Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series: "Enabling a sustainable and just electricity transformation in Thailand"

Last month, we talked with Chuenchom Sangarasri Greacen (Chom Greacen), who is a co-founder of the energy think tank Palang Thai that has undertaken public-interest research for fair, sustainable, and democratic development of the energy sector in Thailand and the wider Mekong region. Before this, from 1999 to 2003, Chom was an electricity policy analyst at the Energy Policy and Planning Office within Thailand’s Ministry of Energy, where she concentrated on the country’s electricity-sector reform process. 

Over the last two decades, Chom has prepared many studies published as reports, academic articles and in the media. Her work has often informed and shaped public debates on electricity planning and policy, as well as particular power projects. In 2012, for example, she prepared a power development plan for Thailand that demonstrated how Thailand could phase out coal, incorporate more renewable energy and emphasize energy efficiency and demand side management, leading to significant debate on the Thai Government’s own Power Development Plan.

In this video, we discussed about enabling a just and sustainable electricity transformation in Thailand.

The video was premiered on CSDS Facebook Page. Below are the timestamps of the video, in case you want to jump to specific section/question.

• 02:47 To begin, please could you give us a brief overview of Thailand's electricity sector at present, in terms of types of generation and ownership. From the government's perspective, what is the current goal of electricity planning? How do you evaluate this goal?

• 10:42 Thailand currently has a very high reserve margin (around 45%?) - How did this become so, and what do you think should be done about it?

• 23:23 There is growing debate in Thailand about increasing the proportion of renewables? How do you evaluate the progress on this to date? Are renewables moving in the right direction in Thailand, in terms of type and expansion?

• 30:28 It seems that 'disruptive technologies', such as decentralized block chain systems, are attracting a lot of attention nowadays.  What are the current issues here, and what do you think about them? 

• 35:26 Often less discussed is the potential for energy efficiency and demand side management? Is there scope for more in Thailand, and do you think it is likely to be achieved?

• 40:31 Do you think that the EU's Carbon Border Tax is significant to Thailand? Is it already having an impact and if so, how?

• 45:20 In what ways do you think research can help support a just and sustainable electricity transformation in Thailand? What should be the research agenda and who should undertake it?

Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series: "Mekong River low flows, community livelihoods and the politics of water knowledge in Northeast Thailand"

Earlier this month, we talked with Assoc. Prof. Kanokwan Manorom who is is currently Lecturer in the Faculty of Liberal Arts, Ubon Ratchathani University, Thailand. She is also the Director of the Mekong Sub-Region Social Research Center in the University.

Ajarn Kanokwan is a sociologist by training whose research examines rural development in Thailand and the wider Mekong region. Her research has focused on to water and land governance, as well related topics such as migration, gender, indigenous knowledge and knowledge politics, and the role of social movements. In this political ecology in asia dialogue, we discussed about the recent changes in the Mekong River and its impact on riparian communities in Northeast Thailand.

The video was premiered on CSDS Facebook Page. Below are the timestamps of the video, in case you want to jump to specific section/question.

• 02:08 Over the last couple of years, there has been a lot of discussion about the changing conditions of the Mekong River, including low flows, algae growth and clear waters. What have been the peoples’ experiences of low flows and other changes in the Mekong River over the last couple of years in Northeast Thailand, including gendered impacts?

• 06:08 In Northeast Thailand nowadays, how important is fishing, and how important is riverbank gardening?

• 07:41 A lot of the focus over the past couple of years has been on inter-government data sharing, both within the MRC, and between China and the LMC. After the low flows in 2020, in October 2020 China announced it would share all year around data from two monitoring stations. How do you evaluate the recent increased focus on state-led water data sharing?

• 11:30 As a sociologist, how do you see the water data relating to local experience and situational knowledge of the river, does it match?

• 16:18 How do you think these types of existing knowledge can be combined or be in dialogue with each other?

• 17:53 How could those types of knowledge come together?

