A. In the past, our economic problems were fairly simple and the solutions to these problems were very often quite straightforward. But about ten years ago, problems became more complicated, starting with the oil shocks, the deterioration of our resources and the rapid changes in the world economy. Our economic development also picked up pace, and began to involve issues which require rational and systematic approaches. At that time, I was Secretary General of the National Economic and Social Development Board, and I realized that we needed more perceptive approaches to economic development. This required up-to-date and solid information as the basis for planning and decision-making.

For a number of years, I had the idea to set up a research institute which would be independent of the government and which would carry out research which was truly objective. Such work could not be done in a government agency, because it does not have a research environment. University people carry out good quality research, but I felt that their work often failed to meet the needs of the policy-makers. I therefore had the idea to set up an independent research institute that could accommodate the country's best academics to help formulate economic policy for the country.

Q. What were some of the initial steps involved in establishing the Institute?

A. We have no tradition in Thailand of having a "think tank" that is financially independent. Therefore, we had several false starts. The World Bank provided a structural adjustment loan which had a component in it for the establishment of an independent research institute to support the government's policy-making. But this didn't work out, as the loan was subject to government control. There was a consensus that we needed an independent institute, and policy-makers concerned all supported the idea. The problem was to find an appropriate mechanism.

Then the opportunity arose with the then Prime Minister of Canada, Mr. Pierre Trudeau. Canada was keen to involve itself in Asian countries' development, and Thailand was named a core country for CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency) aid. I tried to promote Thai-Canadian relations, and took this opportunity to establish TDRI as one of the two projects which CIDA would take up.

But we first had to lay our own groundwork. We needed enough funds to register TDRI as a foundation, a legal entity to qualify as a CIDA project. We were able to obtain funds from three organizations: the Board of Trade of Thailand, the Association of Thai Industries, and the Thai Bankers Association. With these small donations, we had enough money to put us on the agenda. The signing ceremony was held in Ottawa in October, 1984, and was witnessed by the Prime Ministers of Canada and Thailand.

Q. What are your most outstanding memories of the first year of TDRI's operation? What were some of the high points? What were some of the low points?

A. The first year was a year of soul-searching. We had to examine the word "independent" and ask ourselves what that means. Were we independent if our research money came from government? How should we get ourselves close enough to the government to make our work useful, and yet not too close to be influenced or controlled by it? Where was the borderline between "independence" and "advocacy?" A lot of discussions revolved around these issues. In the end we had to be pragmatic.

We were also occupied with giving the Institute its name. I was inspired by the Korean Development Institute's name, and we first came up with the name "Thailand Development Institute." But this denotes an active function in development, so we added the word "research" to connote that the institute's function is not action-oriented but rather research-oriented.

We were also very occupied with getting the various programs started. Our first year was therefore taken up with organizing our first conference on "Development Research and National Development," held in Pattaya in 1984. The conference succeeded in establishing TDRI's research agenda for the next five years.

Q. How do you review the Institute's first five years?

A. The first five years were probably the most active and also the most exciting. There was the question of researchers. The Institute could only be as good as its researchers. We were very fortunate to have put together a good team. We had Dr. Anat as President, Dr. Virabongsa, Dr. Narongchai, and Dr. Ammar as program directors, and Dr. Chalongphob from the World Bank. These were really top-notch people. Most have moved on to be very important people in various organizations; some have become quite famous.

We had the good fortune to be starting out just at the right time, as Thailand was entering a big boom in terms of economic development, and we managed to set the pace and also the tone of our work, and to set a firm foundation for the Institute.

Q. What were the second five years characterized by?

A. The second five years provided the continuity of momentum. We were very fortunate to have as our second president Dr. Phaichitr, and to get an extension of CIDA's aid—the second grant. The most important thing which occurred was that the Institute's financial viability was reassured. Now—with the completion of the Institute's new building—our continuity is further assured.

Q. How do you objectively and frankly assess the Institute's contributions to the country during the past ten years?

A. I think the contributions of TDRI must be rated as fair. Sometimes it has been substantial, sometimes not. There have been ups and downs, like everywhere else. One of our problems has been that to be independent, financially viable and to serve the needs of government, you have to spend a lot of time defining your role. If you speak out your mind frankly, it may not be well received by government, and your access to government information would be accordingly affected. Bureaucrats tend to feel they have a better grasp of issues, and researchers feel they have a better perspective. There would naturally be some misgivings on the part of government officials whose salaries are less than those of TDRI researchers. So it's inevitable that conflicts and tension sometimes arise.

