The government's "Thailand 4.0" policy would fail to deliver unless the government also can kick off critical investment in human capital, further reform tax, implement a multi-year budget, and reduce corruption through deregulation and transparency, economists said.
Pavida Pananond, associate professor of international business at Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University, said she was not sure if Thailand 4.0 and the so-called "Prem Model" would bring the desired results for Thailand. They could end up as mere buzz- words unless other change was delivered.
She was referring to a political model proposed by some members of the National Reform Steering Assembly for Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to follow in the footsteps of former prime minister and current president of the Privy Council, Prem Tinsulanonda. Gen Prem was prime minister for eight years to 1988, and like Gen Prayut held the top job without contesting an election.
"The Prem model showed a semi-democratic set-up could deliver desirable growth but the context is much different now," Ms Pavida told a forum, "Can Thailand's next government bring real economic reform?" held at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand recently.
The world takes quality growth into account, she said. "How come we exercise Section 44 but still be a digital economy (based on the Thailand 4.0 policy) and stay vibrant in world economy?" she asked.
The market looks at the activities of companies, not just the end products. Environmental and labour standards are key markers while the knowledge-based economy is unlikely to emerge from the incentives and paradigms pursued in the past, she said.
Stanley Kang, chairman of the Joint Foreign Chambers of Commerce in Thailand, said the private sector needs political stability, clear investment policies, and a liberal business environment.
"The government is determined to get things done and we appreciate that. As of now, Thailand still needs big support from border activities and CLMV [Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam] economic linkages to sustain growth," Mr Kang said.
Ulrich Zachau, World Bank representative to Thailand, said though the country has solid growth and a poverty reduction track record, it was among three Asean members with modest economic growth this year. The two others are Singapore and Brunei.
Thailand's competitive edge has eroded over time, added Mr Zachau, taking into account business sophistication, innovation, financial market development, technological readiness, infrastructure, and labour market efficiency.
Governance quality was also down, along with political stability indicators, said the country representative.
Thailand was no longer a leader in logistics as its peers have caught up in infrastructure such as the quality of roads, ports, and airports, Mr Zachau said.
However, the World Bank has lauded Thailand's tax reform as helping reduce the tax burden and improve income distribution.
Ms Pavida agreed with Mr Zachau's worries about how to implement the changes pushed by the Prayuth government.
"Thai bureaucrats are notorious about having great plans but bad implementation," she said. "The country has muddled through reform narratives for years."
But while Zachau recognised that countries with a good democracy often perform poorly on the economy, while the authoritative ones can deliver good economic results, Ms Pavida maintained the legitimacy of a government remains a big issue for the market and consumers.
"On a positive note, we have picked out some good ways forward, but I'm not sure if we can act in time as other countries are also moving ahead," she said.