• 22:30 Do you have anything to share about types of knowledge, what kind of direction that are leading the Mekong River, and do you think the expectations of that kind of research can be met?

• 26:42 To achieve the kind of sustainability that we just discussed, should it be just locally, regionally, nationally or transnational platform that we should work towards?

• 31:13 What should be the role of academics, and what should be the priorities for a 'political ecology' research agenda on water in Northeast Thailand?

Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series: "Problems for the plantations: Challenges for large-scale land concessions in Laos and Cambodia"

Last month, we had a discussion with Professor Ian G. Baird, who is currently a Professor of Geography in the Department of Geography at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is also director of the Center for Southeast Asian Studies (CSEAS) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His research focuses mainly on mainland Southeast Asia, especially Laos, Thailand and northeastern Cambodia. He has written on a range of themes related to rural political ecology in Southeast Asia, and that also relates to development studies, post-colonial studies, and on indigeneity in Southeast Asia. His work has addressed land and rivers in mainland Southeast Asia, including the impacts of large hydropower dams and economic land concessions.

This discussion focused on to Ian’s research on land concessions in Southern Laos and NE Cambodia, which relates to questions over control and access to land, government strategy and planning towards economic land concessions and commodity exports, forms of community resistance, and the role of global commodity markets.

The video was premiered on CSDS Facebook Page. Below are the timestamps of the video, in case you want to jump to specific section/question.

• 03:35 To what extent have plantations been established in Southern Laos and NE Cambodia, over what time frame, by which actors and for what purposes?

• 05:50 Why have political ecology researchers paid attention to plantations in Southern Laos and NE Cambodia? What are the main directions of their research and what are the most important findings overall?

• 08:05 Your work has mainly focused on Southeast Asia – in the body of research that has been done so far, are the issues outlined here shared with other regions or is there something about the plantation in Southeast Asia that is unique to the region?

• 09:30 You emphasize in your recent 2019 paper in Journal of Agrarian Change that you would like to draw attention to ‘after the land grab’, in particular for plantation developers. Could you explain why this is significant?

• 14:15 Follow up: how it relates to commodity prices and what you term ‘resource frontier mentality’?

• 20:58 How much influence that community activism or civil society activism had in influencing these companies?

• 25:00 Are there any challenges that are not fixable by these modern agribusinesses when they’re trying to invest in Southern Laos and Northeast Cambodia?

• 26:28 You conclude that in Southern Laos and NE Cambodia “… plantation development is often fraught with difficulties… ” and that “….. they appear to be frequently constituting “lose-lose-lose” scenarios for villagers, the government and investors.” You also note that some government officials in Laos and Cambodia are themselves becoming less supportive of land concessions. Do you anticipate the decline of the plantation as an approach to development in Southern Laos and Northeast Cambodia?

• 31:05 Could the analysis that you showed could give insight to ways to transform this thinking of development, if not from mainstream at least to give new ideas about how activist or even government officials might reapproach plantations and development?

• 34:20 Regarding a political ecology research agenda on plantations and land in Southeast Asia, what would be your suggestions for key priorities?

Further reading: Baird, I. G. (2020). "Problems for the plantations: Challenges for large-scale land concessions in Laos and Cambodia." Journal of Agrarian Change 20(3): 387-407.

Read more of Ian Baird's research here.

Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series: "Transboundary Governance of Haze in Southeast Asia: Challenges and Solutions"

Earlier this month, we had a discussion with Dr. Helena Varkkey, who is currently a Senior Lecturer at the Department of International and Strategic Studies, University of Malaya. Dr. Helena’s research presently focuses on transboundary pollution in Southeast Asia, including on the role of patronage in agribusiness, especially the oil palm industry, and its link to forest fires and haze in the region.

The video was premiered on CSDS Facebook Page. Below are the timestamps of the video, in case you want to jump to specific section/question.

• 02:58 Please could you outline what exactly haze is in Southeast Asia, where does it come from, how is it created, who is affected by it and how?

