Thailand Policy Lab x TFF: Crisis Management Means Multidimensional Measures and Effective Public Communication

• • • Narongsak Osottanakorn, Governor of Lampang, sees 3 major challenges emerging from the spread of COVID-19: health, economic and management crises. He insists that a single-issue approach to solution will not help us overcome multitudes of difficulties.
    • In the United Kingdom, statistical data and research from scholars of different disciplines were factored in before the implementation of COVID-19 lockdown. Meanwhile, policies regarding infection prevention and control in Denmark were met with success. Although facts about COVID-19 can fill one’s mind with dread and paranoia, research reveals that Denish citizens regularly check the latest COVID-19 information from the government and comply with the IPC policies because they trust the official COVID-19 updates to be true.
    • As Thai people exhibit a high level of compliance to COVID-19 prevention measures and self-discipline in comparison to other countries, the worsening state of crises is likely attributed to the problem of mismanagement.
    • The current crises render all the issues which have been plaguing the bureaucratic system more visible than ever.

Ever since World War II, the COVID-19 outbreak is the first major crisis that causes serious reverberations around the world. However, the distinction between the two drastic turns of the history lies in the fact that the COVID-19 pandemic is not ‘man-made’, rather, it is a natural and deeply intractable phenomenon. It is said that every crisis is a test of a nation’s adaptive capacity and flexibility in problem-solving. If the said nation fails, one crisis could spawn into two or more, adding more complications to current predicaments.

This is the third panel discussion on the theme “Rethinking Crisis Management” in “Lessons from the Crisis” series, hosted on Clubhouse by Thailand Future Foundation and Thailand Policy Lab. Scholars and experts from various fields have joined the discussion in search of a way out of crises imposed on Thailand even since the first wave of the COVID-19 outbreak. In this panel, distinguished speakers who offer insights from their experiences in crisis management on domestic and  international scales include:

1. 1. 1. Narongsak Osottanakorn, Governor of Lampang who earns the nickname “the Wild Boar’s Governor” from his contribution to the rescue of 13 members of a junior football team from Tham Luang cave while serving governorship in Chiang Rai.
      2. Dr. Anuchit Anuchitanukul, founder of the contact tracing mobile app “Mor Chana” and  JITASA.CARE, an online platform providing information on COVID-19 assistance. Dr. Anuchit has been the catalyst behind the success of various projects, namely the money transfer service “PromptPay.”
      3. Prof Nattavudh Powdthavee, Professor of Behavioural Science at Warwick Business School, United Kingdom. As an expert in happiness economics,  Prof Nattavudh has taken part in sparking conversations around possible interventions and solutions to the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand.

The following is the summary of a two-hour long discussion from that day.

4 principles that helped Lampang manage the three-dimensional crisis

As Governor of a province with low rate of COVID-19 infection and high COVID-19 vaccination rate, and as an experienced public servant in crisis management, Narongsak is the first to kickstart a dialogue. He points that the differences in COVID-19 situations in each province mirrors the current state of Thailand. Lampang’s local government is able to manage the spread of COVID-19 virus effectively because the situation there differs from other provinces. He believes that each province has its own advantages and disadvantages, the causal factors in the effectiveness of pandemic control and prevention. As for the COVID-19 virus, we have to understand it as a three-dimensional crisis composed of health, economic and management issues. If the local government fails to attach equal importance to the three dimensions of the crisis, we might find ourselves in grave trouble. For example, if the authorities wish to reduce the infection rate down to zero, but at the expense of the local economy, many businesses will be forced into premature closures. The victims of such public health policy will soon protest against it, and this is the scenario Narongsak finds impossibly difficult to control. He insists that policy makers must strive for total control of the situation at the initial stage of planning.

The main contributing factor to COVID-19 transmission is the scarcity of laboratories with COVID-19 testing. The first individual to contract COVID-19 in Lampang wished to be tested, but they were informed that approval from certified laboratories in Bangkok was required. Their COVID-19 testing request was later rejected, the reason simply being that the infected person did not reside in high risk areas. If they insisted on taking the test, the cost would be as high as 3,000 baht. For this reason, the provincial government had to step in, and invest an extremely large portion of its budget in the provision of COVID-19 tests for more than 600 individuals who had been exposed to the pandemic.