We also have the problem of staff turnover. The financial sector in Thailand is very competitive, and pays more and offers more benefits than TDRI can. This staff turnover certainly affects the quality of work coming out of the Institute. The nature of TDRI research has also shifted. Earlier we focused on economic growth. Now environmental issues and social issues, such as health, education and income distribution, have become priorities. Our research has become more specialized, because most of the general issues we were dealing with earlier became quite commonplace. So we have had to get into more specialized realms, but it is much more difficult to find top academics in these realms of study. The question for TDRI in the future is—how can we continue to be viable, not only financially, but also in the sense of providing relevant research for priority development issues.

Q. If you could name your greatest wish for TDRI in the future, what would that be?

A. The work of TDRI will have to be focused and developed in such a way as to adapt to a changing world and a changing Thailand. It is one thing to provide good information; it's another thing to get it in the hands of people who need it. TDRI must know how to disseminate its information. Information technology is rapidly changing. There should be further networking with libraries and research institutes around the world. I believe that TDRI has a role to play in disseminating research results to the general public in Thailand and the region.

A. Eight or nine years ago—when I was invited to be on the Council of Trustees.

Q. Before you became involved with TDRI, what were your perceptions of and opinions about the Institute?

A. I first heard about TDRI through friends and colleagues who were involved with it. I very much welcomed the idea of having a research institute. I thought it would fill a gap in terms of providing a vehicle for the national planning process. And I felt it would be useful to the private sector.

Q. How did your perceptions and opinions change once you became a TDRI Board member?

A. My perceptions and opinions did not change, though I was quite concerned about the dissemination process. I wondered if the information the Institute produced would be widely read by Thais. Another concern was if the Institute would develop into some kind of an elite institution to which most people would not have access. I felt that the importance of research papers was that they should be widely distributed.

Q. How do you now assess the Institute's distribution of its research results?

A. I think it is improving.

Q. What were the circumstances surrounding your assumption of the chairmanship of TDRI?

A. When I formed my first Cabinet, there were not less than five people who sat on the TDRI Board of Trustees. When Dr. Snoh could not continue as TDRI Chairman because of health problems, he personally asked me to assume the Chair.

Q. As Chairman, what have been the major problems at the Institute which you have had to deal with?

A. The quality of the research coming out of the Institute has been uneven. As a new fledgling institute which has to compete with private sector enticements, the turnover of the research staff has been a problem. So we have had to revise our salary scales and benefits and reorganize departments to try to convince the senior researchers that they have a career with TDRI.

Job-hopping continues to be a problem, not only at TDRI. This is also prevalent in the private sector. We have also had to deal with the issue of making the Institute independent and to not have the integrity of its research in any way compromised. In order to do this, the Institute must have financial independence. To achieve this, we have established an Endowment Fund. And there is an increasing number of private sector contracts. Of course we are still working on this. It is very important that we continually strive toward making the Institute an independent "think tank."

Q. How would you frankly and objectively assess TDRI's contribution to Thailand's development over the past ten years?

A. One of the objectives of TDRI is to act as a conscience of the society—and to be an important source of input in national planning and the government's decision-making process. Since its inception, TDRI has widened its scope, and it is being used more and more by the private sector. This also benefits national planning and development but from a different angle and perspective.

Q. What in your opinion are the Institute's major shortcomings?

A. The inability to do research of its own initiative due to lack of financial independence. The difficulties in retaining high-level researchers.

Q. What are the Institute's major strengths?

A. It is the only research institute of its kind in the country. It has a unique contribution to make in that way.

Q. How do you feel TDRI is perceived by the general public in Thailand? Do you feel there is a need for TDRI to better publicize in layman's terms research results which are important and relevant to the general public, say, for example, on urgent environmental issues?

A. TDRI is still not known at the grass roots level. To attempt to be known to the general public would mean that the Institute would have to conduct research relevant to the needs of the layperson, as for example, on environmental issues. We have had a year-end conference for the past nine or ten years. But from now on, we will embark on a second stage of development—we are planning to have small seminars in order to have better dialogue with specific groups of people, for example business people. I think the need is quite obvious for us to develop more sophisticated and appropriate approaches to reach the hearts and minds of the general public.

Q. What are potential areas of development and possibly expansion which you would like to see for the Institute in the upcoming years?

A. Our goal is to have a 30 percent to 70 percent research ratio, that is—30 percent TDRI generated research and 70 percent contract research.

