20 days is a long time: you’re right that this is already dated. When I put this list together (in a rush, I might add) those academics who I found providing quote in the media were the individuals I noted above.
I may (as time permits) put together a more up-to-date list of academic comment. I would appreciate any suggestions that readers may have about any commentators I might otherwise miss.
As Ex-Ajarn probably already knows, corruption is a disease that flourishes in both democratic and authoritarian systems whatever Ex-Ajarn\’s empirical studies show. And it is a toss-up which corruption, (\’elected\’ corruption or \’non-elected\’ corruption) leaves nations that much poorer.
As the Col. no doubt knows, the empirical evidence shows a strong correlation between having non-elected forms of government and increased levels of corruption. Although I know of no specific studies published on this topic measuring the current junta here in Thailand, I wonder why the Col. thinks Thailand would not follow the same pattern found in the rest of the world?
James: the contracts generally “guarantee” farmers a fixed price per kilogram. But there is usually a scale of prices according to the “grade” of the crop. This gives companies some flexibility to adjust the price by downgrading the crop. The input costs (often slightly inflated above market rates) are subtracted from the total payment made to the farmer. If the crop fails, the company bares the cost of the inputs.
How are costs and profits divided between farmers and company? do they get a percentage of sale (as for the rubber farmers in Laos in an earlier post), or a fixed price per kg, or some other arrangement? Are input prices subtracted from this as you seem to suggest?
Hi Tip, thanks for your interest. Here are some quick answers:
1. I would rather not say.
2. There has been longstanding interesting in growing garlic which, in the past, has been very lucrative for the village. 30 or so years ago it was grown much less extensively (partly given that dry season fields were used for raising cattle). But it has expanded gradually to become the dominant cash crop in the 1990s and early 2000s.
3. I will do a post in a few days on the yeild reductions. Key issues, according to the farmers, are climatic variability and soil fertility decline. The trade agreement with China had some impact on price (and a significant impact on perceptions about price). There was also a government scheme encouraging farmers to switch out of garlic given concerns about the impact of Chinese garlic imports.
4. There is considerable labour hire within the village (about half of the village depend on wage labour). Sometimes labourers are also bought in from neighbouring villages. Labour is usually hired for high input tasks like planting, weeding and harvesting. But there is also extensive use of exchange labour.
5. No. Of the 40 farmers I worked with in detail about 30 (if I remember my data correctly) nominated wage labour as their primary or secondary source of income. Livelihoods are typically rather diverse.
6. Very few young people are engaged in agriculture. Most are studying or working in urban employment.
If you get in touch with me direct via email we could have some more extensive discussions.
1) Which district is the village in?
2) How and why did people get into garlic production 20 years ago?
3) What caused yield and price reductions in the early 2000s? Have the farmers been affected by FTA and imported garlic?
4) Do they hire labor in farm?
5) Can these households subsist solely on contract farming?
6) What do young men and women aged 18-35 do? (In the village I’ve carried out fieldwork in Lampun young people are mainly in non-farm employment.)
In Thailand, there is a “culture of corruption” (ever wondered what all those gift baskets around new year are for?). “There will be quick filter down effects.” I wished it was so. However, it seems that by pointing the finger at big corruption cases, people are only encouraged to continue with their ways. A teacher buying his promotion to school director; Ombudsmen office or democracy promotion officials going on tax-paid pleasure trips abroad; district officers and provincial governors getting free memberships in golf clubs; lecturers offering weekend, evening, or English-language curricula? This isn’t seen as corruption, but as normal… (and this is just chicken feed). It seems to me that the higher people climb on the bureaucratic ladder, the more they come to see the opportunities for corruption as some sort of fringe benefit to their position and thus think that this is their right. As a former riverside university rector once bluntly told me: “In your country, lecturers are well paid. But in Thailand, we are forced to become corrupt (so that we might be able to life the lives we think we have a right to, i.e. house, car, foreign schooling of our kids…).” This perspective seems to be widespread. How much of the national budget disappears in this way each year? If I remember correctly, it was either Thipawan or Jaruwan who put the figure as high as 30%. Given that a further 30% is spent uselessly, only 40% might remain for developing the country, although much will go to salaries (look at the budget structure of the ministry of education, for example).
(This is just a comment from years of experience; no claim to academic validity.)
