAN Economic Community by developing human resources in all economic sectors.
Cooperation on international security, disaster management and public health
Contribute to the international community’s efforts to improve the quality of life by fighting against
terrorism, international crimes, drug trafficking, natural disasters and epidemics.
Cooperation on migration
Create economic regional partnerships regarding human capital development and labour migration
However, other strategic pillars in the 11th NESDP that are less evidently outward looking also have
implications beyond Thailand’s borders. A key component of Thailand’s planned restructuring of its
economy is to ‘utilize science, technology, innovation and creativity’. One example that is cited is that ‘it
is necessary to improve productivity in the agricultural sector and to enhance value creation through
innovation and green production processes’. Productivity gains and technological improvements in
agriculture can affect both prices of agricultural products and agricultural processes outside of Thailand.
In addition, Thailand’s approach to ‘managing natural resources and the environment toward
sustainability’ can also affect the lives of the poorest in both the region and beyond. If Thailand is able
to successfully implement its strategy to ‘shift the development paradigm and redirect the country to a
low carbon and environmentally friendly economy’ then Thailand’s contribution to climate change to
which the world’s poorest are particularly vulnerable will be less marked. How Thailand uses its natural
resources also affects regional environmental public goods, like the Mekong, and those whose livelihoods
depend on these resources.
a) The Policy Statement of the Council of Ministers
The way in which Thailand cooperates with other countries, regional communities and international
organisations affects Thailand’s development and international development. An abridged version of
Thailand’s policy on Foreign Affairs and International Economic Cooperation is outlined in Box 2.
17
Box 2: Abridged version of Thailand’s Foreign Policy as articulated in the Policy Statement to the National Assembly http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/policy/9868-Foreign-Policy.html
1) Expedite the promotion and development of relations with neighbouring countries by enhancing cooperation between the public sector, private sector, people and the mass media in order to cultivate mutual understanding and instil closeness among all sectors which will lead to expanded cooperation in the areas of economics, trade, investment, tourism promotion, transportation
2) Create unity and promote cooperation among ASEAN countries in order to realize the goal of creating an ASEAN Community by 2015 in the economic, socio-cultural and security areas.
3) Take on a creative role and promote the national interest in international organisations to address all transnational issues that affect human security.
4) Strengthen cooperation and strategic partnership with countries, groups of countries and international organisations that play important roles in global affairs in order to boost confidence in Thailand,
5) Encourage people-to-people contacts with foreign countries, as well as promote a positive image and technical assistance with developing countries so that people, governments and the international community will have positive attitudes toward the Thai people and Thailand.
6) Promote public awareness and understanding of border issues and global changes that affect Thailand so as to forge consensus in the formulation and implementation of foreign policy.
7) Support ‘People Diplomacy’ to safeguard the interests of Thai nationals,
8) Utilize regional connectivity within the ASEAN region and sub-regions in order to expand the economic base in terms of production and investment,
9) Coordinate the work of government agencies overseas in order to carry out foreign affairs efficiently, effectively and with high quality.
10) Promote close cooperation with Muslim countries and Islamic international organisations to create a correct understanding that Thailand is working on resolving the issue of the Southern Border Provinces,
At the heart of Thailand’s International Cooperation policy is a wish to increase Thailand’s international
standing in order to be better placed to meet the development needs of Thai society. For example, the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs articulates its vision as:
To serve as a leading organisation in enhancing Thailand’s capacity to have a dignified
international status, by playing an honourable and active role, in the field of political
stability and security, economic and social development, and ensuring that Thai society
can best benefit from globalization.5
In addition, there are also a number of policy objectives in the government’s stated economic policy that
also emphasize the mutual benefits of closer economic integration. Relevant policy strategies are outlined
in Box 3.
5 http://www.mfa.go.th/main/en/policy/9867-Vision-&-Mission.html
18
Box 3: Examples of economic cooperation strategies that have development benefits beyond Thailand’s borders
3.2.5 Encourage expansion of Thai entrepreneurs’ investment in neighbouring countries that are able to supply labour and factors of production to bring forth economic prosperity for Thailand and the region.
3.2.8 Promote and expand integration in the areas of economics, trade, investment and finance to enhance mutual benefits under cooperative frameworks and international trade agreements
3.3.4 Expedite the establishment of Special Economic Development Zones in areas with high potential, with particular attention given to border provinces, in order to promote trade, marketing, investment, employment and sourcing of raw materials from neighbouring countries, making full use of ASEAN’s regional connectivity.
3.2 International Cooperation Strategies
At the sector level, a number of public bodies are articulating how international cooperation strategies
can contribute towards the achievement of the policy objectives set out in high-level overarching
government policy documents. For example, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) has a clear strategy in place to
work towards the achievement of improved financial integration, articulated as a priority in the Policy
Statement of the Council of Ministers. One way the BOT is doing this is through actively promoting the
presence of Thailand’s commercial banking sector in the region. The main objectives of the Bank’s
assistance are to support Thai banks in opening branches overseas, to ensure policy compatibilities, and
to support the co-development of the financial sector in neighbouring countries. These initiatives have
clear benefits for Thailand, but also can potentially support financial inclusion.
The BOT is also working with the Ministry of Finance to support Thailand’s neighbours to access
Thailand’s capital markets. For example, Lao PDR issued bonds worth THB1.5bn to institutional investors
in Thai capital markets for the first time in May 2013. While this initiative supports the development of
Thailand’s domestic bond market, it also provides a channel to intermediate regional savings for regional
investments.
The Ministry of Education is another good example of a line ministry with a clear direction on
international cooperation. The Office of Higher Education Commission (OHEC) aims to provide
‘internationalization’ and ‘regionalization’ to Thailand’s higher education. OHEC has a strong emphasis on
building an ‘educational hub’ in ASEAN and is pursuing an active role in international cooperation with
other ASEAN countries to exchange and share knowledge about higher education quality and standards.
The Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives (MOAC) has also prepared an international cooperation
strategy with a view to supporting the achievement of Thailand’s goal to be promoted ‘as the Kitchen
of the World’ both in terms of agricultural products it produces. The strategy came as a result of
extensive consultation with various stakeholders, including strong involvement from the private sector.
The vision of the strategy is to build confidence of Thai food and agricultural products and support
international cooperation on agriculture for sustainable results. Under this vision, the MOAC highlights as
one of their key strategies to develop strong international cooperation practices with other countries and
international organisations. It also aims to support the exchange of knowledge and technical expertise
between countries.
19
Common to all of these cooperation strategies are clear linkages to the national policy goals outlined in
the overarching policy statements. Not all of these cooperation strategies will necessarily be of benefit
to Thailand’s development partners. There are however areas within these strategies where there are key
areas of common interest and mutual benefits. For example, Lao’s issuance of Thai Baht denominated
debt has enabled the Lao government to diversify its debt holdings, while enabling Thailand to deepen its
domestic bond market. The work of the Ministry of Education to promote Thailand as an educational hub
also has clear potential benefits in terms of the development of human capital in the region.
3.3 Strategic Framework for ‘International Development Cooperation’
a) TICA’s strategic framework for technical cooperation
TICA has developed a draft strategic framework for ‘international development cooperation’. In line
with its institutional responsibilities, the framework focuses specifically on technical cooperation and how
it can be used to build capacity in other countries.
Many of the strategies outlined are in keeping with latest international thinking on effective
development cooperation. Bilaterally, it stresses that its support for development should be demand-led
and based on principles of partnership; reference is also made to the principles of the Paris Declaration
on Effective Aid. Multilaterally, it outlines Thailand’s to serve as a regional knowledge hub and work as a
problem solver to tackle regional and global problems. Thailand has also many partnerships agreements
in place with other bilateral donors and multilateral organisation with whom Thailand is working on
triangular cooperation arrangements.
The strategy notes that a key motivation for international development cooperation is to build
Thailand’s recognition on the international stage. This is consistent with high-level foreign policy, where
technical assistance is viewed primarily in terms of the diplomatic benefits it can convey:
[To] promote a positive image and technical assistance with developing countries so that people,
governments and the international community will have positive attitudes toward the Thai people
and Thailand (Policy 7.5)
While soft diplomacy is an understandable objective of technical cooperation, shared by many donors,
it does mean that technical assistance is not necessarily targeted to those who most need the support.
The strategic framework recognizes that past cooperation has tended to focus on building the capabilities
of public servants, but not necessarily local farmers for example.
The strategic framework also notes that technical cooperation is not necessarily well-integrated with
sector policies. Cooperation is seemingly often not targeted to meet national specific sector-based
strategic goals such as addressing specific regional skills gaps that impede the Thai labour market;
reducing risks of communicable diseases that cross borders; or promoting the interchange of academic
knowledge within the ASEAN region. Where cooperation is not integrated with sector policy objectives,
there is a risk of weak ownership of implementing agencies in line ministries, who feel that such activities
are not part of their core mandate.
20
b) Strategy on the Provision of Grants and Loans for economic cooperation
The provision of development finance is primarily seen as a tool to promote economic cooperation with
Thailand’s neighbours. It is largely perceived as being separate to the technical cooperation that Thailand
provides. Thailand’s development finance contributions have primarily focused on supporting the
development of transport infrastructure in Thailand’s neighbouring countries through the provision of
concessional loans administered by NEDA. Support is targeted to those projects that strengthen
connectivity with Thailand and its neighbours. Increasingly, NEDA is looking to finance projects that link
Thailand and its neighbouring countries to the wider Asian region through strengthening regional
transport corridors.
