Air pollution woes in Chiang Mai grabbed national headlines after Pita Limjaroenrat, list-MP and chief adviser to the Move Forward Party, urged the Srettha administration to declare the northern tourist town a disaster zone to unlock more funding to fight pollution in the province.
While his idea of designating the province a disaster zone did not win many backers, with local operators warning that the move was more likely to decimate rebounding local tourism, the bigger question is: What would be a better solution? What should the government do?
Indeed, both the previous and current governments have tried many solutions with limited results. For instance, the previous government of Gen Prayut Chan-o-cha issued a national master plan for lessening PM2.5 pollution in 2019. The blueprint detailed short-, medium- and long-term plans and goals.
The Prayut government put much effort into the short term with water spraying and artificial rain as well as bolstering fire fighting capacity to solve the problem. However, what that government and many before it failed to address were medium- and long-term goals, such as improving fuel quality, which would have posed a burden to refineries or even more drastic actions, such as relocating Klong Toey Port or declaring car-free zones or banning trucks from busy roads at peak times.
It also failed to introduce market mechanisms to promote farm products that come from sustainable harvesting.
Is the Srettha government any different? Not really.
This current government also appears overly dependent on the same old quick fixes, such as arresting arsonists and, like the previous government, using fire fighting and water spraying to subdue the dust.
To be fair, the new government deserves praise for some relatively innovative ideas, such as lobbying Laos, Cambodia, and Myanmar to stop forest fires and hotspots in their territories. The government also made a bold promise to stop importing farm products made by producers who engage in open-air burning.
However, these ideas sound like hot air.
Is it not preposterous to believe that the Myanmar government can order farmers in Shan State to stop burning on their farms?
Indeed, the government should have introduced economic incentives to ensure that farm products, such as rice, maize, and sugar do not come from producers who engage in burning. This idea is not just a castle in the sky. Indeed, our neighbouring countries -- Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia -- tried it almost two decades ago.
Singapore, Malaysia, and Indonesia started creating a system in 2003 to control the palm oil industry and clean up the supply chain. The move followed massive fires caused by slash-and-burn practices in palm oil plantations across Indonesia during the late 1990s. These countries and companies worked with the United Nations Environment Programme to create a clean supply chain that rewarded sustainable farming and penalised open burning.
While these solutions were not a panacea, they at least signalled the intent to initiate longer-term solutions to the problem.
So, instead of chasing arsonists and irresponsible farmers, it is about time PM Srettha, who proudly bills himself as a "salesman", used his economic know-how to devise a brighter solution to the sky-darkening problem of PM2.5 emissions.