” But it is the everyday “small-time graft” . . . that does so much harm to the country!” – That is what Srithanonchai believes but I have my doubts. Thaksin Shinawatra justified his corruption one time by insinuating that corruption is the Thai way . . . and rhetorically invited anyone ‘who had not sinned to cast the first stone’. I responded with a hail of slingshots directed at Thaksin Shinawatra!
Thailand has to prioritize! Tackle big-time corruption starting by the judicial prosecution of Thaksin Shinawatra, wife and gang for any and all offenses including tax cheating. Once Thailand can show determination to jail big-time criminally corrupts, there will be a quick filter down effects . . .
Thanks. This sort of article of article with hard data is very interesting. Digging deeper and finding (probably multiple) causes of farming debt and solutions is certainly more satisfying than the stock explanation I first heard of farming debt being caused by bad advice the government gave farmers so it should be covered by the government.
Contract seems to have two dimensions, 1. the larger company is better able to insure:
“Almost all the contracting companies provide the farmers with seedlings (or seed) and agro-chemicals. The cost of these inputs is then deducted from the selling price of the crop. If the crop fails the loss is borne by the company. ”
2. The larger company is better able to do the research and calculations to find crops with a viable profit margin given current and possibly changing market conditions.
I wonder how the financing of longer term fixed costs are covered, like the Tap Tim fish cages of one fish farmer in the Mekong south of Chiang Saeng. This motivates me to do my own poking around and find out how the economics of it all works.
Nearly everyone here in the forum admit to second-hand or third-hand gossips about the current military rulers . . . so who can I rely on?
Since we all rely on second hand information, my information is just as good as any other guy. And my information (from media and from any googled Thai scandals of 6 years past) still point to Thaksin’s rule as corruption-ridden of a Godzilan scale. Surely Surayud’s forest trespassing (if true) would have been a minor transgression (compared with Thaksin Shinawatra) had he not reluctantly accepted to be interim PM of Thailand.
Small-time graft and ex-Ajarn’s banal gripes about Thai prostitution and military gratuities had been around since Thai Adam . . . and its scale is no more or no less than before. So what is new Srithanonchai, Ex-Ajarn, Grasshopper and the rest?
It is very interesting times in Thai politics and will be a critical election. Post PMThaksin hegemony, many aspirants see that they have a decent chance at power whether through money or the gun – or if via policies, it has to be ‘populist’. I don’t think it is a return to the ‘bad old days’ – it is a new playing field with old players. I don’t know what this would yield after Dec 23 or in 1 year or 5 years (a return of a ‘re-constituted’ PMThaksin as ‘saviour’ – after leading ManCity to a premiership title!). The most likely scenario is a continued ‘bumbling on’ as an imperfect democracy. It make for frustrating watching and requires too much patience and tolerance – much like being stuck in Bangkok traffic.
“Surayud’s government would want to ensure that old-style mega vote-buying (popularized by Thaksin and TRT) do not reassert itself in Surayud’s supervised elections.”
Vote-buying in Thailand has a long-history in Thailand which started long-before Thaksin came to power. Sure, the TRT used the technique but so did the opposition. The TRT are the only party in Thai political history that actually campaigned directly to the people through the use of policies (whether or not these were good policies is another debate, one that in civilized countries is decided by elections). What are the platforms of the political parties for this upcoming election? These parties aligned with the government are not even making a pretense of campaigning to win the votes of the people, instead it is all about forming alliances with individuals who can deliver the votes through vote-buying.
There was no creditable polling that ever showed that Thaksin did not have the support of the majority of Thai voters. Love him or hate him, he would have won the election that coup was staged to stop, whether vote buying occurred or not.
A “bad” elected official is a 100 times better than a “good” dictator, because there is a sure-fire way to replace the “bad” elected official while removal of dictators has consistently proven to be difficult.
And who is to say who is a good leader or a bad leader? Was Ronald Reagan a good or bad leader? How about Jimmy Carter, or Bill Clinton? It is not hard to find a difference of opinion on whether these were good or bad leaders. Just because col. jeru and myself think Thaksin was a bad leader, does that mean we are right and the voters of Thailand are wrong?
