NESDC outlines key areas of focus to become the top economy in Asean
The National Economic Development Council (NESDC) aims to make Thailand Aseans biggest economy, suggesting four areas to increase potential.
NESDC secretary-general
Danucha Pichayanan said Thailand's competitiveness ranking by the Institute of International Institute for Management Development (IMD), Switzerland, was at 28 out of 64 countries, up one place from last year.
Thailand aims to increase its competitiveness, with the long-term goal of becoming No. 1 in Asean, while in the short-term the goal is to surpass Malaysia to become the No. 2 in Asean.
To improve competitiveness, Danucha said Thailand needed to develop in many areas.
1. Upgrading the work of the government sector to be modernised in the digital system, including adjusting the use of government data to keep up with the situation so that the government can use up-to-date information in a timely manner to plan and formulate various policies accurately and quickly.
2. Increase investment in infrastructure to boost investor confidence, and also invest in digital infrastructure faster to prepare for new economic opportunities.
3. Pay attention to human development and enhance the development of labour in accordance with the needs of the labour market and trends of the world economy in the future.
4. Focus on maintaining economic stability, which is something that Thailand is already doing well, especially taking care of household debt and maintaining financial and fiscal discipline in order to continuously maintain economic stability.
Danucha said that in terms of the IMD rankings this year, when looking at various aspects of the score, Thailand's scores have increased in almost every aspect except in terms of economic performance. In this respect, IMD focuses on foreign investment and international trade, both of which saw a sharp drop in scores, with a 16-place drop in international trade and a three-place drop in international investment due to the impact of Covid-19.
Rating in terms of price level is another factor that dragged the score down. This part is not a result of inflation, but the cost of living that increased compared to income levels during the economic decline amid the pandemic, Danucha said.
