Over the past years, Bangkok has witnessed conflicts between the state, especially city administration, and street vendors.
Since taking over the city’s administration in 2015, Bangkok governor Pol Gen Aswin Kwanmuang has stepped up measures against street vendors, even shutting down famous hawkers markets. The harsh action is well advanced under the military regime. In several cases, the city took harsh measures that disregard the city’s history, or the fact that street vendors play an important role in the local economy and city development.
Street food vendors serve low and middle income residents who enable the city to maintain its function. Cleaners, security guards, and taxi drivers, for instance, need affordable food for themselves and their family members. Junior state officials and company workers depend on this group of people, too. If well-managed, food hawkers may add to the city’s charm. In fact, Bangkok’s street food has gained international recognition.
It’s unfortunate that those at City Hall lack a decent vision and policy about street food vendors, pursuing crackdowns instead that raise the possibility of violence. Without a clear policy, the city’s administration seems to pursue piecemeal solutions that can result in social chaos.
Faced with tough measures, the vendors have formed a network with assistance from scholars who are keen on city development. In early September, the network filed a petition with the regime. Subsequently, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha forwarded the matter to a committee headed by Interior Minister Anupong Paochinda. But the network is disappointed that the committee, which is supposed to call a meeting between city officials and affected vendors, keeps trying to distance itself from the issue.
They are to raise the issue this week with the Anupong
panel.
As Thailand concentrates on crackdowns, neighbouring Singapore is becoming more progressive. The rich state proposed its “hawker culture” as an Unesco intangible cultural heritage item. In its proposal, hawker centres are defined as eating places that offer affordable food and serve as “community nodes where people from all walks of life gather to eat and bond over food”.
Of course, hawkers in Thailand and Singapore differ in character. What works in Singapore may fail in Thailand. Besides, hawkers in different areas can have their own characters. Those concerned should look into zoning, which is a vital process that decides where and how vendors could do their business, as well as the preferred operating hours.
There must be rules and regulations that are acceptable by all. It’s necessary that vendors respect the right of the community. This means they have to make sure that their trade does not cause traffic congestion, or occupies footpaths in a manner that obstructs pedestrians.
If relocation is necessary, those concerned must find places with potential, for example, locations that are within reach of customers. This is needed to ensure the viability of vendors, as well as the patrons’ comfort.
To get a workable solution, active participation is needed from all concerned parties. The city’s administration should depart from its top-down and centralised approach. Instead, it has to open up and find a way to reach out to communities in a sustainable manner.
Orderliness and hygiene are important, but what is even more important is balanced development, which can only be achieved if every party — namely the state, vendors, city dwellers, and civic groups — has a say in how public spaces should be utilised for everyone’s benefit.
A trial run should be carried out in every district, so both city officials and vendors can develop a model that works and can be pursued further.
Once a successful model is found, it can be extended and applied in other areas.
The Anupong panel should take this opportunity to set up a dialogue with vendors and other stakeholders, which is crucial to finding a solution that benefits everyone.
