Page 126 - _21-0619 OK

The International Journal of the Royal Society of Thailand
Volume XII, 2020

encroachment and wildlife offences, for example, stands in direct contrast to
the incarceration of poor farmers for relatively minor hunting and gathering
infringements (eg Ekachai 2017).

These three dimensions of inequality are resonant with Schlosberg’s
three-part framework for understanding environmental justice. The three types

of justice referred to are distributional justice, recognitional justice and
procedural justice (Schlosberg 2007). In Thailand, land inequality can be found
in all three dimensions, the latter two of which need to be measured in a
qualitative way.

Measuring inequality
The challenges to measuring land inequality are at least threefold.

The first challenge is what to measure. The second challenge is how to come up
with a relevant index or other descriptor of inequality that reflects the object of
measurement. The third is to access meaningful, accurate and sufficiently
disaggregated data with which to make such a measurement.

In determining what to measure, the dimensions of inequality referred
to above suggest that we need to be specific about what is reflected in
measurement. If it is area-based, this omits the differences in quality, location
and value of the land in question. If it is value-based, this is limited by market
values to the neglect of other meanings and values inherent in land, and of course
it is dependent on being able to come up with a reliable valuation. Use of indices
such as the Gini coefficient thus need to be qualified and their significance
communicated with appropriate explanation. On the other hand, if equitability
is measured in recognitional or procedural terms, then qualitative rather than
quantitative measures are more relevant.

Duangmanee Laovakul (2016) suggests in the most robust and
comprehensive data-based analysis of land inequality in Thailand to date that
landholding is highly unequal. Her study emphasises the concentration of land
and other wealth among business families and politicians rather than the
dispersal of land ownership among family farmers. Using anonymised data on
full land titles (NS4, or chanood), she employs records from the Department of
Lands on to suggest an extremely high measure of inequality reflected in a Gini
coefficient of 0.89. However, this figure needs to be qualified in at least two main

118 Land Governance and Inequality in Thailand:
The Need for Context

5/1/2565 BE 09:04
_21-0619(113-136)7.indd 118
_21-0619(113-136)7.indd 118 5/1/2565 BE 09:04