ANALYSIS OF A MAJOR PUBLIC POLICY TRANSPORT ISSUE IN THAILAND

THE 30 TON TRUCK CONTROVERSY

Art Madsen, M.Ed.

[With Research Assistance from a Thai Student]

Introduction

Many researchers are interested in studying public policy, and the policy process, because this professional discipline concerns issues and decisions that affect them and other people (Theodoulou, Cahn, 1995). This paper is a research paper that examines one of the policy processes that embodies many advantages, but also disadvantages for the Thai people. Most policy makers realize that policy processes from one country cannot be applied identically in other countries, but they may be similar (Lindblom, 1968; Rose, 1993). Moreover, many policy makers recognize that before laws can become legally binding they must be designed, formulated and implemented first through the policy process. Therefore, this paper will mention the Kingdon policy process model that includes agenda setting, group theory, formulation, implementation, and evaluation. It will also mention the Heuristic model in combination with Kingdon. Because the issue to be examined incorporates different concepts that are found in Thailand, this paper will not reflect in all respects the Kingdon/Heuristic US policy model usually thought to be operative in Western Democracies.

Purpose, Scope, and Significance of Analysis

Keeping this in mind, the purpose of the present paper will be to analyze and evaluate several advantages and disadvantages associated with a nationwide transportation decision in Thailand, and to examine the significance and effectiveness of the policy process model that may be used to achieve a satisfactory resolution of the truck tonnage controversy.

Therefore, this paper will present a brief description of the issue, and will explain the positions of several major Thai proponents of the new 30-ton policy as well as the reasoning of those who oppose it. This will be followed by an analysis of principal elements in the Thai policy process, with comparative remarks showing the differences between Thai and American heuristically based process models. Conceptual material will be offered and conclusions will be drawn as to the probability of the adoption of the new policy by the Thai Government.

Description of Policy Issue

The policy issue to be described in this paper is, in fact, a choice between allowing the entire Thai transport industry to utilize trucks with capacities of up to 30 (metric) tons, or to retain the 30-year old policy of a 21-ton maximum. There is a national debate on this issue currently in Thailand. This paper will discuss the pros, cons and policy model most likely to be used in Thailand to resolve this crucial and potentially costly issue. Analysis and evaluation of the likely outcome of this controversy will be based on factual data and material researched from English and Thai language journals, newspapers and media coverage. The implications for the nation’s roadways and overall safety are vast, as are the potential economic and commercial consequences of whatever new policy is adopted by the Thai Government.

Key Players in Favor of New Proposal

According to Mr. Sanoh Tainthong, until recently Minister of the Interior, currently the Principal Advisor to the Thai Prime Minister, it is important to change transportation laws that allow only 21 tons to be carried by trucks; he would prefer to allow them to carry up to 30 tons. When Mr. Sanoh speaks people in Thailand listen because he possesses considerable power and persuasiveness, and may be able to influence national policy in the direction of increased tonnage. Additionally, the Thai media grants coverage to him when he talks or says something. Mr. Sanoh has already changed political affiliation three times in order to remain powerful under new Prime Ministers. First, this key player, Mr. Sanoh, was a member of the Chat Thai party headed by Mr. Bunharn Silipa-Archa who became Prime Minister in 1994. Then Mr. Sanoh moved to the New Aspiration Party that nominated General Chavalit Yongchaiyudh to become Prime Minister in 1996. Lastly, Mr. Sanoh moved to the Thai Rak Thai Party, now the new government of Thailand. Mr. Sanoh was instrumental in the election process culminating in Dr. Taksin becoming the new Prime Minister during the 2001 Election. Also, he controls approximately 70 members of the Thai Legislature. His group of legislators is called “Wang Num Group” (The Nation Group Weekly, March 26–April 1, 2001). They and Mr. Sanoh have easy access to the Prime Minister whenever their wishes. Mr. Sanoh’s influence is so vast that he could almost single-handedly decide this important 21 / 30 ton truck capacity transport issue.

Now that we have learned a little about the power-base of Mr. Sanoh, it is important to state that he mentions four reasons for changing the existing policy. First, for 29 years, the existing policy has been in effect; and, during this time, truck capacities have changed. Second, changing this policy would help to decrease corruption in Thailand among transport, trucking and police officials. Third, changing the 21 ton policy would ease the economic crisis in Thailand because, if trucks can carry over or around 30 tons, it would lower the unit cost of merchandise, because higher capacity trucks would theoretically lower costs. Finally, Mr. Sanoh confirmed that the roads, in spite of criticism to the contrary, are strong enough to change trucking capacities to 30 tons (Thaipost, February 22, 2001; Mathichol, February 23, 2001).

