11 - Civil Society Discourse and the Future of Radical Environmental Movements in Thailand

Summary

INTRODUCTION

This chapter questions the relevance of the new emerging concept of civil society in Thailand, specifically while it has expanded the public space for environmental activism, civil society has also shackled the radical wing of the environmental movements. Because environmental problems are closely linked with poverty and income disparities, the issues of environmental justice raised by the radical movements do not situate favourably within the consensus-dominated civil society discourse. Thus while the concept of civil society is gaining popularity, the radical environmental movements are facing more obstacles and have to work much harder in the present political setting. As such the radical movements’ direct actions will continue to be a pervasive feature of civil society as long as the discursive practice approach does not genuinely embrace the issues of environmental injustice and the state continues its repression of the radical movements. Nevertheless, the radical movements face a dilemma between continuing their style of demanding social justice and, at the same time, maintaining the public's trust in an atmosphere of political reform. In other words, the political legitimacy of the radical environmental movements is being put to a test.

DEVELOPMENT OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENTS

Thai radical environmental movements emerged as a result of political liberalization and the increasing occurrences of environmental crises. The politicization of environmental issues coincided with the new emerging activism among progressive elements of the middle class, led by student activists, amid the advent of political liberalization in the early 1980s. Specifically, two major protests against the Nam Choan Dam in Kanchanaburi and the Tantalum Industrial Plant in Phuket marked the beginning of the politicization of environmental issues (Hirsch and Lohmann 1989).

By the 1990s the nature of environmental activism began to change when environmental issues became overtly linked with development and politics. Indeed, when the economic boom began to take its toll on the environment, it increasingly radicalized the environmental activism as the developmentalism4 strategy caused social and economic dislocations as well as ecological changes; for example, the numerous community resettlement programmes, the increase in death tolls from industrial hazards and accidents, and the vanishing fishing grounds and self-sustaining wetlands. Not surprisingly, since the impacts of the environmental degradation were felt most acutely by the rural marginal groups, the radical environmental movements became identified with their struggles (Pasuk et al., 2002).