EXIM Bank has also been involved in the intermittent financing of strategic infrastructure projects in
the region. In 2008, they provided a loan to support financing of the construction of the Nam Theun II
dam in Lao PDR. A substantial part of the electricity (995MW) generated through this plant is being
exported to the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) as part of a long-term power purchase
agreement (PPA) signed in 2003. Under the agreement the Lao Government will earn $80m in the first 25
years.6
Focusing the provision of development finance on infrastructure development is in keeping with a
traditionally East-Asian approach to development financing. Japanese and Korean aid agencies have
historically focused relatively more of their ODA on infrastructure sectors than bilateral aid agencies in
Europe and the US. Similarly, China has focused much of its development cooperation on supporting the
development of large-scale infrastructure projects.
3.4 Conclusions and recommendations
Thailand has a clear high-level policy and a growing number of strategies at ministerial level on how
international cooperation can meet Thailand’s own goals on socio-economic development. It also has
strategy documents in place that look at how technical cooperation and aid-finance can be used more
effectively.
There is not, however, at present an overarching policy on international development which articulates
Thailand’s goals in terms of the gains to socio-economic development of other countries. Thailand’s
development cooperation is likely to be more effective if there are clear goals that can guide ongoing
engagement, both at a whole-of-government level and the sector level. As has been discussed, different
actors have different views on how they can best meet the interests of their partners and the interests of
their citizens through their engagement in international development. There would be benefit in
articulating Thailand’s own primary objectives.
6 http://www.power-technology.com/projects/namtheun2
21
It is therefore recommended that master-plan be developed that clearly articulates the logic of
what Thailand is trying to achieve in terms of international development and the range of tools that
it is using to achieve those goals. Such a policy should draw from Thailand’s own view and
understanding of the priorities and complexities of development. As government experts on the
preparation of national development plans, the expertise of NESDB would be of great value here in
thinking through how Thailand can support the development trajectory of other countries.
It is also clear that the primary mandate of government agencies is to meet the needs of Thai
citizens. Thailand’s support for development stands most chance of success when there is an
alignment of high-level policy, the strategic plans of ministries and the needs of Thailand’s partners
(be they countries, regions or third-party donors).
As a middle income country with its own development challenges and financing constraints, the
Thai government may also wish to review how it can influence and articulate its contribution to
development in broader terms, including the full breadth of cooperation work that is being done to
support the development of other countries. This might include influencing policy in partner countries
based on Thailand’s own knowledge of development, building regional consensus on development
issues or facilitating knowledge exchange. There are risks that if government-wide development is
seen only in narrow terms of its contributions to official development assistance; it overlooks other
areas where Thailand is making potentially more substantive contributions to development.
22
4. Analysis of Institutional Arrangements for Working with External Partners
4.1 Bilateral Cooperation
A key potential strength of Thailand’s bilateral support to its partner countries is that it is predominantly
‘demand-led’ and can be supported as part of long-term strategic partnerships. This often contrasts with
the approach of traditional development partners, where capacity-building initiatives may be
‘conditionality based’. In this case, development agencies would diagnose weak capacity and insist on
improvements to be measured on an annual basis as a condition of other support.7
Demands for Thailand’s bilateral support emerge from a wide range of institutions. These include:
The Office of Prime Minister
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and diplomatic offices
TICA and frameworks for technical cooperation
NEDA
Direct Ministry to Ministry dialogue at the ministerial level (e.g. exchange between Health
Ministers)
Direct dialogue at the departmental level (e.g. exchange between disease control department)
This multi-layered relationship can potentially be a great strength in building strong relationships. High-
level cooperation is essential if partner countries are to foster consensus on political issues. The Thai
government is more likely to be seen as a valued partner in providing technical know-how if it can forge
linkages between technical experts across a whole range of relevant areas. Thailand can also offer the
government different tools to support their development, including finance through concessional loans
for infrastructure, but also the exchange of technical know-how and human resources.
However, there are also very real risks that if support is uncoordinated that demands for cooperation
may not be aligned to Thailand’s capacity to effectively provide such support. During interviews, a
number of examples were reported where ‘technical experts’ have been provided to support partner
countries, but do not necessarily posses the necessary language or diplomatic skills to effectively
communicate in a foreign setting. Thailand, like all governments, also has areas where it is well-placed to
provide assistance and guidance and those where it is less able to.
Where support is uncoordinated, there is also a risk that the number of projects and areas of
cooperation proliferates. One of the key findings of international evaluations on aid effectiveness is that
smaller numbers of larger projects will tend to have greater impact than a large number of small projects.
Effective bilateral technical cooperation also depends upon long-term strategic engagement and
planning. While technical cooperation should be responsive to the demands of partner countries, a large
part of the assistance offered seems to be one-off activities agreed on an ad-hoc basis. Often activities
are designed as an indicator of friendship rather based on a robust analysis of how Thailand could address
7 Welham et al. (2013)
23
a key capacity need of a partner country over a sustained period. Bilateral strategies should ideally be
forward-looking, with medium-term strategic plans agreed on how identified capacity constraints can be
addressed through technical cooperation.
4.2 Regional and International Cooperation Frameworks
Thailand is an active participant in a number of cooperation frameworks:
At the sub-regional level (e.g. Greater Mekong Sub-region, Indonesia-Malaysia Growth
Triangle)
At the regional level (e.g. ASEAN) and
At the international level (e.g. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change)
The strategic opportunities presented by international cooperation frameworks are recognized in
Thailand’s foreign policy and the NESDP. In particular, cooperation frameworks are seen as an
opportunity for Thailand to advocate and foster consensus on certain policy goals. The NESDP, for
example, particularly stresses the importance of international cooperation frameworks in supporting a
sustainable development agenda:
Agreements under regional environmental cooperation frameworks should adhere to the
promotion of green production, consumption and services that lead to reduction of green house
gas (GHG) emission.
During research interviews, a number of examples were also provided of where Thailand is using
international cooperation frameworks at the sector level to advocate for key strategic policy priorities.
In the education sector, the Thai government is working closely with UNESCO and the UN to promote
Education for All. It is also actively participating in the formulation of post-2015 goals in the education
sector to replace the MDGs. In the health sector, there have also been examples of the Thai government
advocating and advising on the path towards provision of universal health coverage.
The forthcoming establishment of the ASEAN economic community in 2015 also allows great scope for
Thailand to pursue its policy objectives on enhancing regional economic connectivity. As part of the
overall cooperation framework, agreements will be put in place for example on trade policy, on financial
integration and the movement of labour.
In addition to supporting policy advocacy, regional cooperation frameworks are also being utilized as a
means for promoting knowledge exchange and the movement of people and ideas in the ASEAN region.
Much of this investment has been inwardly focused: there have been large increases in budgets for
programmes that support Thais in better understanding regional opportunities. Although this might not
be defined as ODA as such, the development of language skills and regional awareness are necessary if
Thailand is to build business to business and people to people contact with regional partners.
Thailand is actively seeking to promote itself as a regional knowledge hub. The Fiscal Policy Office is for
example facilitating work in conjunction with the Asian Development Bank and UN-ESCAP to support
24
Thailand’s Fiscal Policy Research Institute, to build country capabilities in serving as a regional centre for
offering macroeconomic training. If these ambitions are to gain support and recognition in an
international development context, it would be useful to link these ambitions to specific regional
development challenges. Further understanding is therefore required on where there is demand
regionally to address specific skills constraints, whether Thailand is well placed to address them and how
this would link to Thailand’s own development priorities.
4.3 International Organisations
The government’s foreign policy states as an objective that the government should ‘take on a creative
role and promote the national interest in international organisations, specifically at the United Nations
and regional organisations’. Further, a proposed strategy under the 11th NESDP is to support non-profit
international organisations to further the government’s agenda on regional development.
Thailand is advantageously placed in this regards with many UN agencies and International NGOs
choosing to base their regional operations in Bangkok. Thailand has long-standing evolving relationships
with these organisations and bilateral donors. Increasingly, Thailand is partnering with international
organisations in triangular frameworks to supplement the financial contributions of these organisations
with its technical know-how and knowledge on its development successes and challenges. Such
relationships exist across a whole range of ministries and institutions.
There are a number of examples of where Thailand is actively promoting its own goals for regional
development and leveraging the resources of international organisations (both financial and technical)
to support the achievements of these goals. During the interviews there were a number of examples of
this type of behaviour emerging:
1. Promotion of regional economic integration. One of the two key strategic pillars of the ADB’s
new Thailand country partnership strategy is to support the government in its agenda of regional
integration. This is being done through support for the sharing of Thailand’s development
experiences and knowledge and sub-regional economic cooperation programmes.
2. Prevention of communicable disease in the sub-regions. With Thailand graduating to upper-
middle-income country status, Thailand is no longer eligible for receipt of Global Fund resources.
Give the propensity for communicable diseases to cross borders, there is a strong case to tackle
this issue at the regional level. The Global Fund therefore agreed to the Ministry of Public Health’s
proposal for a regional grant, the first of its kind.
These examples are seemingly however the exception at present rather than the rule. Many of the
arrangements with international organisations in Thailand seem predominantly to be aimed at building
mutual good-will. Often the international organisations will set the agenda of cooperation and Thailand
will be a largely passive partner. A further challenge of this type of arrangement is the increased
complexity in aligning the interests of both providers and recipient. Additional complexity may also be
25
created in terms of coordination of support. 8 There may then be benefit in undertaking a review of
those organizations whose interests are strategically aligned with Thailand’s own. These need not be
the only organizations with whom Thailand enters into agreements, but these could be engagements
where efforts could be prioritised.
