Koh Samui is an island paradise. But if you have ever looked behind the paradise, what you find may be mountains of rubbish.It was reported early in the week that local authorities there have been struggling to deal with some 250,000 tonnes of rubbish. The landfill on the island has overflowed, with simply no room for more.
So the authorities are looking to "export" the waste to some places off the island.
Samui is not alone with this problem. Indeed, it would not be an exaggeration to say that every locality in the country is similarly mired in its own garbage. The magnitude of the problem is daunting.
According to the Pollution Control Department (PCD), each Thai produces a daily average of 1.15kg of waste, amounting to over 73,000 tonnes nationwide.
Wasant Techawongtham is former News Editor, Bangkok Post.
In 2014, the country had 2,490 dump sites but only 466 of them provide sanitary management services. The rest of them, I assume, were poorly-managed open dumps, and I suspect many more illegal dumps were missing from the statistics.
Over 28 million tonnes of waste, meanwhile, were left unprocessed. That's a whole mountain range of rubbish.
I used to think the situation in Bangkok would be the most severe. Its official population of six-plus million residents balloons to over 10 million if unregistered and non-permanent residents are included, each contributing his/her share.
How bad is the situation? At any unoccupied or undeveloped plot of land all over the city, you can be sure of seeing all sorts of garbage dumped along its parameters.
The canals, once the proud face of Bangkok, not only carry sewage but have long been public dumping grounds as well. That fact recently came to light -- again -- in a very visual way after monsoon rain caused severe flooding.
It transpired that tonnes of assorted rubbish had gathered at many main water gates, effectively incapacitating drainage.
At one such water gate, more than five tonnes of garbage accumulated there, composed of regular consumer product waste to large household waste such as mattresses and furniture items.
Surprisingly, Bangkok was not the worst performer in garbage management, not even in the top 10, according to the PCD.
In its 2013 study, the department found Songkhla at the top of the heap, followed by Bangkok's eastern neighbour Samut Prakan.
But a year later, Samut Prakan took over the No.1 ranking. That was the year that a number of fires raged through its largest landfill in Phraeksa area, spreading toxic fumes to wide areas and parts of Bangkok.
If there was a silver lining in those toxic incidents, it is that it raised public awareness of the magnitude of the country's waste problem. It also led the cabinet to declare waste management as an urgent issue to tackle. A "roadmap on household and hazardous waste management" was subsequently adopted. It was no earth-shattering document, containing a list of action plans of immediate, medium- and long-terms that have been proposed in the past.
Its most controversial aspect is a proposal to employ waste-to-energy technology to manage waste.
Officials look to new technology to generate electricity from burning garbage. But environmentalists are concerned about air pollution and toxic leftovers incineration would generate.
All but one of the proposals in the roadmap deal with the physical management of waste -- how to reduce, recycle and dispose of it. These are merely end-of-pipe solutions. They deal with the end products of our behaviours but not our behaviours themselves that cause the problem.
No possible solutions should be overlooked, of course. But to achieve lasting solutions will require changes in behaviours that are rooted in the Thai culture.
Back when Thailand was mostly agrarian and rural, garbage was of little concern. Everything was made of natural products. Once consumed it could be thrown away to degrade naturally.
Now time has changed as well as landscape and lifestyle. Unfortunately but also understandably, our cultural heritage proves to be resistant to change. On top of this, modern living has led to attitudes that preclude concerns for the public goods -- a phenomenon known as "tragedy of the commons".
All these are not helped by a bureaucratic system that is inert, inefficient, uncreative and inclined toward physical rather than behavioural solutions.
To be fair, the waste management roadmap does contain a proposal to "instil discipline to achieve sustainable management", including enforcing laws against illegal dumping and launching campaigns to raise public awareness.
But two years on, almost nothing of the sort has been implemented. Sure, there was an attempt to convince major stores to stop providing plastic bags. That campaign lasted less than a couple of months.
Any psychologist or sociologist can attest that changing human behaviours is one of the toughest things to do. But it's not impossible.
Once upon a time, Thais didn't like queuing. Now lines at counters are a common sight. Men used to look at condoms with disdain and smokers were everywhere. Now condom use is widespread and most smokers puff away at a few designated spots.
The point is, with the right tools, motivation, strategy and actors, behaviours can be changed. But this usually happens when bureaucracy is not the lead performer.
It was effective when private individuals, groups or organisations took the lead with the bureaucracy providing support, financial or otherwise.
So bring back the Magic Eyes environmental awareness campaign and let loose someone with the charisma and magic touch of the likes of Khunying Chodchoy Sophonpanich and Mechai Viravaidya to transform an enduring Thai legacy.