Additionally, Mr. Udom Suwitsukdanon, Chiang Mai’s Truck Association President, has spoken publicly in favor of Mr. Sanoh’s position. He confirms that many trucks are (illegally) carrying up to 40 or 50 tons without problems, except that bribes have to be paid to police officials. If the new policy of 30 tons is implemented, bribes will no longer have to be paid, he asserts. If each truck gives a special fee of 30 baht per year to the Government in order to carry a capacity of 30 tons, then the Government will have a sizeable new source of revenue with which to upgrade and repair the highway system (Mathichol, February 24, 2001)

Another important official, Mr. Theerachai Sankaew who is an influential member of the Thai Rak Thai Party and Vice President of a major Northwestern Sugar Cooperative, confirms that many trucks are now actually transporting 33 tons or more (Mathichol, February 24, 2001). He is a strong supporter of Mr. Sanoh’s position. What his motives may be is open to question; nonetheless, like other supporters of this idea, he is powerful and convinced of the benefits to be derived.

The Director of the Truck Drivers Organization, Mr.Chatchavan, has openly favored the increase of tonnage to 30 tons. He feels that the entire country can save more than 78 Trillion Baht per year in transportation costs. He is receiving considerable press coverage (Mathichol, February 24, 2001).

Key Player	Policy Position	Official Capacity
Sanoh	Chief Proponent of 30-ton Policy	Principal Advisor to the Prime Minister
Udom	Strong Supporter of Proposed Policy	Chiang Mai Truck Association President
Theerachai	Regional Supporter of Proposed Policy	Vice-President NW Sugar Association
Chatchavan	Supports Sonah’s viewpoint	Director of Driver Organization
Purachai	Neutral, wants to study implications	Minister of Interior
Chalerm	Adamantly opposed to the proposal, cites objections	Parliamentarian, New Aspiration Party Member
Srisook	Opposes the new proposal because of road damage	General Secretary of Transport Ministry

FIGURE I

Dr. Purachai Piamsomboon, a highly influential figure who is currently Minister of the Interior has adopted a wise position with respect to this growing controversy. Rather than agreeing immediately with Mr. Sanoh, he has asked his Ministry to study the possible effects of this major weight-change for trucks in Thailand. When asked if corruption could be avoided through adoption of the new 30-ton concept, Dr. Purachai wisely stated that he could not comment on possible effects in the distant future (Mathichol, February 12, 2001; Mathichol, February 23, 2001). The whole question, he feels, needs to be examined carefully prior to a decision. This is tantamount to a neutral position on the policy controversy

Key Players Opposed to the New Policy

The Vice-President of the New Aspiration Party, Mr. Chalerm Youbumlung, is concerned about the economic stability of Thailand. Expenditure of massive amounts of money to restructure the national highway system to accommodate the new policy is not possible, he argues. Due to the Asian monetary crisis, which began in Thailand, the country has no budgetary resources to consider such a major task. Even if the new roads do not have to be built right away the 30-ton truck capacity policy will damage the roads within a matter of about 3 years, according to the Department of Highways (Mathichol, February 24, 2001). He also stresses that changing the trucking policy will not eliminate corruption in Thailand, and so corruption is an unrelated sub-issue within the context of the 30-ton capacity proposal (Mathichol, March 1, 2001). Mr. Chalerm is clearly an opponent of the new policy.

There are also opponents of the proposal within the Ministry of Transport such as Mr. Srisook Chandrangsu who is the General Permanent Secretary of the Transport and Communications Ministry. He has spoken out courageously in opposition to this policy for the same reasons as Mr.Chalerm. He is a realist who sees many practical obstacles to the implementation of the increased tonnage proposal (Mathichol, February 23, 2001)

Discussion of the Policy Process Model in Thailand

In most of the world’s countries, there is a stage-based policy process that resembles a combination of the Kingdon and Heuristic models. The manner in which the agenda is set differs somewhat among westerns democratic nations and third world autocracies. Thailand is moving gradually toward democracy, even though it retains many highly centralized channels of authority. Elections by the people are not the only indicator of democracy, of course. What really matters, in countries like Thailand, is how policy is made and legislation is enacted.

Stage A Stage B Stage C

Figure II

On Figure II, policy in Thailand begins with suggestions for change at the lower levels of government or society, in accordance with both the Kingdon and Heuristic-stage models. However, as can be seen, after discussion of priorities has taken place at Stage A, Stage B becomes the locus of decision-making. At this Stage, high-ranking Thai government officials intervene and frequently reverse priorities, suppress policy initiatives, or re-prioritize the agenda. This results in decisions that are not always reflective of the people’s will. Sometimes, conflicts of interest are publicized by the press and pressure is placed on the officials at Stage B who made particularly bad decisions. But this does not usually occur.

