SYMBOLIC DECENTRALIZATION: LOCAL GOVERNMENT CHALLENGES IN PM2.5 ENVIRONMENTAL GOVERNANCE WITHIN INDUSTRIALIZING THAILAND

Chayaporn CHATURAPORNPRACIT; Punchada SIRIVUNNABOOD

doi:10.14456/apsr.2026.10

Authors

Chayaporn CHATURAPORNPRACIT Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Mahidol University, Thailand
Punchada SIRIVUNNABOOD Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Mahidol University, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14456/apsr.2026.10

Keywords:

Symbolic Decentralization, Environmental Governance, PM2.5 Pollution, Green Criminology, Regulatory Authority

Abstract

This article examines the structural complexities of environmental governance in rapidly industrializing regions by investigating PM2.5 pollution management within Thailand’s Eastern Economic Corridor. While decentralization reforms theoretically empower local authorities to address community concerns, this research explores the practical disconnect between localized environmental harm and highly centralized regulatory frameworks. Employing a rigorous qualitative methodology comprising documentary analysis, sixty-two in-depth interviews, and three focus groups, the study engages diverse stakeholders across multiple governance levels. Drawing on green criminology and interpretive policy analysis, the empirical findings show that local governments serve primarily as frontline responders but lack the legal authority and institutional capacity to regulate major industrial polluters directly. This profound mismatch creates a governance condition conceptualized as "symbolic decentralization," in which heavy administrative burdens are routinely devolved without transferring substantive regulatory power. Consequently, fragmented responsibilities, delayed interventions, and weak deterrence mechanisms persist, inadvertently normalizing environmental harm within affected communities. Ultimately, the study argues that effectively mitigating PM2.5 pollution goes beyond technical solutions and requires comprehensive institutional reforms that align regulatory authority with the spatial distribution of environmental risks.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Astuti, R., Miller, M., McGregor, A., Sukmara, M., Saputra, W., Sulistyanto, & Taylor, D. (2022). Making illegality visible: The governance dilemmas created by visualizing illegal palm oil plantations in Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. Land Use Policy, 114, 105942.

Ayres, I., & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Azid, A., Juahir, H., Toriman, M., Kamarudin, M., Saudi, A., Hasnam, C., … & Yamin, M. (2014). Prediction of the Level of Air Pollution Using Principal Component Analysis and Artificial Neural Network Techniques: A Case Study in Malaysia. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 225, 2063.

Beirne, P., & South, N. (eds.). (2007). Issues in green criminology: Confronting harms against environments, humanity and other animals. Devon: Willan Publishing.

Betsill, M., Dubash, N., Paterson, M., van Asselt, H., Vihma, A., & Winkler, H. (2015). Building productive links between the UNFCCC and the broader global climate governance landscape. Global Environmental Politics, 15(2), 1-10.

Brauer, M., Freedman, G., Frostad, J., van Donkelaar, A., Martin, R., Dentener, F., … & Cohen, A. (2016). Ambient Air Pollution Exposure Estimation for the Global Burden of Disease 2013. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(1), 79-88.

Cai, L., & Guo, L. (2023). Environmental Decentralization, Environmental Regulation and Environmental Pollution: Evidence from China. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 32(3), 2053-2068.

Dinh, H., & Wesseler, J. (2024). Decentralization of Vietnam'S forestlands: The policy process and impact. Land Use Policy, 143, 107194.

Do, T., & Thi, T. (2023). Vietnam’s Environmental Policy: A 30-year critical review (ZCEAP Working Paper 04-23). Australian: Zero Carbon Energy for the Asia-Pacific Initiative.

Faguet, J., & Pöschl, C. (eds.). (2015). Is decentralization good for development? Perspectives from academics and policy makers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fisher, R. (2016). Environmental governance and decentralization. In P. Hirsch (ed.). Routledge Handbook of the Environment in Southeast Asia (pp. 1-14). London: Routledge.

Health Effects Institute. (2020). State of global air 2020: A special report on global exposure to air pollution and its health impacts. Massachusetts: Health Effects Institute.

Heilmann, D. (2015). After Indonesia’s Ratification: The ASEAN Agreement on Transboundary Haze Pollution and its Effectiveness as a Regional Environmental Governance Tool. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 34(3), 95-121.

Jordan, A., Huitema, D., van Asselt, H., & Forster, J. (eds.). (2018). Governing Climate Change: Polycentricity in Action?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kostka, G., & Zhang, C. (2018). Tightening the grip: environmental governance under Xi Jinping. Environmental Politics, 27(5), 769-781.

Lelieveld, J., Klingmüller, K., Pozzer, A., Burnett, R., Haines, A., & Ramanathan, V. (2019). Effects of fossil fuel and total anthropogenic emission removal on public health and climate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(15), 7192-7197.

Lynch, M. (2020). Green criminology and environmental crime: Criminology that matters in the age of global ecological collapse. Journal of White Collar and Corporate Crime, 1(1), 50-61.

Lynch, M., & Long, M. (2022). Green Criminology: Capitalism, Green Crime and Justice, and Environmental Destruction. Annual Review of Criminology, 5, 255-276.

Lynch, M., Long, M., Stretesky, P., & Barrett, K. (2017). Green criminology: Crime, justice, and the environment. California: University of California Press.

Nair, S., Mukherjee, I., Howlett, M., & Cashore, B. (2023). Environmental Policy Dynamics in Southeast Asia: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back. In Routledge Handbook of Environmental Policy (pp. 291-301). Oxford: Taylor and Francis.

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2020). OECD economic surveys: Thailand 2020. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1787/ad2e50fa-en.

Ostrom, E. (2009). A Polycentric Approach for Coping with Climate Change (Policy Research Working Paper 5095). Washington, D.C.: The World Bank.

Ribot, J. (2002). Democratic decentralization of natural resources: Institutionalizing popular participation. Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.

Ruggiero, V., & South, N. (2013). Green Criminology and Crimes of the Economy: Theory, Research and Praxis. Critical Criminology, 21, 359-373.

Rusmili, S., Hamzah, F., Maulud, K., & Latif, M. (2024). Exploring Temporal and Spatial Trends in PM2.5 Concentrations in the Klang Valley, Malaysia: Insights for Air Quality Management. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 235, 401.

Smoke, P. (2015). Rethinking Decentralization: Assessing Challenges to a Popular Public Sector Reform. Public Administration and Development, 35(2), 97-112.

South, N. (2014). Green criminology: Reflections, connections, horizons. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 3(2), 5-20.

Zhang, Q., Zheng, Y., Tong, D., Shao, M., Wang, S., Zhang, Y., … & Hao, J. (2019). Drivers of improved PM2.5 air quality in China from 2013 to 2017. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(49), 24463-24469.

Zhang, Y., & Zhang, J. (2024). Environmental governance and regional green development: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 447, 141643.