Narongsak then asks the audience to see the bigger picture of the problem.  A viral disease alone does not constitute the present hardship. In the Northern region, multiple crises arise on a daily basis. People are constantly faced with extreme cold, earthquakes, wildfire, floods, natural disasters and human-made hazards. This is precisely why emergency management must be in place. Special attention needs to be given to emergency workers. Finding a way to reduce fatigue from work is a necessity. In terms of health communications, accessible and clear language should be used in the delivery of information, instead of convoluted and jargon-ridden statements. Back in early 2021, when the news of an outbreak from Wuhan began to circulate, the Government of Lampang made a decision to purchase face masks and organize mask-making workshops. In the span of only one month, the numbers of face masks in storage were over 1 million. The local government was able to garner 40 life support machines and 8,000 hospital beds from all over the province, as well as order 50 ventilators more. In addition, Lampang is the province with the highest numbers of medical staff dispatched to Bangkok to help contain the outbreak. The principles that informed Narongsak’s decisions in crisis management include:

1. 1. 1. Provide a real-time crisis response
      2. Make informed decisions
      3. Collaborate with various stakeholders; a viral outbreak is not an exclusive issue between doctors and the governor.
      4. Always evaluate the output and make amendments to reach the goal as quickly as possible

We must solve the problems with the principles of “4C” and turn mistakes into lessons learned instead of repeating the same errors again and again

In contrast to the successful model crisis management in Lampang, Dr. Anuchit decides to present the counterexample. Other provinces lack systematic planning for the crisis, namely Bangkok, the capital city of Thailand. He insists that the central government must commit itself to learning from the prior mistakes, since it is undoubtedly a better choice than learning nothing and repeating the same errors. The authorities must embrace criticism, or else the problems will never go away.

He has thus presented the 4C principles to executive officers, which include:

• Command center – only a single and centralized place for carry outing orders promptly, minimizing the possibilities of miscommunication
• Coordinated organizations – every sector must join forces and receive orders from the command center.
• Communication – the authorities must communicate information and official plans to the citizens with transparency.
• Control of supply and resources – transparent and systematic management of resources is a requisite.

The problem is no key worker handled crisis management in accordance with the 4P principles; they all worked in separation. Moreover, the government decided to disseminate only good news, stubbornly refusing to face the reality head-on. By prioritizing “feel-good” information over facts, the government has aroused not only the climate of distrust among the public, but also various conspiracy theories. As for public organizations, they were more preoccupied with claiming ownership and success over projects. Instead of resolving the internal conflicts, the government invested much of its precious time on reputation recovery.

As an expert with experience in working with the public sector, Dr. Anuchit remarks that the current crisis only exposes all the old problems ridden in the bureaucracy. The system in place  was, and remains, dysfunctional. Moving to the issues in public health, he says that hospitals in Bangkok fall under the administration of the Ministry of Public Health and other public health service agencies. We are now in the scenario where each unit fails to coordinate with one another, leading to unnecessary conflicts in communication.

Doing it like the UK: decision-making firmly based on facts, statistics and research

During the first wave of the outbreak, many European countries were not prepared for the shock from the pandemic crisis, with numbers of COVID-19 cases soaring above 1 million. Prof Nattavudh is one of the behavioral economists who experienced the outbreak in the UK first-hand. He says that, back in March 2020, the UK did not handle the crisis better than other countries. In the beginning, infection prevention and control was, in fact, acutely unsuccessful due to the absence of lockdown. The government wanted to delay the announcement of a nationwide lockdown in hopes of preventing economic regression and  lockdown fatigue. However, scholars and experts across the country expressly stressed the necessity of a lockdown, fearing that the UK would collapse any further. In response to the demand from the experts, the authorities decided to request assistance from scholars of different disciplines in the formulation of the COVID-19 action plan.

Looking back at the history of Europe, we can see that the scholarship of science and scientific research have long gained prominence, forming the solid basis for decision-making. Prof Nattavud had the opportunity to discuss numerous social issues concerning the economy and mental health, namely the trade-off between loss of life and economic damage, in the UK parliament. He found that the answer was neither choosing the former or the latter, but saving both life and the economy. Although the government ordered a nationwide lockdown, citizens were allowed to leave their homes to improve their mental health for one hour. The government also paid 80% of salary for employees affected by the COVID-19 outbreak and planned to collect income tax in the next 10 – 20 years.