A. Fast and explosive. When I first joined the Institute, I did not expect the growth to be as rapid as it proved to be. Within the first four years, the Institute established itself and obtained a staff of over 100 people. This was the good work of Dr. Anat, the first president. I would call this the first phase of the Institute's development—establishing it and making it into a credible and indispensable part of Thai society. That phase involved a lot of risks and risk-taking. The second phase was a period of consolidation; more staff was added, bringing the number to between 120 and 150 people. There was less risk-taking and the Institute was put on a firm financial footing. This was the work of Dr. Phaichitr, the second president. So when I took over as the third president, the Institute was more or less on a solid ground, allowing us more time to think about our future direction.

Q. What do you feel has been some of the best research coming out of the Institute over the past ten years?

A. In the earlier years, the research with the biggest impact came from the macroeconomics program. TDRI established itself as one of the economic forecasting units which gave an independent view of the Thai economy. We also had good research on our educational system. We were concerned with how problems in our educational system linked up with the economy. Our research indicated a failure to provide secondary education for primary school leavers. Problems connected to Science and Technology development were also highlighted. However, we don't wish to claim that TDRI was the original generator of these ideas. Many of these ideas have been floating around for a long time. TDRI sifts and sorts through ideas and materials, often generated in government circles, and tries to open them up to national scrutiny to create a national forum. We try to make judgements and recommendations based on objective empirical data. The whole point of having TDRI is to have an outside independent assessor of information.

Q. What research has been most lacking at the Institute?

A. We have not participated enough in research on infrastructure, for example, we have not looked at transport infrastructure in its totality, nor have we been able to assess the strains the transport system in Thailand is currently experiencing. Another area in which our research is lacking is in water resources. In both these areas we are trying to catch up.

Q. Do you feel that the Institute's work has generally improved in quality?

A. I would not say it has improved, but it has also not declined. We are running into a very severe manpower shortage. There is a need for more high quality work.

Q. TDRI was set up primarily to provide information which would assist government in formulating economic policy. Has TDRI essentially met the demands of the public and private sector in providing relevant, in-depth research to assist decision-makers?

A. It's very difficult to say how much is enough. I don't think it's enough. This is as much as we can manage with the resources at our disposal.

Q. Do you believe that generally TDRI research results are taken into consideration, heeded and used by government officials when formulating policy and development strategies?

A. There is a common misconception here which I would like to correct. Many people think that there are bright-eyed and bushy-tailed researchers at TDRI trying to influence government. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are not advisors to the government. We merely try to make a fair assessment of the situation and create a national forum. Therefore it is difficult to say-government did this because TDRI said so. TDRI does not back away from expressing itself freely, even if it disagrees with government, and even if government is strongly opposed to TDRI recommendations.

Q. What is the current financial situation of the Institute?

A. TDRI is secure financially. But now we want to strike out in different directions and shift from a project-based, almost consulting culture to a research culture. The direction in which the Institute would like to move is to do anticipatory research. But we need to build our Endowment Fund to do more of this type of research. We have now set up a fund-raising committee and we are trying different ideas to augment our Endowment Fund.

Q. What are the major criticisms of TDRI made by outsiders? What are your responses to these criticisms?

A. From outside the government, we are very much seen as an elitist organization closely linked to the government. It is important to stress that this is untrue. In response, we can only stress that TDRI has always been committed to rigorous examination of policies from empirical materials, and tries to remain as impartial as possible.

From the government, there is the criticism that we make suggestions or recommendations which they already know about. Our response to this is that we have never aimed to be original. Our aim is to be as objective and critical as possible in assessing the information we receive. A third criticism is that TDRI is pro-industry. My response to this is that our research involves several programs, and it should be viewed in totality. Our work on environmental issues, for example, has provided a balanced view of industry and the environment.

Q. As President, what are the Institute's major problems you are now dealing with?

A. One of our major problems is to recruit qualified staff and make them happy. The current boom in the financial sector in Thailand today has very much affected our ability to retain quality researchers—across the board, at all levels, in all fields of economics. The pay scale and the bonuses which the financial sector offers are much higher than we can offer. Providing an environment conducive to doing research and other incentives could compensate for our weaknesses to some extent, but we realize that there is a limit. Other than this, I think other problems are manageable.

Q. What future directions do you foresee TDRI's research programs taking?

A. We will continue more or less along the same lines, but we will put more effort into generating our own research.

Q. How can TDRI improve itself to best serve the needs of the country?

A. To try to obtain financial resources to finance work that is self-generating. In saying this, however, I don't want to downplay the importance of contract work. Ultimately a good research institute is a blend of academic excellence and responsiveness to the country's needs.

