Anyway, the place where I spent most time on my travels was Thailand. A beautiful country in many ways, and clearly developing quickly. Today, the city of Bangkok looks something like this.
That would have been unimaginable a couple of decades ago. Economic growth has been impressive. In the decade 2003-2013, GDP grew from $142bn to $385bn (in current US dollars). Not far off a three-fold increase inside a decade, even given the 2009 slump with which we all are familiar.
Compare that with the countries where most of the readers of this blog are from:
- The USA saw GDP increase from $11.5tn to $16tn inside that same decade: a 39% increase.
- The UK saw GDP increase from $1.87tn to $2.52tn: an increase of just under 35%.
You may be inclined to say that I have not adjusted for population growth, and indeed I haven't, but this has not been the primary driver of rising Thai GDP. Comparing this time with the UK and France (because their populations are similar to that of Thailand) we will see why:
Although it's still very far behind, it's catching up with the leading economies, and that's why scenes like the one of Bangkok shown above now exist. But then on the other hand scenes like the following also exist.
 |
| Lahu Tribal village, Northern Thailand |
Given that only one third of Thailand's population live in urban areas, the latter is probably a little closer to the experience of a typical Thai, however the tribes-people in the north of the country are particularly poor, and are not recognised as Thai citizens.
Anyway, I digress. The point which I wish to make is that Thailand is clearly a fairly rapidly developing country, however I doubt it will catch up in the way that South Korea and Japan were able to. The reason for this, I believe, is the astounding lack of planning that goes into their development. Take for example pedestrians. Where would you expect them to walk? Presumably a pavement (sidewalk) and sometimes across a bridge or through a subway (underpass). In Thailand, however, it seems that people's properties extend right up to the street, so the few pedestrians, fewer cyclists, and many motorbikes and cars all fight over the same space. This may seem fine for now, but would any developed country put up with this? When Thailand eventually decides this is a problem, and that they really ought to come up with something better than cramming everyone into the same space, they will be stuck. There is no more space to work with.
The poor planning doesn't stop at things like that, either. Take for example the (actually very nice) sky train in Bangkok, which is the main form of commuter rail transport in the city. For a start, it doesn't visit the main tourist attractions. It also doesn't visit vast swathes of the western side of the city - home to literally millions of people. These areas are poorer, so there would presumably be less demand for the train, but it's something of a vicious circle - areas have no trains because they're poor (I assume) but then they stay poor because they have no trains. So the mayhem continues - cramming more and more vehicles into really limited space. Bangkok has the worst traffic congestion I have ever seen, and the number of buses is very limited, especially when you realise that this is a city larger than London or Paris (it's urban population is typically estimated at around 15 million, compared to 10.8 million for Paris or 9.5 million for London, although all of these figures are quite contentious).
So my conclusion? Thailand is in some senses a wonderful place - lush greenery, the densest tree coverage I have ever seen, wonderful hospitality. However, I can't escape the conclusion that Thailand is its own worst enemy. I suppose that a good step on the way towards that might finally be to get a stable elected government. I hope for their sake that they manage it.