This ‘small time graft’ issue is one not isolated to Thailand but the region. All the states surrounding Thailand have a similar issue of cronyism. Malaysia has its ‘new rich’, Cambodia has the extended extended family of Hun Sen, Burma…. The regional exception is Singapore. (I am not sure about Vietnam.)
Why doesn’t Singapore suffer from these labels? Obviously now it would be quite hard for Singapore to suffer from the type of corruption (other than nepotism?) that goes on north of its border, but how did Singapore achieve this? I am sure the answer is in its determined involvement with the international economy which has created a pressurised domestic system that has consequently fostered accountability… and responsibility. Surely if Thai people wish to rid themselves of corruption, Bangkok needs to become an NIE and spread its growth and institutions outward.. perhaps to the detriment of forests and rivers…
People with first-hand accounts of large scale corruption are unlikely to make the details public for obvious reasons. Chuan lacked the political muscle to tackle the problem, Thaksin actually did make some moves to lessen corruption (with the obvious exception of the corruption that benefited him personally), but the current administration is too concerned with retaining power to do anything that would result in making any powerful people unhappy, unless the people are already their political enemies and then the anti-corruption drive has nothing to do with corruption, but is a use of power to crush political opposition (although the opposition was also corrupt). The corruption is not the motive for the vendetta against members of the TRT, but the political power they wielded. The Junta has not made a single move against any of the corruption that benefits the Democrat party, the military or the police. Although hard to measure, appears to me that corruption is on the increase, but previous empirical studies shows a strong correlation between dictatorships and corruption, so there is no reason to think Thailand would be the exception to the rule.
Hard to believe that there continues to be support for this military dictatorship with all the evidence of its failure, and the support is surely evaporating but we have to admire col. jeru for standing on his principles of supporting authoritarian and non-elected rule as long as his object of hatred (Thaksin) is prevented from running in an election.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Contract farming
Another question: do the villagers still do any subsistence (ie for home consumption) farming? rice etc?
Academic commentary on Burma uprising
Thanks Kyi May Kaung,
20 days is a long time: you’re right that this is already dated. When I put this list together (in a rush, I might add) those academics who I found providing quote in the media were the individuals I noted above.
I may (as time permits) put together a more up-to-date list of academic comment. I would appreciate any suggestions that readers may have about any commentators I might otherwise miss.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Academic commentary on Burma uprising
I am afraid this is already dated, and a bit inclined too much towards junta friendlies.
KMK
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
As Ex-Ajarn probably already knows, corruption is a disease that flourishes in both democratic and authoritarian systems whatever Ex-Ajarn\’s empirical studies show. And it is a toss-up which corruption, (\’elected\’ corruption or \’non-elected\’ corruption) leaves nations that much poorer.
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
As the Col. no doubt knows, the empirical evidence shows a strong correlation between having non-elected forms of government and increased levels of corruption. Although I know of no specific studies published on this topic measuring the current junta here in Thailand, I wonder why the Col. thinks Thailand would not follow the same pattern found in the rest of the world?
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
A transparency international assessment is more than third-hand gossip.
Contract farming
James: the contracts generally “guarantee” farmers a fixed price per kilogram. But there is usually a scale of prices according to the “grade” of the crop. This gives companies some flexibility to adjust the price by downgrading the crop. The input costs (often slightly inflated above market rates) are subtracted from the total payment made to the farmer. If the crop fails, the company bares the cost of the inputs.
Contract farming
How are costs and profits divided between farmers and company? do they get a percentage of sale (as for the rubber farmers in Laos in an earlier post), or a fixed price per kg, or some other arrangement? Are input prices subtracted from this as you seem to suggest?
Dance for health
[…] Mandala’s favourite junta bureaucrat, Ladda Tangsupachai┬ (scourge of coyotes)┬ has made it big […]
Contract farming
Hi Tip, thanks for your interest. Here are some quick answers:
1. I would rather not say.
2. There has been longstanding interesting in growing garlic which, in the past, has been very lucrative for the village. 30 or so years ago it was grown much less extensively (partly given that dry season fields were used for raising cattle). But it has expanded gradually to become the dominant cash crop in the 1990s and early 2000s.
3. I will do a post in a few days on the yeild reductions. Key issues, according to the farmers, are climatic variability and soil fertility decline. The trade agreement with China had some impact on price (and a significant impact on perceptions about price). There was also a government scheme encouraging farmers to switch out of garlic given concerns about the impact of Chinese garlic imports.