4.4 Partnerships with Domestic Stakeholders
Strengthening partnerships between government and other domestic stakeholders is viewed by the
government as a key strategy to promote development. One of the stated strategies of the government’s
foreign policy is to ‘Expedite the promotion and development of relations with neighbouring countries by
enhancing cooperation between the public sector, private sector, people and the mass media’. The NESDP
XI suggests the government should ‘strengthen domestic development partners at the community level’.
TICA also note in the 2008-2012 strategic plan that the government should as a priority ‘support the role
of public sector/private sector and civil society groups for IDC’.
There are a number of existing examples where government has partnered with domestic organisations
to effectively promote its development cooperation agenda. A key sector where this has taken place has
been in education where partnerships have been formed between academic institutions in the ASEAN
region. This type of partnership can help to forge the type of long-term relationship that underpins
effective knowledge exchange.
Domestic development partners may also have specific skills that leave them better placed to provide
technical support than the government. For example, while government staff may have specific technical
skills they may not have experience in teaching or training. Identifying relevant partner institutions with
dedicated capacity to provide training may leave government better placed to respond to ad-hoc training
requests. This is the model being followed by the Ministry of Finance with the Fiscal Policy Research
Institute.
NEDA, EXIM Bank and the Bank of Thailand are examples of organisations that are actively working with
the Thai private sector to promote the interests of Thai firms through cooperation agreements. For
example, loans provided by EXIM Bank and NEDA require that investment projects are undertaken by Thai
firms. The Bank of Thailand is also working with its commercial banking sector and other central banks in
the region to ensure that standards of compliance are consistent across borders thereby facilitating the
entrance of Thai banks to other markets in the region. In addition, the Ministry of Agriculture is actively
seeking inputs from the private sector in order to formulate their international cooperation strategy as
they recognize the growing role of the private sector in marketing agricultural products in the
international market.
Using partners to support programme implementation also helps to free up time of staff to focus more
on strategic issues and less on administration. During research interviews, it was apparent that a large
part of the time of staff working on international cooperation is currently dedicated to the administration
of programmes. It was reported, for example, that considerable time is spent fielding calls on
8 See for example Cabral and Weinstock (2010) who note similar challenges in the Brazilian context
26
arrangements for the payments of per diems on scholarship and training programmes. Processing
requests for visas for visitors from other countries was also reported to be a lengthy and time-consuming
procedure. TICA noted that when responsibility for implementation of a university partnership
programme was delegated to the Khon Kaen University, the demand on TICA staff for programme
administration was greatly reduced.
Many other countries contract out implementation of development projects to NGOs and consultancy
firms, who may have stronger links to communities or particular expertise in project implementation
or training than the government is unable to provide. At present, Thailand predominantly looks to the
government to provide the human resources for implementation of programmes. There is a significant
consulting industry and NGO presence in Bangkok, of both international and Thai organisations, that could
potentially take on responsibility for certain aspects of international cooperation projects.
4.5 Recommendations:
The Thai government may wish to consider the development of bilateral country strategies for
those countries that are seen to be priorities as development partners. The development of such
strategies would provide a useful framework through which Thailand could review the whole
package of support being offered to a country over a period of three to five years. A good entry
point for strategizing future country support is to document the support that has been provided
in recent years and to reflect in tandem with country partners as to whether it has been
appropriately targeted. There may also be scope to rationalize the number of projects and
interventions being undertaken in order to focus resources on fewer, better funded projects
thereby minimising administrative costs for both parties. Annex 3 shows for example information
collected on all the recorded capacity building activities that were undertaken in Myanmar in
2011. Information could be similarly organized for other key bilateral partners in order to
comprehensively review existing programmes.
Greater awareness is also required of Thailand’s own capacity to provide effective technical
support and policy guidance. At the moment, Thailand’s strengths are identified by TICA at the
sector level (e.g. the proposed focus in health, education, agriculture and rural development).
However, within sectors there will be particular departments or focus areas where Thailand is
better placed to offer assistance than others. Dialogue is required between line ministries and
TICA to identify where Thailand has the capacity to make positive contributions to development
through technical cooperation.
Effective use of international cooperation frameworks for policy advocacy also depends upon
Thailand having clearly articulated policy positions in place. These policy positions need to
demonstrate domestic commitment to goals on which they are seeking consensus as well as the
rationale for partners to support such positions.
27
In order for Thailand to present a more coordinated and coherent policy position to bilateral,
regional and international partners; roles, responsibilities and internal arrangements for
coordination need to be clarified more comprehensively (these are looked at further in the next
section).
As part of a master-plan, there could be benefit in undertaking a stakeholder analysis of
international and domestic partners to review whether their interests are aligned to Thailand’s
own goals for development cooperation. International Organisations could be grouped into
those where the government wishes to deepen cooperation for specific strategic policy interests
and those where cooperation is maintained largely for diplomatic purposes.
There is scope to extend the type of domestic partnership model used in higher education to
other sectors. For example, the UK has developed a number of health links between UK medical
institutions and counterparts in developing countries. There may be scope for similar linkages
between hospitals in the region so that nurses and doctors can exchange and impart knowledge.
Government may wish to review the contracting out of implementation of certain programmes
to other domestic partners including NGOs or the private sector, where it is felt they have a
comparative advantage.
It can see from the cases of EXIM Bank, Bank of Thailand and Ministry of Agriculture,
cooperation between the ministries and the private sector contribute to a mutual
understanding and learning about development cooperation. It raises the awareness for
development issues and needs for the private sector, while it also provide public administrations
with a better understanding of the needs of the private sector and more knowledge about
important management aspects which the private sector has more expertise. Thus, public-private
alliances should be encouraged to play a stronger role in development cooperation, in order to
achieve a common set of development objectives for both the public and private sectors.
A situation analysis could be undertaken that reviews how Thailand could address development
gaps through playing the role of a ‘knowledge hub’. This would involve setting out what might
be some of the skills and knowledge gaps constraining development in the region; what existing
mechanism are in place to support regional knowledge exchange; where Thailand has the
capacity, personnel and facilities to fill those gaps and what the international development
community has learnt about effective peer-to-peer learning.
28
5. Institutional Analysis
5.1 Coordination of Thailand’s Development Cooperation
The previous sections have put forward three key reasons why Thailand might wish to attempt to better
coordinate its approach to development:
1. Integrated policy-making and implementation. By drawing together knowledge of government
policy priorities and country development needs, mutual benefits can be identified for
development cooperation thereby strengthening joint-ownership of development cooperation.
2. Working effectively with partners. In order to maximize the impacts of Thailand’s bilateral
support, while minimizing administrative costs, Thailand should be coordinating its interactions
with its key partners.
3. Improved public relations and soft diplomacy. By drawing together information and evaluation
of the various elements of Thailand’s contributions to development, the government will be
better placed to represent itself both internationally as an active development partner as well as
explaining clearly to domestic constituents the rationale for government engagement in
development.
a) Existing roles and responsibilities
If one takes a broad view of ‘international development cooperation’ then it can be seen that a range of
institutions are involved in the planning and implementation of policy. At an overarching level, the Office
of the Prime Minister sets out the overall direction of government policy that guides the government
approach to international and economic cooperation. The NESDB also has a key role in policy
development, given their responsibility for preparing the NESDP, as well as bespoke policy research on
major issues such as ASEAN integration.
The Bureau of Budget (who report to the Office of the Prime Minister) is responsible for preparing the
government budget. Additional resources are allocated to the strategic priorities highlighted in the high-
level government policy developed by the Office of the Prime Minister.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is responsible for the preparation and implementation of the
government’s foreign policy. The Ministry is predominantly organized along country and regional lines
and so is well placed to advise on country-specific and region-specific issues. The Ministry of Foreign
Affairs also houses the Department of International Organisations, who manage a large proportion of
the contributions to International Organisations that constitutes a significant proportion of Thailand’s
overall Official Development Assistance (over 40% in 2011)
TICA has been designated as the focal point for managing ‘International Development Cooperation’. In
practise, its primary responsibilities are to act as the primary agency for administering technical
cooperation with developing countries. In regional cooperation frameworks, TICA is also tasked with
leading on elements of human capital development. The current institutional structure of TICA is such that
is split between a Development Cooperation Bureau that is broken down along regional lines and a
29
Partnership Bureau that is split between multilateral organisations and bilateral organisations. At present,
the organisation does not have any officers responsible for specialising in certain sectors. This may explain
the concerns raised by sector ministries during the course of interviews that TICA had insufficient
understanding of the strategic priorities and capacities of line ministries.
The Ministry of Finance plays a central role in coordinating government policy on international economic
cooperation. In particular the Fiscal Policy Office and within it the Bureau of International Economic Policy
are responsible for guiding policy on international economic issues such as trade policy and international
finance. Responsibility for liaising with the multilateral development banks also resides in this office.
Prior to 2005, the Ministry of Finance also directly administered the Neighbouring Economic Development
Fund. This was then replaced by NEDA, an independent public organisation in 2005. The operations of
NEDA are overseen by a Board of Directors with representatives from the Ministry of Finance (Fiscal Policy
Office and International Economic Cooperation), the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, NESDB and independent
economists and academics.
