Food Policy

Strategic Framework for Food Management in Thailand

Introduction and Objectives

The most recent comprehensive plan for improving Thailand's food system was the Strategic Framework for Food Management in Thailand. As the 2008 National Food Committee Act drew the Thai National Food Committee into existence, their main initiave was to develop this framework. Both the formation of the committee and this framework established a newfound importance of the issues related to Thailand's food system. The plan was effective for five years, from 2012 to 2016. It addressed four major themes, including food security, food quality and food safety, food education, and food management. Objectives for this plan were as follows:

1. To increase the efficiency of resource management for sustainable national food production.

2. To ensure that food products from households, communities and industries are of good standard, conform to food safety standards and are of high nutritional value.

3. To create food education and research systems to generate a body of knowledge on all food production aspects, including the distribution of knowledge to interested agencies.

4. To improve the efficiency of the food management system, including food related laws and information system, etc.

5. To create food security in households and communities
   during normal times and during emergencies.

Strategies

The Strategic Framework for Food Management in Thailand document provided general strategies to improve issues related to the four major themes. Exact plans of action were not included. Instead, vague proposals were made that allowed for interpretation of how to complete these tasks. Strategies corresponding to each of the four themes are described below.

Food Security—The plan outlined several approaches to address food security and its components, with some focused on increasing food supply and others tackling lack of accessibilty. Approaches focused on increasing food supply included protecting and managing natural resource inputs of production, balancing the proportion of food crops versus energy crops, and increasing the agricultural labor force by creating motivation for participation. Approaches focused on improving accessibility included promoting of accessibilty at the community level, innovating new technologies, and developing better logistic systems for food products.

Food Safety and Quality— Strategies for improving food safety and quality mainly involved increased monitoring of the food production system at the industrial and community level. Safety and quality regulations were to be standardized and promoted so that they could be effectively implemented.

Food Education— To improve food education, the Thai National Food Committee proposed the government should support food research for a more expansive knowledgebase, and collaborate with agencies to promote food education. It was also proposed that farmers should increase their knowledge about their trade, and that everyone should learn more about appropriate consumptive behaviors.

Food Management— There were three approaches included to address food management issues. The first one was to strengthen the structure of food management organizations. The second strategy was to write and revise laws that would better regulate food production. Lastly, databases were to be improved upon so they could be used as better tools¹.

Other Recent Policy Implementations

Food Labeling

In December of 2014, a new food labeling law became active in Thailand that expanded the requirements of information provided for pre-packaged food products. New additions included highlighting allergens on ingredient lists, categorizing food additives, and providing health warnings for caffeinated soft drinks. This policy aimed to educate consumers on the contents of their food products and associated health risks, overall improving food safety practices⁵.

Investment

In 2017, the Thailand Board of Investment permitted several agricultural projects aimed to increase yields and improve efficiency and food quality. Many of the projects center around innovative technology use, such as GPS, robotics, and data analytics. The result may be reduced food insecurity, but specifically, the government hopes the end result will be a close collaboration amongst farmers, public sectors, and private companies for an overall strengthened food system⁶.

Setting Crop Prices

In October of 2020, the Thai government set prices for the 2020-2021 rice cropping season in order to support agricultural production. This plan guarantees farmers a minimum income if rice prices fall below market value. Prices are set between THB 10 000 and THB 15 000 per tonne or roughly USD 330 to USD 495. However, there is a limit set on the quantity of tonnes per household insured by this price minimum, ranging between 14 and 30. The result of this guarantee protects farmers from financial losses so that they are able to continue their vital role as producers in a stable food system⁷.

Opportunities for Improvement

Food Waste

The problem of food waste was not addressed by the Strategic Framework for Food Management in Thailand, but is relevant to improving food security. Thailand does not track how much food goes to waste in total, but the nation's Pollution Control Department estimated in 2017 that 64 percent of garbage was organic materials, not including trash covered by private waste-management companies. Only 2 percent of this organic waste is recycled⁸. Government investment in improved waste-sorting systems may increase the amount of food recycled for a more sustainable food system. Food waste could also be reduced by not creating as much in the first place. Advancing technologies to make food products last longer, such as better food storage, could decrease the quantity of food wasted. The government could support the reduction of food waste by investing in development projects for these types of technologies. Surplus is a significant factor of food waste, and private companies such as Ikea and Mariott hotels have stepped up to donate surplus food. However, there is no government mandated policy for all food distributors to donate their surpluses. Policies calling for distribution of surplus food would work to improve food insecurity, as those in need would have better access to nutritionally adequate foods⁹.

Nutrition

Consumptive behaviors are a problem affecting children in Thailand, but government policies may offer solutions. Although undernourishment rates have been decreasing in recent years, it remains a public health issue, which is apparent when looking at national data for stunting. Nutritional deficiencies can restrict the body's ability to grow, therefore causing stunting. Stunting can be seen in approximately 11 percent of children under the age of 5 in Thailand. For comparison, that is 7 percent more than what is experienced in the United States. In contrast, approximately 9.6 percent of children and adolescents in Thailand are obese¹⁰. Both food access and nutrition education play prominent roles in these two extremes. The government can implement policies such as increasing wages and crop subsidies to improve food access for demographics most likely affected by undernourishment. Nutrition education is important when addressing obesity, so that people know how to fuel their bodies in a healthy way. Access to healthier foods may help as well. The Thai government can promote these by collaborating with nutrition organizations and incentivizing the sale and consumption of healthier foods.

Ethical Considerations

The agricultural innovations that the Thai government supports require careful considerations so that they are done in an ethical way. It is clear from the Strategic Framework of Food Management in Thailand document and the 2017 investments in technology development that the goal is to advance several areas of the food system. However, if they operate under the innovation presumption for example, new technologies may be dangerous. The innovation presumption is where innovation is ethically acceptable unless there is a good reason not to¹¹. In context, this means agricultural technologies can be used until it is proven harmful. But operating under this presumption can unnecessarily expose consumers and producers to unsafe innovations. For instance, developing a new pesticide to increase crop yields may appear to be beneficial to food security. However, farm workers could soon experience unexpected health problems related to the pesticide application, or if the agricultural products make it to consumers, consumers may experience health problems related to eating. Therefore, advantages of innovation could be outweighed by disadvantages if development is not carried out in a precautious manner.