Prof Nattavud says the UK has done remarkably well in health communications, in contrast to Thailand, where misinformation prevails and statistical data regarding COVID-19 cases and deaths has no supporting evidence. Before the lifting of lockdown, the UK government aimed towards a 90% vaccination rate or above in the aging population. Once the goal was reached, special attention was then given to death counts, which is now significantly fewer than Thailand’s. Each day more than 30,000 new cases in the UK are reported, simply because at least one million people are able to access COVID-19 tests on a daily basis.

Prof Nattavud brings up the success in COVID-19 control from Denmark, where the battle against the pandemic outbreak is declared over. Although facts about COVID-19 can fill one’s mind with dread and paranoia, research reveals that Denish citizens regularly check the latest COVID-19 information from the government and comply with the IPC policies because they trust the official COVID-19 updates to be true.

Dr. Anuchit also adds that Thai people exhibit a high level of compliance to COVID-19 prevention measures and self-discipline in comparison to other countries. Here, we can always find people wearing face masks and upholding social distancing. Perhaps the worsening state of crises is likely attributed to mismanagement. With better crisis response strategy, Thailand would not have reached such a critical point in history.

Positive thinking VS realistic thinking: which one suits the effective policy more?

After hearing opinions about domestic and international models for policy responses to COVID-19 and the outcome in Thailand, Narongsak speaks from the standpoint of a civil servant. He claims that most public-sector workers are unable to respond to public criticism. Most arguments would already take place and end in the conference room, and  staff would head back to their work.

Prior to this panel discussion, Narongsak just had a meeting with the Lampang Provincial Office of the Comptroller General. Much to his surprise, new data indicates that the local economy is in much better shape compared to the years before the COVID-19 outbreak. For this reason, Narongsak wants to focus on improving communication and understanding between the local government and the communities. Regarding the matter of delayed delivery of COVID-19 vaccines, he wishes to avoid putting all the blame on the central authorities, as it could prolong unnecessary arguments.

Dr. Anuchit immediately agrees to disagree with Narongsak’s last point, as he sees that avoiding the problem entirely will not make the problem go away. For example, many people travel to hospitals only to find out that  their COVID-19 vaccination appointments are canceled due to unavailability of vaccines. This kind of experience in the public health system happens many times. Dr. Anuchit mentions that he was once in a conference where every participant put forward their propositions but failed to engage with each other. At the end, the meeting was over without any real progress.

Formulating the policy from experience, searching for the right model for Thailand

Concluding the panel, the moderator asks the speakers about possible development of best practices in policy-making and implementation in various places. As an expert who has experience with the UK model, Prof Nattavudh emphasizes that transparency is central to policy planning. He also asserts that the authorities must openly acknowledge the impact that conflicts have on this country. The numbers of influential people who take advantage of the situation are numerous, yet never revealed to the public.

Prof Nattavudh asks if we truly live in a society where people can speak the truth without fear of the consequences, not only when working on national projects, but also within the organizations that are set on developing sustainable policy. In the UK, the culture of transparency is well-established and later institutionalized. This explains why their citizens strongly believe in healthcare and remain relatively unaffected by the spread of COVID-19 virus. At the same time, the government communicates their COVID-19 action plans to the public with transparency and creates incentives for public compliance.

Dr. Anuchit remarks that the important lessons for policy-making during the crisis is strategizing the use of data and technology. Good policy regarding technology is indicative of well-thought planning.  Optimization of technology does not exclusively concern data, but also extends to cover other areas that Thailand is still lacking in comparison to other countries.

Policy recommendations

• • • Policies regarding crisis management must cover all 3 dimensions: health, economy, and management. Failure to balance out the priority of 3 issues will lead to future conflicts.
    • In the UK, COVID-19 management policy was born out of participatory process. The authorities requested assistance from scholars of different disciplines in the formulation of the COVID-19 action plan.
    • Effective communication ensures successful implementation of policy. Research reveals that citizens regularly check the latest COVID-19 information from the government and comply with the IPC policies if they trust the official COVID-19 updates to be true.
    • Transparency is central to policy planning. The authorities must openly acknowledge the impact that conflicts have on this country. The numbers of influential people who take advantage of the situation are numerous, yet never revealed to the public.
    • Policies regarding crisis management must include strategizing the use of data and technology.