Although NEDA’s primary responsibilities are to provide development finance, it also offers technical
support in areas such as debt repayment, trade facilitation and infrastructure development. While there
are clear linkages between the work of NEDA and TICA, communication is largely limited to providing data
for the ODA reports prepared by TICA. It was recognized during interviews that on occasions there is
duplication of efforts between the organisations.
In certain years, EXIM Bank has been the single largest contributor of finance eligible to be recorded as
ODA. That said EXIM Bank does not see itself as an international development institution, given its focus
on promoting the commercial interests of Thai exporters and investors. This perception reflects a fairly
common view across government that (i) development is charitable rather than commercial and (ii) that
economic cooperation and development cooperation are distinct. For many Asian donors (Korea and
China for example), the EXIM Bank are a crucial partner in presenting an overall package of assistance to
support country development.
Most line ministries have offices in place to support and coordinate a ministerial approach to international
cooperation. These agencies serve as useful focal points for supporting international cooperation
programmes with other government agencies, international organisations and domestic partners. For the
most part, these agencies play a support function through the management of information and linking up
departments with opportunities for cooperation. Responsibility for implementation of technical
cooperation is largely under the remit of individual departments or offices (e.g. in the health sector, the
Department of Disease Control, Medical Services, Food and Drug Administration etc.).
30
b) Existing Cross-Agency Committees
At present, there is no single committee responsible for overseeing the coordination of policy on
development between different ministries. However, there are a number of structures in place that are
relevant to this agenda:
The International Economic Policy Committee is chaired by the Prime Minister and makes a
number of decisions relevant to an agenda of pursuing mutual growth and investment. At the
most recent meeting, for example, it was agreed that duty-free, and quota-free (DFQF) market
access be granted to the least developed countries with the Ministry of Commerce assigned to
implement the scheme.9
NEDA has in place a Board of Governors that oversee the appraisal and review of the investment
projects financed by NEDA.
There is a National Committee for Foreign Affairs, chaired by the Prime Minister with
representation at ministerial level that has been inactive in recent times (although there are plans
for it to be reconvened later this year).
There is also a Committee for Economic and Technical Cooperation with representation of
Permanent Secretaries that also has not met in recent years.
During interviews, a number of ministries acknowledged that international cooperation could be made
considerably more effective by coordinating the efforts of individual departments within ministries. For
example, the Ministry of Public Health reported examples of separate check points at borders for food
safety and disease control even though responsibilities all fall under the same ministry. To address these
coordination challenges, the Ministry of Public Health recently set up a committee on international
cooperation with Director Generals represented from each department. This committee has been used
as a means to integrate strategies, share information and identify where greater value can be added
through departments working together. They are supported by the International Health Bureau acting as
a secretariat (see Figure 2).
9 http://www.noodls.com/view/D2CA781095B164AE4E7804C3775E1B1A96236714
31
Figure 2: Structure to Coordinate International Cooperation within the Ministry of Health
Recommendations
At the highest level, the development and endorsement of an international development policy
and ongoing review of its implementation would seem to require contributions from a number of
agencies across government. The specific approach and representation of such a commission
policy partly depends on Thailand’s agreed development model that outlines what development
policy is trying to achieve and the primary tools with which to achieve it. There are however a
number of possible options for such a commission:
Option 1: To create a new committee dedicated to this particular goal; or
Option 2: To restructure the existing National Foreign Policy Committee; or
Ministerial Committee for International Cooperation
International Bureau
Implementing Department 1
Implementing Department 2
Implementing Department 3
Administrative Coordination
Policy and Strategy Coordination
Secretariat
32
Option 3: To restructure the existing Economic and Technical Cooperation Committee.
A broad view of development cooperation would require that membership of such a committee
would include representation from both the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and TICA and the
Ministry of Finance and NEDA to help bridge issues of economic cooperation and international
relations. This committee should also include representatives of those sectors, where it is agreed
that Thailand should prioritise its development support.
At a country-level, mechanisms could be put in place to better coordinate country strategies
and plans for key partners. This could involve country-based Embassy staff, country-based TICA
representatives, representation from NEDA and also potentially the Ministry of Finance to report
on any economic cooperation initiatives.
If TICA is to ensure that proposed technical cooperation is aligned with the strategic priorities
of ministries, then consideration should be given to identifying certain sector focal points who
can liaise with relevant agencies. Given the level of resources in TICA, initially priority could be
given to identifying specialists in two to three priority sectors (such as Health, Agriculture and
Education). Focal points should also be identified at NEDA and TICA who are responsible for
sharing information with each other on their respective plans to ensure that programming is
coordinated.
5.2 Information Management
TICA has been collecting information on the ODA that the Thai government provides for a number of
years. In order to collate information on ODA, TICA circulates annually a letter and accompanying form
requesting relevant agencies to submit information on support provided in the previous year. Information
is collected on the name of the project, the type of support (i.e. grant, loan or contribution to international
organisation), and the recipient of support (i.e. the country).
Box 3: What is ODA?
The OECD-DAC first defined ODA in 1969 as a means of providing a standardized measure of OECD country
aid commitments. The OECD defines ODA as follows:
Official development assistance is defined as those flows to countries and territories on the DAC List of
ODA Recipients and to multilateral development institutions which are:
i. provided by official agencies, including state and local governments, or by their executive
agencies; and
ii. Each transaction of which:
33
a) is administered with the promotion of the economic development and welfare of developing
countries as its main objective; and
b) is concessional in character
The benefits of recording ODA to TICA are currently unclear to many parties interviewed during the
research. There is a perception within the government that existing reporting on ODA is primarily for
external stakeholders rather than to inform government development policy. This impression is
reinforced by the difficulty ministries face in accessing timely information. The most recent statistics
available on ODA flows on TICA’s website is from 2011, even though TICA has received information on
ODA flows up to 2012. The publication of ODA figures is typically delayed until TICA feels they have
received from ministries comprehensive and reliable information.
A common complaint from ministries is that there is a lack of clarity on what should be recorded as
ODA. This issue has also been raised at meetings of the UNJT-IC. The advice of international organisations
has also been sought as to what might be an appropriate definition of ODA. While there is scope to clarify
the definitional issue, reporting also seems to be influenced by perceptions of whether it is worth
recording. For example, where ministries host government to government training workshops, many do
not see the value in recording the financial contributions for hosting such a meeting, given the small sums
involved and the administrative costs in isolating all these expenditure items across large government
ministries.
Focusing information management solely on financial contributions also has the potential to
underestimate Thailand’s contribution to technical cooperation. For a start, much of the support that
Thailand provides for technical cooperation is not directly financed by the Thai government. At the
ministry level, a large part of Thailand’s technical cooperation is financed by third-party international
organisations. These types of activities currently go unrecorded in ministerial submissions on ODA, as the
ministries themselves are making no direct financial contributions.
The size of financing of activities does not necessarily equate to the impact those activities have. Given
Thailand’s focus on supporting human capital development in the region, reporting solely on the costs of
such activities may underestimate their value. Rather, it would be of value to get a better understanding
of some of the long-term outputs of the cooperation that Thailand has offered.
Information management is also not yet being used as a tool to support planning. ODA reporting is
currently done retrospectively on actual financing or technical cooperation that has been provided. Many
countries record both planned ODA commitments as well as actual disbursements to help both donor and
recipient countries to plan their programmes of assistance.
Information management is also not as yet widely seen as a tool for learning and improving the
development cooperation offered. Over a number of years, the government will have accumulated
considerable knowledge on country partners, international development trends, sample training
programmes, project reports and evaluation. At present, there are seemingly no formal mechanisms to
capture this information and synthesize the findings to support learning in the government.
34
Process for the recording of ODA could also be improved upon both between ministries and TICA, but
also within ministries. It was suggested by agencies that responsibilities for reporting were often unclear
with international cooperation bureaus within ministries and also implementing departments unsure as
to who should be recording information and what should be reported.
Recommendations:
Information on ODA should be viewed as a tool for government to analyze and make more
effective its own development cooperation, rather than as a requirement for reporting to
international organisations. In order to do this, TICA should make information on development
cooperation more easily and readily available. Consideration should be given to developing a
simple, password protected online database that could be used for both accessing and updating
information on development cooperation directly by different focal points for the line ministries.
The information received from ministries should be organized in such a way that it shows cross-
government support for technical cooperation in sector-based and country-based reports.
Clear guidance should be developed on those activities that should be recorded in the database
on development cooperation. This guidance should encourage recording more comprehensive
information on the cooperation activities undertaken including triangular cooperation
arrangements financed by third parties. Where information is available for outputs from activities,
this information should also be reported. Consideration should be given to providing a threshold
under which the financial contributions of activities do not need to be recorded (e.g. THB
300,000).
Focal points for information management should be identified in each ministry and a small
number of specialists identified in TICA to support and train focal points on recording information.
TICA and NEDA should also designate focal points for the exchange of information on both
planned activities as well as activities that have already been completed in order to facilitate the
preparation of annual plans for bilateral support.
To encourage evaluation and learning, ministries and TICA should strengthen its knowledge
management practices and put structures in place to centralize records of training programmes
that have been completed, any project reports or evaluations as well as relevant documents on
international trends or evaluations.
