Wildfire and Haze Policy Evolution: A Case Study of Wildfire and Haze Policy in Chiang Mai

Abstract

This article aims to explain the evolution and characteristics of wildfire and haze management policies in Thailand especially in Chiang Mai province through resource management theory and Elinor Ostrom's institutional principle. This qualitative study uses descriptive interpretation method and two types of data: 1. primary and secondary document research and 2. in-depth Interviews. The research found that the evolution and characteristics of wildfire and haze management policies have been divided into 2 eras: 1) Pre-Zero burning policy era (1941 - 2007): Thai state issued forest policy, haze policy and public mitigation policy. But the state had not given any importance to solving wildfire and haze problems in term the principles of forest management policy. The state focused on getting rural people out of forest and giving the punishment to who causes wildfire. 2) Zero burning policy era (2013 to present): the state issued Zero burning policy which causes unexpected consequences such as impacts on farmers and fuel management in forest areas. The research also found that the state has issued policy to deal with immediate problems. Although the situation in Chiang Mai has been harsh since 2007, previous wildfire and haze policies are considered to be within the resource management of state model. There was a low level of concordance to Ostrom's institutionalization principle, especially the exclusion of the rural people to participate in formulating the local policy, resulting in absence of cooperative framework and policy failure. The researcher suggests that there should be an institutional change in common pool resource management to the cooperative model between state and community rather than a model which overregulated by any single actor.

Keywords:  Policy; Wildfire – haze; Zero burning