Changes in Social Welfare due to the Policy of Thai Rubber Price

Authors

  • Soyfa Sertkaew Graduate School of Public Administration, National Institute of Development Administration
  • Montree Socatiyanurak Socatiyanurak Graduate School of Public Administration, National Institute of Development Administration

Keywords:

para rubber, price policy, rubber price, social welfare

Abstract

This research was aimed at analyzing the efficiency of price policies on the Thai economic system. Policy efficiency was considered in terms of social welfare. Five rubber price stabilization policies from 1992 to 2016 were studied. Social welfare measurement was based on changes in the producer surplus and the consumer surplus compared to the budget and income from policy implementation. To measure producer surplus and consumer surplus, Thai rubber demand and supply models were produced using secondary information from 1987 to 2016. It was found that policy factors did not affect Thai rubber demand and supply. It could be stated that the price intervention policy did not affect Thai rubber markets. The consumer surplus decreased by 231.15529 billion Baht because rubber was bought at higher prices than the market, while the producer surplus increased by 228.20244 billion Baht because of rubber sold at higher prices than the market. The budget for policy implementation and operation loss amounted to 21.02061 billion Baht. Thus, social welfare lost due to policy implementation for   14 years accounted for 23.973.47 billion Baht, or 1,712.39 million Baht per year. There were three recommended options for Thailand’s rubber price stabilization policies: 1) production policies that decrease plantation area and increase product quality, 2) farmer strengthening support, to serve as a driving mechanism for managing price uncertainty and to add rubber value by providing knowledge, innovation and technology to farmers; and 3) a public role change–from the operator to the director, in particular regarding commercial policies through previous public mechanisms, this would include a role in supporting business operators.

References

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2010. Crop: Rubber. [Online] Availiable https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (1 March 2017).

Office of Agricultural Economics. 2015. Agricultural Statistic of Thailand. [Online] Available https://www.oae.go.th/assets/portals/1/files/ebook/yearbook58.pdf (1 March 2017).

Pochanukul Suzuki, P. and P. Sapsisanjai. 2014. Study on a Market Intervention Policy on Rubber to Prevent Corruption. Bangkok: Office of The National Anti-Corruption Commission. 23 p. [in Thai]

Chomchan, S. 2014. Dynamics of Thailand's agricultural policy: from the past to the present, Part 2 specific Thailand's agricultural Policy. 609 p. In Research Report. Bangkok: The Thailand Research Fund. [in Thai]

State Audit Office of the Kingdom of Thailand. 2017. Farmers’ institute potential development to stabilize rubber prices and manage the government’s stocks. Bangkok: Rubber Authority of Thailand. Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. [Online] Available https://www.oag.go.th (17 January 2018).

Various Outstanding Rubber Credits. 2015. Thairath. (2 June 2015): 8. [in Thai]

Published

2020-04-30

How to Cite

Sertkaew, S. ., & Socatiyanurak, M. S. (2020). Changes in Social Welfare due to the Policy of Thai Rubber Price. Journal of Agricultural Research and Extension, 37(1), 106–117. retrieved from https://li01.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/MJUJN/article/view/215093

Issue

Section

Research Article