5.3 Monitoring and Evaluation
35
Recent years have seen a much greater focus on results of development cooperation amongst
traditional donors. Given the fiscal constraints faced in many developed countries, aid budgets are
increasingly under threat and governments are being challenged to demonstrate the impacts of aid
provided and that value for money is being achieved with the resources used. As such aid is often closely
linked to short-term targets that aim to measure progress. A number of tools are being used to evaluate
the impact and effectiveness of aid including peer reviews of development cooperation are common
amongst OECD donors, value for money audits, programme evaluation, as well as quite technical
randomized control trials.
TICA’s strategic framework has also emphasized the importance of putting in place monitoring and
evaluation systems. A useful starting point would be to identify what should be monitored and evaluated.
At present, macro-level evaluation of the overall strength of Thailand’s development cooperation is
difficult given that there is not a unified framework against which the success of Thailand’s cooperation
can be judged. In the development of the master-plan, it would be useful to identify a number of metrics
that could be to monitor Thailand’s contribution to development.
Evaluation of bilateral support should also be undertaken in conjunction with Thailand’s partners.
Collating information on the support that has been provided by Thailand to key partners and seeking their
viewpoints on what has worked well and what has worked less well would be of value. In a spirit of
‘horizontality’ there could be potential to agree upon two or three metrics against which Thailand and the
respective partners would be measured.
Processes for the evaluation of large technical cooperation initiatives could be strengthened. When
NEDA provides concessional financing for the development of infrastructure, processes are in place for
project appraisal and evaluation. NEDA is also responsible for reporting to the board on the progress of
projects. Current processes for the evaluation of technical cooperation projects are less rigorous. This is
due to a number of reasons: first, the sums involved in any single project are typically much smaller;
secondly, the benefits of projects are more difficult to measure than the physical progress of a road
construction project or an airport; thirdly, the sheer volume of technical cooperation projects undertaken
by the government is much greater. Nevertheless, there are certain recurring large projects like the
government scholarship programme that merit more robust monitoring and evaluation.
It is also clear that committees and processes often do exist to systematically collate information on
technical cooperation programmes. At present, however, there is seemingly no systematic feedback
mechanism to use information and learning to inform future policy and programmes.
Recommendations
A number of metrics should be identified against which Thailand’s development cooperation can
be monitored at a macro-level (at present, only the total amount of ODA is monitored). This might
include at a high level certain outcome indicators in partner countries (e.g. employment levels,
financial inclusion rates, human development indicators etc.); as well as output indicators (e.g.
the kilometres of road built, the number of people trained, cooperation frameworks agreed etc.).
36
Thailand should invite its priority partners to provide feedback on its overall country
contributions in formally recorded and published annual review meetings. This would give the
opportunity to revise and reorganize Thailand’s development support, as well as identifying
Thailand’s strengths and weaknesses through a comprehensive feedback system.
Thailand should conduct some evaluations of its flagship technical cooperation programmes
including, for example, the scholarship programme.
It would be useful to develop an annual report that reviews the progress of major technical-
cooperation projects against a number of agreed metrics that could then be used in conjunction
with the development of future plans and strategies.
This type of monitoring report could be used as a way of communicating to the public about the
government’s work on international development cooperation and the benefits for both Thailand
and its partners. Communicating impacts and results would be a key accountability mechanism
to the Thai public and also to Thailand’s partners.
5.4 Development of Organisational Capabilities and Staff Development
For TICA to become the experts in government on the design and implementation of technical
cooperation to support human capital development, TICA needs to develop the capabilities to advising
ministries on areas such as:
Latest international development trends,
The development needs of specific countries,
Guidelines on good practise for both bilateral and triangular cooperation
In order to play this role, there is a need to lessen the current administrative responsibilities that
constitute much of their overall work. Ideally, less time would be spent on ‘turning the wheel’ on long-
standing programmes and more time dedicated to thinking through how Thailand’s capabilities can be
best channelled to supporting specific identified needs on a sustained basis.
If TICA is to assist the government to develop integrated sector-based strategies for development
cooperation, then consideration should be given to identifying certain sector focal points who can liaise
with sector ministries. Some skills and training may be needed to give officers a foundation of
understanding in their ‘specialized’ sector. Further, if technical cooperation programmes are to gain
higher-level ownership within TICA’s parent ministry, (the Ministry of Foreign Affairs), then there would
be benefit in aiming to promote greater interchange of personnel and ideas between TICA and other
departments in the Ministry.
The provision of effective technical assistance does not depend only on ‘experts’ having the necessary
technical skills. Diplomacy, cultural sensitivity, teaching skills and language skills are all pre-requisites for
37
providing effective technical assistance. Many ministries therefore suggested that TICA should play a role
in providing training for these skills. There are however limitations to what can be achieved through short-
term training. TICA are unlikely, for example, to be able to address gaps in language skills. Ideally, some
minimum language skills might therefore be identified as a pre-requisite for undertaking technical
missions unless facilities for translation are available.
There may also be benefit in working with one of Thailand’s partners on development of monitoring
and evaluation criteria and skills. It might be possible, for example, to use a number of triangular projects
that Thailand is involved in as a basis for developing M&E criteria for future bilateral projects. For example,
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is now planning to pursue a triangular project with JICA to implement
development projects in Africa, utilizing JICA’s findings and Thailand’s specialized skills in various areas.
As a framework is developed for the project, some generic guidelines for monitoring and evaluation could
be developed in tandem.
38
6. Financing Analysis
Historically, national contributions to development have predominantly been assessed by looking at
the amount of aid provided, as a percentage of gross national income. While this is a useful measure, it
is not the only relevant financing information when analysing development. This is demonstrated by the
growing interest at the OECD in a broader range of ‘development finance’ flows. Further, as has been
discussed, the provision of aid is just one policy tool that the Thai government has with which it can
influence development. This analysis then:
1. Reviews the size and composition of the official development assistance that is being provided
2. Provides a comparison of ODA and other external finance flows to Thailand’s key development
partners
3. Looks at how the national budget is being used to promote Thailand’s goals on international
cooperation for development
6.1 Official Development Assistance
TICA has been collating information on official development assistance for a number of years now and
has records of ODA flows dating back to 1997. It has been suggested elsewhere that the figures compiled
by TICA under-estimate the total amount of ODA as a result of ministries omitting technical cooperation
activities that would be eligible for recording as ODA.10 Although it was evident during interviews that not
all funds provided for training activities across the whole of government were being captured, activities
were excluded mainly as result of being deemed too small to make it worthwhile to record. Even if
ministerial contributions to technical cooperation were being underestimated by as much as 100%; they
constitute a relatively small part of the overall figures for ODA and so would not greatly impact the overall
figures.
The ODA figures presented here exclude contributions from EXIM Bank. EXIM Bank has made large
contributions in the past to infrastructure projects in both Lao PDR and Myanmar that are significantly
larger than all other sources of ODA combined. For example, in 2008, the EXIM Bank provided THB1.75
billion towards the constructions of Nam Theun II Dam in Lao PDR, THB1.55 billion towards the
development of a sugar refinery also in Lao PDR and THB1.03 billion to the Maldives towards hotel
construction. These combined loans were double the size of all remaining ODA flows in that year. EXIM
Bank continues to provide concessional finance to Thai companies for investments abroad. However, at
present these are not systematically reported to TICA, as they are in support for commercial undertakings.
Over the period, there has been a decline in the size of ODA provided, resulting primarily from declining
loans provided by NEDA. Contributions to International Organisations and grants (including technical
cooperation) have remained broadly flat over the period.
10 See for example Burns 2013).
39
Figure 3: Thai ODA, 2007-2012
Source: TICA
ODA as a percentage of GDP is low and declining. As of 2012, ODA was recorded as THB1.1billion
(USD37m equivalent), which is approximately 0.01% of GDP. By point of comparison, Table 1 shows
estimates from 200611 of a number of middle income country contributions.
Table 1: ODA as a % of GNI in Selected Countries in 2006
ODA as a % of GNI
South Africa 0.07%
China 0.06%-0.08%
India 0.06%-0.11%
Malaysia 0.01%
Chile <0.01%
Argentina <0.01%
Brazil 0.04% Source: ECOSOC 2008
Lao PDR has consistently been the single largest recipient of Thai ODA, receiving approximately 40% of
the total resources. This is primarily as a result of continued support for transport infrastructure projects
financed by NEDA. Earlier in the period, Cambodia was also a major recipient of Thai ODA, but they have
not received any infrastructure loans since 2009 and as such their share has declined. Despite Thailand’s
evolving relationship with Myanmar, recorded ODA to date has been a small share of the total accounting
for just over 3% of the total in 2012. As the overall size of ODA has declined, the share of total ODA
11 It was not possible to find more up to date information of ODA flows from these comparator countries.
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Loans 1,351.18 1,081.67 766.77 504.05 336.38 214.44
Contribution to IOs 402.55 428.53 241.22 490.56 569.54 404.30
Grants 545.19 543.50 800.71 492.97 452.57 498.46
-
500.00
1,000.00
1,500.00
2,000.00
2,500.00
40
resources channelled to international organisations has increased sharply reaching over 40% of the total
in 2011.
Figure 4: Proportion of ODA received by partners, 2007-2012
Source: TICA
As of 2011, 31% of total ODA was used to provide financial assistance for infrastructure. The financial
assistance provided has been concentrated on transport infrastructure and predominantly administered
by NEDA. It has also been focused on a relatively small number of projects and provided only to
neighbouring countries.