The legislature in my country can override the decisions of Stage B Ministers, and this is an encouraging indication of progress being made. Usually, only on major policy issues, such as the 30-Ton Policy, does the Legislature become involved. Once the Government has issued a decision about the 30-Ton Policy, the legislators will have to ratify the ministerial decision. Whether this occurs or not depends on popular pressure on the Legislature, even though Mr. Sanoh already controls approximately 70 legislators.

So the Kingdon/Heuristic hybrid model can be distorted even at the Legislative level. This sometimes results in the creation of a Punctuated Equilibrium Framework, as will be seen below.

A More Detailed Assessment of Policy Dynamics in Thailand

within the Context of the 30-Ton Controversy

As is generally known, the Kingdon Model consists of agenda setting, political streams of influence, formulation, and implementation (Winn, 2000). Its final stage, ideally, is evaluation. The Kingdon model is often used during first attempts at policy-making in Thailand, but is overturned by higher level political interference in mid-process, prior to implementation and evaluation. The standard heuristic model, not looked upon with favor by Sabatier (1999), is also overridden in Thailand most of the time, as shown on Figure II. However, “Final Thai Policy” has usually become, after high level interference, a combination of incremental change (often to save money), under one Prime Minister, and then an abrupt change as a New Government comes to power. For example, when Dr. Taksin became Prime Minister recently, his new approaches to policy making, and his new policies, clashed noticeably with those of the previous government. Many people in Thailand feel that the attempt against his life at the Bangkok Airport (Bangkok Post, Feb 2001), may have been due to the dramatic changes he was attempting to implement in Thai anti-drug policy or in judicial policies affecting criminal syndicates in the country. He was making major policy shifts that displeased established interests within his society. There is a policy process model to fit the description of what the new Prime Minister probably did. Sometimes, this model, called by Sabatier, and other theorists, the “Punctuated-Equilibrium Framework”, or the “incremental/dramatic change” model, comes into play in Bangkok in a high-profile manner. This model is also heavily influenced by political dynamics, but it seems to be far more realistic than the heuristic model, and is accurately descriptive of what occurs periodically in Thailand.

In fact, the “incremental/dramatic change” model may be what is about to happen with the 30-Ton controversy as well. For many years, 30 ton trucks have been on the highways illegally in Thailand, and were accepted thorough a system of pay-offs, on an incremental (ex-officio) policy basis – i.e. gradual growth in numbers of such trucks. Now, influenced by Mr. Sanoh, the new Prime Minister may, upon (near) rubber-stamp ratification of the Legislature, actually sign this law into effect – creating a dramatic policy shift. This process, heavily manipulated behind the scenes, could be construed as a manifestation of the Punctuated Equilibrium Framework, having moved from incremental change to an entirely new policy.

Summary

Readers should understand that the background material for this policy process paper has been researched through reference to reliable Thai media sources and is based on nationally published surveys and opinion polls, such as the “Suan Dusit’s Poll”. These types of polls indicated the full spectrum of Thai opinion on the issue of the 30-ton policy dispute. On balance, these studies showed that 72.96% of the Thai people disagree with implementing the new 30-Ton Truck policy, whereas only 17.22% agree (Mathichol, February 24, 2001). It is obvious that nearly three quarters of the Thai people are opposed to the new 30-ton policy. Mr. Sanoh’s idea is not tremendously popular, as can be easily seen.

In Thailand, where the policy process is markedly different than in the United States, it is quite likely that the minority position will prevail. The Kingdon/Heuristic hybrid model seems to work well in the United States, where policy stages are effective means of ultimately seeing that the best policy for the most people is implemented. However, in Thailand, the policy model is heavily skewed and influenced by power, authority and financial leverage. Key players are able to manipulate the content and thrust of policy proposals, to their own advantage, and this is not necessarily in the interest of the nation. Because no one is willing to take a stance or assume responsibility, unscrupulous persons step in, seize the opportunity, and misuse their power (Lindblom, 1968). This sometimes results in ‘incrementalism’ with a dramatic shift after a given period of time, as in the Punctuated-Equilibrium Model; but more often than not, it leads to inefficient government and to the possibility of actually doing damage to the nation’s welfare on a broad spectrum of policy issues, one example of which would be the 30-Ton policy under examination in this paper.

Perhaps one day in the near future, my country will develop a more effective means of ensuring that well designed policies – in harmony with the majority’s opinion – become operational within all of our Ministries and Departments.

.

References

(to be completed)

Books à

Smith, J Book Title, Publisher, Place, Date.

Newspapers à

……………… “Name of Article”, Name of Newspaper, Location of Newspaper, Date of Issue, Page.

Website à

Smith, J. “Name of Article”, Journal if any, Name of Site, Location of Site, Date. URL .

Lecture Notes à

Winn, J. Government 567, NMSU, March 10, 2001.