• 09:48 Could you explain a little bit more on why were the peatlands being drained in the first place, and why did the fires happened?

• 16:45 Your research has focused on the role of patronage in agribusiness. Please could you explain a little why patronage is an important issue in understanding haze in Southeast Asia.

• 21:22 A part of your research has focused on the role of transboundary environmental governance mechanisms in addressing haze. These have included the ASEAN’s ‘Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution’ and Singapore’s Transboundary Haze Pollution Act. Please could you explain about what these mechanisms are and how they were created. From your perspective, how effective have these mechanisms been and why?

• 27:20 What has been the role of community movements, civil society and researchers in influencing these transboundary environmental governance mechanisms and their enforcement?

• 32:00 In one of your recent papers you have framed the haze dilemma in Malaysia as a trade off between economic growth and public health. Please could you explain how decisions on this trade off have been arrived at, whose interests and voices are considered, and why

• 38:20 In terms of prospects for addressing transboundary haze in Southeast Asia, what do you consider to be some of the most promising initiatives at present and why? [By states, by companies, by civil society/ community/ consumers?]

• 42:55 Regarding a research agenda on transboundary haze in Southeast Asia, what would be your suggestions for key priorities?

Further Reading: Varkkey, H. (2018). The haze problem in Southeast Asia: palm oil and patronage. Routledge. Read more of Dr. Helena’s research here.

Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series: "Disastrous Flooding and Haze in Bangkok"

Earlier this month, we had a discussion with Dr. Danny Marks, who is currently an Assistant Professor of Environmental Politics and Policy in the School of Law and Government of Dublin City University. Dr. Marks research overall has focused on environmental governance in Southeast Asia, in particular with regard to political ecology, environmental justice, climate governance, and disaster risk reduction.

This discussion is the first on the Political Ecology in Asia Dialogue Series. This series is a new initiative of CSDS, and we hold the objective of encouraging rigorous debate through the lens of political ecology on development issues and trends in the region, including social, economic and environmental changes taking place.

Below are the timestamps of the video, in case you want to jump to specific section/question.

• 03:15 Could you outline your analysis of a political ecology of disastrous flooding in Bangkok? What are the underlying reasons why Bangkok is vulnerable to disastrous flooding? What are the key impacts? How does it help explain who is vulnerable to flooding?

• 09:45 To expand a little bit, the flooding takes place not only on the Bangkok city itself but also within the context of the wider Chao Phraya basin. Can you please comment on the wider changes within the basin?

• 12:03 When we talk about the flooding in Bangkok and the wider Chao Phraya basin, are there particular groups of people that are vulnerable and why?

• 15:18 In the context of flooding and the uneven impacts between different groups, what does that mean to your idea of disaster justice?

• 18:15 Having discussed disaster justice, how does your explanation differ from the Thai government explanations?

• 20:54 Could disastrous flooding happen again? Have lessons been learned? Have things changed? What will the future look like if another disaster happens?

• 24:15 What could be the consequences of climate change to a city like Bangkok, especially through the political ecology and disaster justice lens?

• 27:15 What should be the policy recommendations and priority actions taken, with the viewpoint of achieving disaster justice/climate justice?

• 29:20 Every year it seems now, Bangkok suffers severe air pollution in the cool season. Could you explain why haze happens in Bangkok? How can political ecology help us analyze it

• 33:37 Is the issue of injustice and inequality in haze being recognised, let alone being addressed in policy or even public discussion?

• 36:11 Is haze here to stay in Bangkok, or do you see any condition under which there could be cleaner air in the city and what would it take for it to happen?

• 39:46 Beyond the topics that we have focused on today, your work has extended to several other topics including plastic pollution, electricity planning, etc. Are there any connections between your works? Are there shared traits in terms of their political ecologies that you could draw out?

• 42:34 Regarding a political ecology research agenda in Thailand and Southeast Asia, what would be your suggestions for key priorities?