A. The public's awareness and perception of TDRI have grown over the years, especially in the realm of academics and thinkers. There are very few academics do who not know TDRI and many may even want to one day work for the Institute. I think the general public's perception of TDRI is positive. However, most of the work done is seen to be too detailed or too technical to have mass appeal. But this is not what TDRI should be concerned about. Rather, TDRI should strive to come out with impartial, accurate and credible research. People involved in the implementation of TDRI's recommendations should be the best judges of the contributions the Institute has made to the country's development.

Q. As publisher and journalist, how do you believe members of the media corps in Thailand generally perceive TDRI?

A. The media generally have a positive impression of TDRI. The media often turn to TDRI staff for comments on and analysis of various issues. The problem is that although TDRI has qualified people doing relevant research work, many of them are too busy and are often not accessible. The briefings on research studies in recent years have become far and few between. The research on water, for example, has been good, but not regularly publicized.

Q. What are the major criticisms of TDRI made by the media? Government? International development agencies? The business and industrial sector? The general public?

A. There are no serious criticisms of TDRI. Those criticisms which are made tend to come from people who have worked at but resigned from TDRI.

Q. What has been some of the best research coming out of the Institute? What has been lacking in the research coming out of the Institute?

A. The most consistent work over the years has been the annual macroeconomic forecasts and the work published for the annual year-end conferences. What is lacking, perhaps, is follow-up on the recommendations made and monthly comments on issues on which the Institute has taken a clear position.

Q. Do you believe that generally TDRI research results are taken into consideration, heeded and used by government officials when formulating policy and development strategies?

A. Yes, but government officials may not mention TDRI as a source of information or recommendations. Perhaps TDRI is not assertive enough in publicizing the work it has done for government agencies.

Q. Do you believe that there is an inherent conflict of interest in having an institute whose major task may involve criticism of government, but having that same government serve as the institute's major source of contracts and therefore income?

A. No, as long as TDRI can maintain its impartiality and expound its recommendations in the interest of the public. Many research institutes around the world rely on financing from their respective governments, and governments rely on such research institutes for planning input. But in some areas TDRI seems to have compromised itself, such as in its studies on tourism, and to a lesser extent, its study on the privatization of CAT.

Q. How would you rank TDRI's contributions with other research institutes in Thailand? Internationally?

A. TDRI has no competing institutes in Thailand. However, it does seem to be lagging behind in areas where the country is undergoing rapid changes, such as telecommunications policy (The Chulalongkorn University Faculty of Law is very strong here.), Indochina, decentralization and environment. TDRI should promote its sectoral studies more; the work done so far seems to be too generalized. The Thai Research Fund has come on strong of late. Competition should make TDRI work harder and be more creative in presenting its research results.

Q. How can TDRI improve itself to best serve the needs of the country?

A. Attract the best researchers to do the best work. Build up specializations which the Institute can sustain over time. Pick the right topics to study.

Q. What future roles and research undertakings do you think the Institute should pursue?

A. NESDB is now formulating ten-year plans, and there are several topics which TDRI could choose to study, such as the funding of the health care system, how the government should deal with people in the traditional sector as the modern sector continues to grow, manpower training, regional financial centers, Indochina, etc. Issues related to globalization should be given special attention. TDRI should also maintain a constant dialogue with government ministries, which are policy-makers.

SIGNIFICANT DATES AND EVENTS OF TDRI

March 23, 1984: Establishment of the Thailand Development Research Institute Foundation by NESDB.

April 11, 1984: Signing of the Agreement between CIDA and TDRI in Ottawa, Canada, with the Prime Ministers of both Thailand and Canada in attendance, making Canadian $4.48 million available for the first five years of TDRI operations

April 24: Cabinet approval of the TDRI Foundation's status as a "Foundation for the Public Interest in Accordance with Royal Thai Government Policy"

July 6: First TDRI Board of Directors' meeting, with Dr. Snoh Unakul elected Chairman and Dr. Anat Arbhabhirama appointed President and Chief Executive Officer. Adoption of TDRI Bylaws

November 1: Assumption of presidential duties by Dr. Anat Arbhabhirama, and official commencement of TDRI operations

November 5: Occupancy of office facilities in the Rajapark Building, Asoke Road, Bangkok

November 30: Appointment of Dr. Ammar Siamwalla as Director of the Agriculture and Rural Development Program

Appointment of Dr. Virabongsa Ramangkura as Director of the Macroeconomic Policy

December 1-2: Seminar in Pattaya on "Development Research and National Development"

December 2: First meeting of the Council of Trustees

March 14, 1985: Appointment of Dr. Kopr Kritayakirana as Director of the Science and Technology Development Program and Assistant to the President. Adopting of the Revised TDRI Bylaws

December 14-15: TDRI's First Year-End Conference at Pattaya, entitled "New Dimensions for Development"