Figure 5: Proportion of ODA by Type, 2011
Source: TICA
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Cambodia Laos Myanmar IOs Other
Contributions to International Organisations
42%
Grants and loans for
Infrastructure31%
Technical Cooperation
26%
Humanitarian assistance
1%
41
In contrast to the concentration of Thailand’s financial assistance, Thailand’s technical cooperation which
comprises 26% of the total is highly fragmented. It involves:
A large number of countries (73 countries receive some form of technical assistance from TICA)
A large number of sectors
A large number of institutional players (18 agencies reported undertaking technical cooperation
activities)
A large number of projects
One of the findings of international research on aid effectiveness has been that fewer, larger projects
tend to be more effective than lots of small projects. Many countries are reducing the number of
countries that they provide aid to as a result. Denmark, for example, has recently announced it is
withdrawing from 11 countries in order it can concentrate its assistance on 15 partner countries.12 The
Netherlands is also reducing its assistance to 15 countries from 33. 13
Figure 6 and Figure 8 show that technical cooperation is fairly evenly split across a whole range of sectors at both the whole of government level and TICA. Overall, there is however a focus on the social sectors with 48% of total technical cooperation focused on social development, education and public health combined. Agriculture also receives 11% of technical cooperation expenditure. At a country level, technical cooperation is also split across a range of sectors. In Lao PDR (
Figure 7) the largest share of resources is channelled to education, economic cooperation (e.g. trade,
finance, industry etc.) and health (22%, 14% and 11% respectively) support seemingly crosses a whole
range of sectors. In Myanmar (Figure 9), the largest shares are to social development, agriculture and
education (21%, 18% and 13% respectively).
At present, TICA collates information on ODA projects on an institutional basis for each financial year.
There would be benefit in TICA arranging the information collected to present reports that focus on
specific countries and sectors over a number of years, to give an integrated view of the whole package of
support being offered. Examples are provided here for Myanmar and the health sector (see Table 2 and
Table 3). These reports show that the current ad-hoc approach to development cooperation means that
there is a large amount of change in the support provided from one year to the next. The information
provided is also highly disaggregated: individual one-off workshops may take place without necessarily
being part of an ongoing strategic programme of support. It can also be seen that in a single sector,
recipient governments may be dealing with three or four different counterparts from the Thai
government.
12 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/38/41/47866608.pdf 13 http://www.government.nl/issues/development-cooperation/the-development-policy-of-the-netherlands
Figure 6: % of Sector Share of Technical Cooperation, Total
Figure 7: % Sector Share of Technical Cooperation Lao PDR
Figure 8: % of Sector Share of Technical Cooperation, TICA
Figure 9: % Sector Share of Technical Cooperation Myanmar
.
Education18%
Health12%
Infrastructure4%
Agriculture11%
Social Development
18%
Science and Technology
5%
Economic Cooperation
13%
Tourism1%
Natural Resources
and Environment
5%
Mining and Energy
4% 0%
Other sectors9%
Education22%
Health12%
Infrastructure3%
Agriculture9%
Social Development
8%
Science and Technology
8%
Economic Cooperation
14%
Tourism1%
Natural Resources
and Environme
nt5%
Mining and Energy
5%0% Other
sectors13%
Education10%
Health14%
Infrastructure
3%
Agriculture13%
Social Developmen
t23%
Science and Technology
5%
Economic Cooperation
10%
Tourism1%
Natural Resources
and Environment
7%
Mining and Energy
4%0%
Other sectors
10%
Education13%
Health4%
Infrastructure6%
Agriculture18%
Social Developme
nt21%
Science and Technology
9%
Economic Cooperation
8%
Tourism1%
Natural Resources
and Environmen
t5%
Mining and Energy
4% 0%Other
sectors11%
43
Table 2: Recorded Country Assistance to Myanmar, 2009-2011
Sector Project Implementing Agency
Education: 2009 2010 2011
Curriculum Development in Teaching Thai Language at Yangon University of
Foreign Language TICA 100,000 331,400 280,900
Capacity Building for the Meteorology and Hydrology, Early Warning System and
Rehabilitation on the Cyclone Nargis Affected Areas TICA 228,000 1,954,010 4,993,630
International students scholarships OHEC 2,420,160 5,654,753 262,621
Basic Thai - teaching programmes Ministry of Education 200,000 - -
Teachers' training course TICA - 194,000 -
Schools construction and training centre TICA - 488,000 -
ASEAN New Middle Management and Leadership Development MFA - 41,667 -
Scholarships for Thai students under UNESCO Ministry of Educaiton - 133,333 -
Scholarships for students Ministry of Energy - 2,000,000 -
Support funds for Thai Government scholarship programmes with UNESCO for
neighbouring countries Ministry of Education - - -
Donation for schools in Rangoon Ministry of Foreign Affairs - - 100,000
Doctoral scholarship Office of the Prime Minister - - 258,750
Technical training and cooperation programme Ministry of Transport - - 694,450
subtotal 2,948,160 10,797,163 6,590,351
Technology transfers and technical assistance cooperation
Monitoring the Production of Rubber and Oil Palm in Mon State Ministry of Science - - 71,300
Assessment of Land Use and Land Cover Status of Inlay Lake and Its Surroundings Ministry of Science
- - 35,650
Reliability of Town Land Mapping by Using THEOS Fused Data Ministry of Science - - 71,300
International Cooperation for Quality control of air quality between Thai-
Myanmar
Ministry of Natural
Resources - - 50,000
Technical workshop for staff at the Department of Civil Aviation, Myanmar Ministry of Transport 274,060 - 694,450
AEROTHAI Performance Based Navigation System (PBN) Ministry of Transport 19,422 - -
Technical workshop for air transportation staff, Department of Civil Aviation,
Myanmar
Ministry of Transport
18,000 - -
International Workshop on Remote Sensing for Disaster Management in
Southeast Asia Ministry of Science 12,990 - -
Human Resource Development Program in Biotechnology for Asia Pacific Ministry of Science 230,491 139,075 124,828
Training Course on Comprehensive Rehabilitation for Workers with Physical
Disabilities Ministry of Labour 170,002 - -
Community Energy Project Ministry of Energy 1,291,800 - -
Assessment of Solar Energy project Ministry of Energy 3,708,000 - -
The 6 International Training Course on Precursor Chemical Control for Asian Narcotics Law Enforcement OfficresMinistry of Justice 25,871 - -
Successful International Market Access Ministry of Commerce 99,304 - -
ASEAN preparation workshop Ministry of Commerce 567,932 - -
Survey and Analysis Methodology of Agribusiness in Thailand Ministry of Transport - 7,080 -
Decision Making Methods of Agro Based Industries in Thailand Ministry of Science - 13,730 -
subtotal 6,417,872 159,885 1,047,528
Health:
ICU Training for Nurse Ministry of Public Health - - 249,634
Donation for Monks' Hospital in Jivitadana Sangha MFA - 200,000 -
Traning to increase the hearing capacity for people with hearing difficulties Ministry of Public Health - - 527,198
subtotal - 200,000 776,832
Transport Infrastructure
Road Safety Engineering Workshop NEDA - - 106,152
subtotal - - 106,152
Agriculture
The Livestock Village Development along Thai -Myanmar Border TICA 247,000 - -
Demonstration vil lages (agriculture) for border areas TICA - 564,600 -
subtotal 247,000 564,600 -
Trade-related
Trade shows and trade exhibitions expenses Ministry of Commerce 5,447,930 - -
Myanmar Agricultural Development Bank TICA 121,000 - -
subtotal 5,568,930 - -
Financing
44
Table 3: Recorded Assistance to Health Sector, 2009-2011
6.2 Other external capital flows
Figure 10 shows that ODA is relatively small compared to the size of the foreign direct investment and
remittances that are being channelled from Thailand to its neighbours. Unlike other donors in the region
(including China and Japan), in a development context Thailand does not systematically measure or report
on the size of Thai foreign direct investment in developing countries. For its neighbouring countries,
Thailand is a major player in terms of the size of investment provided.
