Governance and Micropolitics of Traditional ... - IPRsonline.org

articles). The advocacy of groups such as the Thai Biotechnology Alliance Association for
example have to date been more focused on pushing for the removal of the moratorium on
GMOs and public education than they have on the patent exclusion on life-forms (BAA
brochure, 2006).
The shift from the agricultural sector to the manufacturing sector as the primary source of
exports income have also relegated agriculture as a trade concern to a certain extent. Despite
the still large population of farmers, trade concerns have become focused more heavily on
manufactured goods (of low to moderate technological or value added inputs). Agriculture
thus runs the risk of being pushed back further as a trade concern in FTAs involving Thailand.
Whilst the economy of Thailand has been growing rapidly with the exception of the
1997/1998 economic crisis and recovery, the benefits of such growth in terms of standard of
living and income are not necessarily being distributed to the rest of the country. Despite a
decrease in the number of people living under the international poverty line, the inequality in
income levels is higher than many other Southeast Asian countries and in a global context
Thailand ranks high. According to national estimates, the income share of the poorest 20% of
households is barely 4% of national income compared with 60% for the richest 20% (Kermel-
Torres, D. 2004). This poses the question of whether the government’s decentralisation
strategies, and economic policies are having any substantial effect on raising incomes in
regions other than the central region of Thailand. A positive finding made by a National
Statistics Office study was that the proportion of Thai farmers living below the poverty line
has decreased from 47 per cent to 27 per cent of the population between 1994 and 2004.
Nevertheless, general differences in incomes among farmers remained formidable, with the
richest earning 12 times as much on average as the poorest, the study said (Bangkok Post,
09/08/2005, Rural wealth gap lingers, study reveals).
In Thailand the primacy of the capital is an extreme phenomenon, with its origins in the city’s
geographical location and the country’s highly centralised style of territorial management. 28
This central role, which can also be seen in the way other activities and decision making are
concentrated, is reflected in the demography of the country, with over 50% of the urban
population residing in the greater Bangkok metropolitan region (Kermel-Torres, D. 2004).
There is thus a considerable divide between the large rural population (approximately 70%
but shrinking [Yuthavong, Yongyuth. 2003]), and the one highly centralised urban area. The
importance of this spatial phenomenon is not to be understated due to the centralised
Ministerial structure and issues related to peripheral consultation and ideological difference.
This could be described as a domestic geopolitics of difference. These differences are in turn
reflected in the laws of Thailand whether implicitly or explicitly. With regards to the laws
described in Section 3.5, this geopolitics of difference is something that is subtle and
complex.
28 The administration of Thailand is divided into 5 levels: center, provinces (changwat), districts (amphoe in
rural areas and khet in Bangkok), sub-districts (tambon) and villages (muban).
34