4. There is considerable labour hire within the village (about half of the village depend on wage labour). Sometimes labourers are also bought in from neighbouring villages. Labour is usually hired for high input tasks like planting, weeding and harvesting. But there is also extensive use of exchange labour.
5. No. Of the 40 farmers I worked with in detail about 30 (if I remember my data correctly) nominated wage labour as their primary or secondary source of income. Livelihoods are typically rather diverse.
6. Very few young people are engaged in agriculture. Most are studying or working in urban employment.
If you get in touch with me direct via email we could have some more extensive discussions.
More on the Chinese in northern Laos
very well and useful
Contract farming
Andrew, I have some questions:
1) Which district is the village in?
2) How and why did people get into garlic production 20 years ago?
3) What caused yield and price reductions in the early 2000s? Have the farmers been affected by FTA and imported garlic?
4) Do they hire labor in farm?
5) Can these households subsist solely on contract farming?
6) What do young men and women aged 18-35 do? (In the village I’ve carried out fieldwork in Lampun young people are mainly in non-farm employment.)
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
In Thailand, there is a “culture of corruption” (ever wondered what all those gift baskets around new year are for?). “There will be quick filter down effects.” I wished it was so. However, it seems that by pointing the finger at big corruption cases, people are only encouraged to continue with their ways. A teacher buying his promotion to school director; Ombudsmen office or democracy promotion officials going on tax-paid pleasure trips abroad; district officers and provincial governors getting free memberships in golf clubs; lecturers offering weekend, evening, or English-language curricula? This isn’t seen as corruption, but as normal… (and this is just chicken feed). It seems to me that the higher people climb on the bureaucratic ladder, the more they come to see the opportunities for corruption as some sort of fringe benefit to their position and thus think that this is their right. As a former riverside university rector once bluntly told me: “In your country, lecturers are well paid. But in Thailand, we are forced to become corrupt (so that we might be able to life the lives we think we have a right to, i.e. house, car, foreign schooling of our kids…).” This perspective seems to be widespread. How much of the national budget disappears in this way each year? If I remember correctly, it was either Thipawan or Jaruwan who put the figure as high as 30%. Given that a further 30% is spent uselessly, only 40% might remain for developing the country, although much will go to salaries (look at the budget structure of the ministry of education, for example).
(This is just a comment from years of experience; no claim to academic validity.)
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
” But it is the everyday “small-time graft” . . . that does so much harm to the country!” – That is what Srithanonchai believes but I have my doubts. Thaksin Shinawatra justified his corruption one time by insinuating that corruption is the Thai way . . . and rhetorically invited anyone ‘who had not sinned to cast the first stone’. I responded with a hail of slingshots directed at Thaksin Shinawatra!
Thailand has to prioritize! Tackle big-time corruption starting by the judicial prosecution of Thaksin Shinawatra, wife and gang for any and all offenses including tax cheating. Once Thailand can show determination to jail big-time criminally corrupts, there will be a quick filter down effects . . .
Contract farming
Thanks. This sort of article of article with hard data is very interesting. Digging deeper and finding (probably multiple) causes of farming debt and solutions is certainly more satisfying than the stock explanation I first heard of farming debt being caused by bad advice the government gave farmers so it should be covered by the government.
Contract seems to have two dimensions, 1. the larger company is better able to insure:
“Almost all the contracting companies provide the farmers with seedlings (or seed) and agro-chemicals. The cost of these inputs is then deducted from the selling price of the crop. If the crop fails the loss is borne by the company. ”
2. The larger company is better able to do the research and calculations to find crops with a viable profit margin given current and possibly changing market conditions.
I wonder how the financing of longer term fixed costs are covered, like the Tap Tim fish cages of one fish farmer in the Mekong south of Chiang Saeng. This motivates me to do my own poking around and find out how the economics of it all works.
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
Nearly everyone here in the forum admit to second-hand or third-hand gossips about the current military rulers . . . so who can I rely on?
Since we all rely on second hand information, my information is just as good as any other guy. And my information (from media and from any googled Thai scandals of 6 years past) still point to Thaksin’s rule as corruption-ridden of a Godzilan scale. Surely Surayud’s forest trespassing (if true) would have been a minor transgression (compared with Thaksin Shinawatra) had he not reluctantly accepted to be interim PM of Thailand.