Country Project Implementing Agency 2009 2010 2011
Cambodia
Cambodian - Thailand Collaboration on Malaria Control under the Initiative of
Her Royal Highness Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn
TICA
32,121,000 21,943,000 -
Technical support for healthcare facilities MFA - 500,000 -
Children activities to raise awareness on health issues MFA - 234,197 -
Dentistry services for rural areas MFA - 347,113 -
Donations MFA - 10,000 -
Technical support for healthcare facilities MFA - 43,864 -
New hospital beds MFA - 150,000 -
Professional staff development for healthcare professionals TICA - 430,400 -
subtotal 32,121,000 23,658,574 -
Laos Hospital construction
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs - - 347,000
Training Laotian doctors on mental health in order to develop human capital
capacity for Laos' health professionals
Ministry of Public Health
- - 204,288
The Project on Training Program in Technology of Medicine & Public Health
Personnel from Lao PDR initiated by HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn
Phrase II
TICA
- - 2,529,900
Nurse training courseTICA
- 18,467 207,500
Training for Laotian's health professionalsTICA
- - 21,500
The Project on Training Program in Technology of Medicine & Public Health
Personnel from Lao PDR initiated by HRH Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn
Phrase II
TICA
3,544,000 3,775,280 -
Development Project of Borkeo Hospital TICA2,014,000 4,756,566 -
Development of Public Health Services Provision System in Phonehong District TICA
4,575,000 130,000 -
Technical cooperation (Thai-Lao) for dentistry healthcare TICA- 1,281,000 -
Community healthcare centres TICA- 430,400 -
10,133,000 10,391,713 3,310,188
Myanmar
Donation for children's hospital in Rangoon Ministry of Foreign
Affairs - - 100,000
ICU Training for Nurse Ministry of Public Health
- - 249,634
Traning to increase the hearing capacity for people with hearing difficulties Ministry of Public Health
- - 527,198
Building hospital's capacity in Muang-Lek TICA - - 80,900
Donation for Monk's hospital in Jivitadana Sangha MFA - 200,000 -
Viet Nam
Hospital Management Ministry of Public Health
- - 192,894
The Project on Health, Hanoi TICA 237,000 - -
Technical cooperation workshop on healthcare services MFA - 68,531 -
Technical cooperation workshop on healthcare services TICA - 430,400 -
237,000 698,931 1,150,626
Others
A visit to Afghanistan to establish developmetn cooperation in the public
health sector
Ministry of Foreign
Affairs - - 299,841
Training on Mental health Ministry of Public Health
- - 107,784
Secondary Refeference Standards (Drug Laboratory) Ministry of Public Health
- - 164,524
Training on Preparation and Imlementation of Need based Local & external
faculy development program for medical institute
Ministry of Public Health
- - 107,784
International Cooperation for Thai Public Health and Bhutan Ministry of Public Health
- - 544,600
45
Looking only at the size of investment does not say anything about the quality of that investment or its
particular effects on development. However, FDI in certain sectors has considerable scope to support job
creation. For example, Thailand invested abroad US$312 million in the food, beverage and tobacco sector
in 2011, which is typically labour intensive. 14 Further, where investments are made in mining and
quarrying or electrical energy, when managed responsibly, those investments can make notable
contributions to domestic resource mobilization. Lao PDR, for example, is targeting growing revenues in
electrical energy and mining to raise taxation to support national development.
Although estimates of remittance flows are unreliable, (particularly to Myanmar where transfers are
predominantly made through an informal system called ‘hundi’ ), it is clear that they are also a
substantial source of income for all of Thailand’s neighbouring countries. Policies on migration and
labour rights of migrant workers have implications on the availability of migrant labour and also the
income that they generate. For example, policies aimed at supporting the regularisation of migrant
workers can contribute to increases in wages and remittances for those workers. Further, reforms in the
banking sector can also potentially encourage the use of formal channels for remitting income, which may
have the potential to increase financial inclusion. Recently Siam Commercial Bank has abolished fees for
remitting income to Myanmar with a view to gaining a greater share of remittance flows.
Figure 10: External capital flows from Thailand to neighbouring countries (USD Millions)
Source : FDI figures from International Trade Centre, Remittances from World Bank (Lao PDR, Cambodia and Viet Nam) and
Macquarie University Estimates (for Myanmar) and ODA from TICA
6.3 The National Budget and International Development
The strategies and programmes identified in the budget are aligned to the policy statement of the
Council of Ministers. At present, within this overall strategic framework of the budget, there is a
14 International Trade Centre
Lao Cambodia Viet Nam Myanmar
Remittances 15.0 22.0 57.0 300.0
Foreign Direct Investment 140.5 55.9 479.1 1222.7
ODA (as recorded to TICA) 17.4 0.8 0.8 1.9
0.0
200.0
400.0
600.0
800.0
1000.0
1200.0
1400.0
46
programme on ‘mobilizing foreign policy and international relations’ but not a dedicated budget line for
‘international development cooperation’ as such.
Strategy Number One of the budget also identifies certain ‘urgent priorities’ for which the Bureau of
Budget sets aside dedicated resources that ministries across government can make a case for receiving.
Since 2012, the Bureau of Budget has, for example, increased funds significantly to a specific programme
dedicated to strengthening regional cooperation and integration. In the most recent budget THB 8.0
billion (equivalent to 0.33% of the total budget) has been dedicated to this end, up from THB 0.4 billion in
2011. These funds are accessed by a range of sectors and are additional to the ongoing funds that the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs has historically had to finance ongoing work on international cooperation.
Although the focus of this investment is largely internal and not eligible to be recorded as ‘ODA’ as such,
some of the resources spent under this programme will support Thailand in its goals on development
cooperation. For example, Thailand’s ambition to set itself up as a ‘knowledge hub’ would require
significant domestic investment in developing and administering appropriate academic programmes.
Considerable investment is also focused on partnership and the exchange of ideas in the region. The
Commission for Higher Education, for example, notes that funds for reciprocal university exchange
programmes between ASEAN countries increased by 160% in the most recent budget from THB 10 million
in 2012 to 26 million in 2013, while the funding for exchange programmes for other parts of the world has
remained constant.
Thailand also contributes to international development through public funds used domestically to
promote regional connectivity and integration. Most notably, the government is currently considering
borrowing THB 2 trillion for investments in a high-speed rail network with a view to strengthen regional
transport connectivity. This would have implications for the costs of moving goods and people around the
region.
It is worth noting that it is not possible to directly link budget allocations to standardized reporting
requirements on ODA. There are financial flows that are eligible to be recorded as ODA flows that would
not be found in the budget (for example, concessional loans made by NEDA or EXIM Bank that are not
fully financed from the budget).
Conclusions and recommendations
Given the relatively small sums involved in technical cooperation, there may be benefit in focusing
interventions in fewer sectors and in more sustained programmes. It is unlikely that one-off
activities with no follow up will contribute to sustained capacity development.
Organising information on ODA by country and by sector is a useful way to begin to integrate
thinking about how to adopt a more coordinated approach to development across government
Government policies that influence investment flows and remittances merit consideration as
tools to influence development.
In conjunction with development of a master-plan on development cooperation, consideration
could be given to how the budget classification could be used to monitor budgetary allocations to
priorities set out in the plan.
47
7. Conclusions and Recommendations
A number of recommendations have been made at the end of each of the sections of this paper. These
recommendations can be grouped into a number of areas:
Recommendations for setting the overall strategic direction of development cooperation
These recommendations are possibly the most important, but also the most ambitious and difficult to
address.
It is recommended that the Thai government develops a master-plan that articulates a common,
government position on what its objectives are in the field of international development
Parameters should be agreed on what tools it wishes to consider with regard to the achievement
of the goals set out in the master plan. Consideration should be given to looking beyond aid
instruments
The master-plan should serve as a guide to support the prioritisation of technical cooperation in
fewer, larger programmes.
The master-plan should then act as basis for
o Developing sector-based strategic plans in key priority sectors
o Developing country strategies for priority countries that outline opportunities where
Thailand’s own international development strategy is aligned to country needs.
o Reviewing the alignment of international and domestic partners and Thailand’s own
strategy to identify priority partners for supporting the achievement of the development
goals.
A situation analysis could also be undertaken that reviews how Thailand’s ambitions to be a
knowledge hub could address specific sector and country development priorities and the
potential partners to support those ambitions.
Recommendations for institutional structures and coordination
If the policy recommendations are to be followed institutional structures would need to be put in place
to implement such an agenda.
Consideration should be given to forming a cross-ministerial grouping to oversee the
development and implementation of a cross-government international development policy. This
could involve creating a new commission or building into the mandates of existing relevant
committees (e.g. the Economic and Technical Cooperation Committee).
Large ministries would also benefit from similar commissions in order to support inter-ministerial
policy coordination.
At a country-level, mechanisms could be put in place to better coordinate country strategies and
plans for key partners.
If TICA is to ensure that proposed technical cooperation is aligned with the strategic priorities of
ministries, then consideration should be given to identifying certain sector focal points who can
liaise with relevant agencies.
48
Recommendations for organisational capabilities and capacity
There are a number of systems improvements that could be put in place relatively easily that would
support improved effectiveness of existing programming. These include:
Information management
Information should be exchange on planned support for development cooperation from key
agencies (e.g. NEDA, OHEC) as well as recording ODA retrospectively. This would lead to improved
coordination and also enable Thailand to present a full package of coordinated support.
The information received from ministries should be organized in such a way that it shows cross-
government support for technical cooperation in sector-based and country-based reports to
better communicate internally and with partners a ‘whole-of-government’ approach to
development cooperation.
Clear guidance should be developed on those activities that should be recorded in the database
on development cooperation. This guidance should encourage recording more comprehensive
information on the cooperation activities undertaken including triangular cooperation
arrangements financed by third parties.
Focal points for information management should be identified in each ministry and a small
number of specialists identified in TICA to support and train focal points on recording information.
Monitoring and Evaluation
It would be useful to develop an annual report that reviews the progress of major technical-
cooperation projects against a number of agreed metrics (with country partners) that could then
be used in conjunction with the development of future plans and strategies.
Thailand should conduct some evaluations of its flagship technical cooperation programmes
including, for example, the scholarship programme.
Thailand should invite its priority partners to provide feedback on its overall country
contributions at formally recorded annual review meetings.
Knowledge management and training
Much of the knowledge that the government has on development cooperation is not formally
captured. It would be useful to put in formal structures to capture information on:
o Latest international development trends,
o The development needs of specific countries,
o Guidelines on good practise for both bilateral and triangular cooperation
Thailand should proactively use its international partners to support it to address its existing skills
gaps in technical cooperation
49
References
Asian Development Bank. 2013. ADB COUNTRY PARTNERSHIP STRATEGY FOR THAILAND, 2013 -
2016. Bangkok.
Bank of Thailand. 2012. Annual Report and Strategic Plan. Bangkok: Bank of Thailand.
