World Food Policy Volume 3, No. 2/Volume 4, No. 1, Fall16/Spring17 | Page 15

Integrating Food and Nutrition Security in a Middle-Income, Globalized, Food-Exporting Nation: Thailand’s Food Policy Challenge ed Nations Development Programme, training centers where farmers could be trained in sufficiency methods, fam- 2007). The stated aim of this approach ers were offered seed money to convert is to empower farming households by their farm practices, sufficiency econ- making them less reliant on fluctuat- omy principles were taught in schools ing market forces and to enable more and special television programs, and social marketing campaigns were con- secure incomes for farmers through ducted to inform the Thai public of the growing a larger variety of crops (Supa- benefits of sufficiency economy ideas phol, 2010). The health and economic (Isager & Ivarsson, 2010). benefits of organic agriculture are also Despite these government ef- recognized. Importantly, the philoso- phy distinguishes between subsistence forts, the results of the promotion of the production and sufficiency production, sufficiency economy are unclear. Some with sufficiency meaning that farmers reports suggest that participation by produce enough for a comfortable ex- famers has been low, but there is no of- istence. At the root of the sufficiency, ficial government data on the program’s economy is an appeal to the Buddhist success. There are several reasons why ‘middle path’ of moderation. Farmers the sufficiency economy faces limita- shouldn’t live in poverty and depriva- tions in contemporary Thailand. In tion, but also should not sacrifice their many ways, it may already be too late happiness, health, and the environment to attempt to change farmers’ lives and for greater economic gain. In this as- livelihoods in such substantial ways. pect the philosophy is not a new idea, Although a large proportion of Thais it continues various government pro- are agriculturalists, Thai rural life is far from static. There are large numbers grams since the 1980s which have en- of rural Thais who engage in season- couraged Thai people to self-reliance, al urban–rural migration for example thrift, self-discipline, and commitment and many farming families rely on off- to the community and nation (Pong- farm income to meet their needs (Rigg sapich, 1996). & Nattapoolwat, 2001). Also within Since 2002, the sufficiency econ- rural communities themselves, there omy philosophy has been incorporated is a large degree of economic diversifi- into official Thai government planning cation already underway with govern- documents, most notably the 5-year- ment employment and small business ly National Economic and Social De- ownership providing new livelihoods velopment plans, as a key goal of Thai for rural Thais. Thai farmers are also development strategies. And after 2006, already dependent on the market at a when a military government took con- fundamental level for income and so- trol of the country, it became the “offi- cial status reasons. It may, therefore, be cial guiding philosophy” for all branch- unrealistic to expect them to return to es of government. Ten billion baht was a pre-capitalist version of agricultural invested in creating model villages and production. Many also do not desire to 15