Highlights from the Closed-group Discussion on the Deliberation Model Research
Like many middle-income countries, Thailand faces unique challenges in developing a comprehensive social protection system. The fragmentation of service provision and inadequate coordination among government agencies lead to overlaps, inefficiencies, and gaps in service delivery. More importantly, the limited participation of the public in the policy design and implementation process prevents a full understanding of people's realities. These issues pose significant obstacles to the progress and administration of social protection.
Nevertheless, Thailand can learn from and adapt best practices from other countries, particularly from other developing nations. These countries have incorporated deliberative mechanisms that enhance public participation, reducing the gap between national and local policymaking, promoting social accountability, and ensuring that social protection policies align with the needs of target groups.
Having contributed to this significant study, recommendations from experts gathered during the dialogue on 11 December 2024 provide guidance on developing institutionalised deliberations for a more comprehensive social protection system. They highlight two key foundational conditions for institutionalised deliberations:
- A supportive mindset among policymakers and implementers of social protection, ensuring they understand the principles and nature of deliberations.
- Restructuring power and redefining the role of the state, shifting towards decentralisation and transforming the state into a facilitator that empowers people to contribute more effectively to supporting governance.
Essentially, it is noted that the extent and form of such support should be tailored to the specific context and goals of each area. A hybrid deliberation model should be designed and implemented accordingly. Although experts emphasise context-specific adaptation, they also recommend a common practice across all areas: ensuring the continuity of deliberations by fostering regular engagement among the public and various stakeholders.
Each area should identify and assign a clear entity responsible for overseeing the deliberation process, preferably a government agency with an existing mandate, to prevent duplication of efforts. Experts believe that without continuity and a clearly defined lead entity, deliberations may lose political momentum and fail to drive meaningful change. This continuity factor has been a key element in the success of institutionalised deliberations.
-By Asst. Prof. Dr. Ajirapa Pienkhuntod, Department of Public Administration, Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat University-
Publication is in Thai language. To receive the free-of-charge printed version, you are welcomed to send a request to Office.Thailand@kas.de. Please state your full name, organisation, and postal address for us to further manage mailing.