Brookings Institute. 2011. Reframing Development Cooperation. The 2011 Brookings Blum
Roundtable Policy Briefs (from Global Aid to Development).
Burns, M. 2013. Effective and relevant functions of national focal points for Thailand as an
effective Global Partner. THAILAND INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION
STRATEGIC REVIEW. Bangkok: UNFPA.
Cabral, L. and Weinstock J. 2010. Brazilian technical cooperation for development: Drivers,
mechanics and future prospects. ODI
Centre for Global Development. 2013. Commitment to Development Index 2012. Washington DC:
Centre for Global Development.
Glennie, J. 2011. A new direction for international co-operation. The Guardian, 5th October.
Information Office of the State Council, The People's Republic of China. 2013. China's Peaceful
Development. Beijing: Information Office of the State Council.
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). 2008. Joint Study on Effective Technical
Cooperation for Capacity Development. Tokyo: JICA.
Ministry of Agriculture (Thailand). 2013. International Cooperation Strategy (Draft). Bangkok:
Ministry of Agriculture.
Ministry of Education (Thailand). 2012. International Cooperation Strategy (Draft). Bangkok:
Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs (Iceland). 2011. Strategy for Iceland’s International Development,
2011 – 2014. Reykjavik: Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
50
Ministry of Public Health (Thailand). 2012. Minister's Announcement of the Ministry's new
international cooperation strategy. 10 August 2012.
National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB). 2012. 11 the National Economic and
Social Development Plan (2012 - 2016). Bangkok: NESDB.
Neighbouring Countries Economic Development Cooperation Agency (NEDA). 2012. Annual
Report and Strategic Plan. Bangkok: NEDA.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2013. Is it ODA? OECD.
Overseas Development Institute. 2012. Horizon 2025: Creative destruction in the aid industry.
London: Overseas Development Institute.
Strange, A., Parks, B., Tierney, M., Fuchs, A. and Dreher, A. 2013. China’s Development Finance
to Africa: A Media-Based Approach to Data Collection. Working Paper 323. Washington DC:
Centre for Global Development.
Thailand International Development Cooperation Agency. 2009. Annual Report. Bangkok: TICA.
Thailand International Development Cooperation Agency. 2012. TICA Highlights. Bangkok: TICA.
United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). 2008. Background study for the
development cooperation forum: Trends in South-South and triangular development
cooperation.
Welham, B., Krause, P. and Hedger, E. 2013. Linking PFM dimensions to development priorities.
Working Paper 380. London: Overseas Development Institute.
51
Annex 1: List of Key Interviewees
1) TICA
• Mrs. Jitkasem Tantasiri ,TICA’s Director of international development cooperation division 2;
• Mrs. Chalinthip Yasoksang, TICA’s Development Cooperation Officer;
• Mrs. Warangkana Singhacharn, TICA’s Development Cooperation Officer; and
• Ms. Arunee Hiam, TICA’s Development Cooperation Officer
2) Ministry of Education
• Miss Duriva Amatavivat, Director Bureau of International Cooperation;
• Miss Ratchanin Pongudom, Foreign Relations Officer / Programme Officer (focal point);
• Mr. Uthai Sala-ngam, Foreign Relations Officer
3) Office of Higher Education Commission
• Director Chadarat Singhadechakul, Director of International Cooperation Bureau, OHEC
4) Ministry of Public Health
• Deputy Permanent Secretary Charnvit Tharathep, M.D.
• Director Sopida Chavanichkul (M.D.), Director of International Health Division, Ministry of Public
Health
5) NEDA
• Mr. Teerasak Mongkulpod, NEDA’s Vice President;
• Ms. Hataitat Mahasukon, NEDA’s Director of Policy and Planning Bureau
6) Ministry of Agriculture
• Ms. Siriporn Thanarachatapoom, Senior Analyst – Policy and Planning, Bureau of International
Cooperation, Ministry of Agriculture
7) Ministry of Finance
• Mr. Thanabaht Ruksujarit, Economist, Fiscal Policy Office, Ministry of Finance
8) Bank of Thailand
• Mr. Suwatchai Chaikhor, Division Chief, International Department, Monetary Policy Group
• Mr. Suppakorn Chotika-arpa, Team Executive, International Strategy Division, International
Department, Monetary Policy Group
9) NESDB
• Dr. Wanchat Suwankitti, Policy and Plan Analyst, Senior Professional Level, Social Database and
Indicator Development Office
52
Annex 2: Participants in Workshop on Development Cooperation, 20 June 2013
No. Name Position Organisation
1 Mrs. Suwanee Khamman Deputy Secretary-General Office of National Economic and Social Development Board
2 Dr. Piyanuch Wuttisorn Director of Social Database and Indicator Development Office
Office of National Economic and Social Development Board
3 Dr. Wanchat Suwankitti Policy and Plan Analyst, Senior Professional Level, Social Database and Indicator Development Office
Office of National Economic and Social Development Board
4 Ms. Patima Chongcharoentanawat
Policy and Plan Analyst-Practitioner Level, Social Database and Indicator Development Office
Office of National Economic and Social Development Board
5 Mr. Banchong Amornchewin
Director, Planning and Monitoring Branch
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
6 Mrs. Sasitorn Wongweerachotkit
Director of International Organisations Partnership Branch (Multilateral)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
7 Mr. Wattanawit Gajaseni Director of Countries Partnership Branch (Bilateral and Trilateral)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
8 Ms. Warangkana Singhachan
Development Cooperation Officer (Professional Level)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
9 Ms. Pin Sridurongkatum Development Cooperation Officer (Professional Level)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
10 Ms. Arunee Hiam Development Cooperation Officer (Professional Level)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
11 Ms. Sunee Suthianun Development Cooperation Officer (Professional Level)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
12 Ms. Piyawan Phanphuet Development Cooperation Officer (Practitioner Level)
Thailand International Development Cooperation (TICA)
13 Ms. Ratchanin Pongudom Foreign Relations Officer Ministry of Education
14 Mr. Uthai Sala-ngam Foreign Relations Officer Ministry of Education
15 Mrs. Vichita Yongyutampai Project Analyst Neighbouring Countries Economic Development Cooperation Agency
16 Mrs. Pithbangon Jetaphai Policy and Planning Analyst Neighbouring Countries Economic Development Cooperation Agency
17 Mr. Thanabaht Ruksujarit Economist, Fiscal Policy Office Ministry of Finance
18 Mr. Surachadt Sasipongpairoj
Economist, Fiscal Policy Office Ministry of Finance
19 Mrs. Sugritta Pongsaparn Policy and Plan Analyst Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
20 Ms. Suparadee Potisat Policy and Plan Analyst Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives
53
21 Ms. Sujittra Kiatsutthakorn Environmental Official (Professional Level)
Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
22 Mrs. Nonglak Sopakayoung Environmental Projects Analyst Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment
23 Mrs. Chidchanok Choompalee
Plan and Policy Analyst Ministry of Energy
24 Mrs. Dararut Ritboongakorn Plan and Policy Analyst Ministry of Energy
25 Mr. Chinnavuthi Khawsumlee
Chief of Foreign Affairs Group Ministry of Interior
26 Mr. Wasu Wisalaporn International Affairs Division Ministry of Justice
27 Mr. Pongrath Srirangpairoj International Affairs Division Ministry of Justice
28 Ms. Pimpaporn Thitayanun Senior Labour Officer, Bureau of International Cooperation
Ministry of Labour
29 Mr. Kittipong Prachuablarp Plan and Policy Analyst, Office of Industrial Economics
Ministry of Industry
30 Mrs. Sumantana Chantaroagwong
Director, Head of International Resources Mobilization and Utilization Group, Bureau of International Cooperation Strategy
Office of the Higher Education Commission, Ministry of Education
31 Mrs. Sudaporn Imcharoen Educator, Bureau of International Cooperation Strategy
Office of the Higher Education Commission, Ministry of Education
32 Mr. Suwatchai Chaikhor Head, International Strategy Division, International Dept, Monetary Policy Group
Bank of Thailand
33 Mr. Suppakorn Chotika-arpa Team Executive, International Strategy Division, International Dept, Monetary Policy Group
Bank of Thailand
34 Mrs. Tunsinee Thongnoi Economist EXIM Bank
35 Mrs. Setasuda Tulyathan First Vice President EXIM Bank
36 Mr. Wichai Songsmatirong Technical Officer Ministry of Transport
37 Mr. Somruay Suwanpakdechit
Social Development Officer Ministry of Social Development and Human Security
38 Mr. Banlu Supaaksorn Foreign Relations Officer Ministry of Public Health
39 Mr. Supoj Suttirat Foreign Relations Officer Ministry of Science and Technology
40 Mr Nampeth Kaiboriboon Foreign Relations Officer Office of the Prime Minister
41 Ms. Arisanee Suwanarat Foreign Relations Officer Ministry of Information and Communication Technology
42 Ms. Marina Walter Deputy Resident Representative UNDP Thailand
43 Mrs. Tongta Khiewpaisal Programme Specialist, DSAU UNDP Thailand
44 Ms. Saranya Tanvanaratskul Programme Associate, DSAU UNDP Thailand
45 Mr. Thomas Beloe Governance and Development Effectiveness Advisor
UNDP APRC
46
Mr. Mark Miller International Consultant UNDP Thailand
47 Ms. Duangkamol Ponchamni
National Programme Officer UNFPA
48 Mr. Werapong Prapha National Consultant UNDP Thailand
54