Small-time graft and ex-Ajarn’s banal gripes about Thai prostitution and military gratuities had been around since Thai Adam . . . and its scale is no more or no less than before. So what is new Srithanonchai, Ex-Ajarn, Grasshopper and the rest?
Border nonsence
It is very interesting times in Thai politics and will be a critical election. Post PMThaksin hegemony, many aspirants see that they have a decent chance at power whether through money or the gun – or if via policies, it has to be ‘populist’. I don’t think it is a return to the ‘bad old days’ – it is a new playing field with old players. I don’t know what this would yield after Dec 23 or in 1 year or 5 years (a return of a ‘re-constituted’ PMThaksin as ‘saviour’ – after leading ManCity to a premiership title!). The most likely scenario is a continued ‘bumbling on’ as an imperfect democracy. It make for frustrating watching and requires too much patience and tolerance – much like being stuck in Bangkok traffic.
Border nonsence
“Surayud’s government would want to ensure that old-style mega vote-buying (popularized by Thaksin and TRT) do not reassert itself in Surayud’s supervised elections.”
Vote-buying in Thailand has a long-history in Thailand which started long-before Thaksin came to power. Sure, the TRT used the technique but so did the opposition. The TRT are the only party in Thai political history that actually campaigned directly to the people through the use of policies (whether or not these were good policies is another debate, one that in civilized countries is decided by elections). What are the platforms of the political parties for this upcoming election? These parties aligned with the government are not even making a pretense of campaigning to win the votes of the people, instead it is all about forming alliances with individuals who can deliver the votes through vote-buying.
There was no creditable polling that ever showed that Thaksin did not have the support of the majority of Thai voters. Love him or hate him, he would have won the election that coup was staged to stop, whether vote buying occurred or not.
A “bad” elected official is a 100 times better than a “good” dictator, because there is a sure-fire way to replace the “bad” elected official while removal of dictators has consistently proven to be difficult.
And who is to say who is a good leader or a bad leader? Was Ronald Reagan a good or bad leader? How about Jimmy Carter, or Bill Clinton? It is not hard to find a difference of opinion on whether these were good or bad leaders. Just because col. jeru and myself think Thaksin was a bad leader, does that mean we are right and the voters of Thailand are wrong?
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
This ‘small time graft’ issue is one not isolated to Thailand but the region. All the states surrounding Thailand have a similar issue of cronyism. Malaysia has its ‘new rich’, Cambodia has the extended extended family of Hun Sen, Burma…. The regional exception is Singapore. (I am not sure about Vietnam.)
Why doesn’t Singapore suffer from these labels? Obviously now it would be quite hard for Singapore to suffer from the type of corruption (other than nepotism?) that goes on north of its border, but how did Singapore achieve this? I am sure the answer is in its determined involvement with the international economy which has created a pressurised domestic system that has consequently fostered accountability… and responsibility. Surely if Thai people wish to rid themselves of corruption, Bangkok needs to become an NIE and spread its growth and institutions outward.. perhaps to the detriment of forests and rivers…
Thailand’s (second?) highest profile forest encroacher?
col. jeru
People with first-hand accounts of large scale corruption are unlikely to make the details public for obvious reasons. Chuan lacked the political muscle to tackle the problem, Thaksin actually did make some moves to lessen corruption (with the obvious exception of the corruption that benefited him personally), but the current administration is too concerned with retaining power to do anything that would result in making any powerful people unhappy, unless the people are already their political enemies and then the anti-corruption drive has nothing to do with corruption, but is a use of power to crush political opposition (although the opposition was also corrupt). The corruption is not the motive for the vendetta against members of the TRT, but the political power they wielded. The Junta has not made a single move against any of the corruption that benefits the Democrat party, the military or the police. Although hard to measure, appears to me that corruption is on the increase, but previous empirical studies shows a strong correlation between dictatorships and corruption, so there is no reason to think Thailand would be the exception to the rule.
Hard to believe that there continues to be support for this military dictatorship with all the evidence of its failure, and the support is surely evaporating but we have to admire col. jeru for standing on his principles of supporting authoritarian and non-elected rule as long as his object of hatred (Thaksin) is prevented from running in an election.