Thailand: An Economic Miracle in Need of an Encore

In October 2026, Thailand hosted the International Monetary Fund-World Bank (IMF-WB) Annual Meetings for the second time in 35 years. The meetings put the spotlight on Thailand’s economic prospects and generated optimism about the country’s future. Yet much of the discussion has focused on what sectors Thailand should target to upgrade its economy, with less attention paid to how the country might get there.

History tends to repeat itself, albeit in different ways. Thailand first hosted the international meeting in 1991. At the time, the country was one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, with double-digit growth between 1988 and 1990. This earned it a reputation as an “economic miracle”. Then, Thailand offered lessons about how a developing country achieved rapid economic growth through labour-intensive, export-led industrialisation.

This time, Thailand is no longer an economic miracle; in fact, the economy needs another one.  Growth slowed from an annual average of 9.3 per cent in 1987–1996 to 5.2 per cent in 1999–2007 and 3.6 per cent in 2010–2019. Covid-19 compounded this, with growth remaining below three per cent annually since 2020. Economic prospects over the next two decades look grim. An ageing and shrinking workforce, rising pension and healthcare needs will put further pressure on fiscal space. High public and private debt will constrain investment, while persistent inequality will limit access to the skills and opportunities needed for economic upgrading. As a small, open economy, Thailand also faces immediate pressures from trade tensions and volatile energy prices.

Thailand’s economic challenges have prompted renewed international attention, with several media outlets and international organisations revisiting the country’s economic performance and prospects ahead of the IMF–WB meetings. One such publication is the World Bank’s Building Thailand’s Future Today. The report identifies five industries that could drive the country’s future growth: advanced manufacturing, sustainable and wellness tourism, digital services, agrifood and creative industries. The sectors bear a striking resemblance to the ten S-curve industries promoted under the General Prayuth Chan-o-Cha government. This suggests that identifying promising sectors is easier than creating the conditions for them to thrive. The failure to translate earlier ambitions into sustained upgrading may reflect inconsistent government commitment, weak coordination across government agencies and limited implementation capacity. These difficulties are compounded by political incentives that favour short-term results over reforms requiring sustained commitment across successive governments. Unless these obstacles are addressed, coming up with another sector list is unlikely to produce a different outcome.  

The World Bank report recognises this. It also proposes measures to address some of the institutional obstacles to economic upgrading. The report concludes with 10 “no-regrets” priorities, many of which would require more extensive institutional reforms. One example is giving municipalities greater authority to manage their own affairs (for example, control over local taxes and surcharges). Decentralisation is not new in Thailand, but reforms pursued since the 1997 Constitution have remained partly implemented. In June 2026, the Bhumjaithai party announced plans to propose constitutional amendments that would give local authorities greater power over taxation. While this would be welcome, the real test will be how far it translates into fiscal and decision-making powers for local governments.

Similar challenges arise in public spending, particularly amid calls for fiscal consolidation at the IMF-World Bank meetings. This need not rely solely on raising taxes or cutting spending across the board, particularly when economic growth remains weak. Improving the effectiveness of public spending offers another way forward. Thailand has introduced several large-scale programmes in recent years, including the State Welfare Card (SWC) programme and the co-payment schemes, often without rigorous evaluation of their effectiveness. Many studies suggest that the majority of SWC beneficiaries are not poor, while about half of the poor remain excluded. The Anutin government has since tightened eligibility criteria, perhaps partly in response to shrinking fiscal space. Yet this has also generated complaints and dissatisfaction among existing cardholders. Even with tighter criteria, the programme still covers around 13 million people, or a fifth of the population.

… economic opportunities remain heavily concentrated in Bangkok, but their benefits are unevenly shared, even among those living in the capital. The stark contrast tells us more about the country’s development than any graph at the venue could.

As Thailand ages and fiscal pressures mount, the country can ill afford such inefficiencies. The deeper problem is the absence of a durable, evidence-based social protection system that outlasts individual governments. Instead, successive governments face incentives to preserve popular programmes rather than rigorously evaluate and improve existing ones. The question is thus whether sitting governments are more committed to improving the programme’s effectiveness or preserving its political popularity.

Amid the emphasis on new growth industries, relatively little attention has been paid to how the benefits of economic transformation can be shared widely. Thailand has made remarkable progress in reducing poverty, from 58 per cent in 1990 to just 3 per cent in 2025. But these improvements tell only part of the story. A short stroll from the Queen Sirikit National Convention Centre, the venue of both IMF-WB Annual Meetings, to the nearby Khlong Toei slum is instructive. The slum houses more than 100,000 residents across 200 rai (0.6 square kilometres). The location represents the confluence of the debt and deprivation that is part and parcel of everyday life. Khlong Toei grew around Bangkok Port, attracting workers and their families. Since the late 1980s, Thailand has shifted much of the port’s activities to the Eastern Seaboard, now the Eastern Economic Corridor (EEC). Yet decades later, many Khlong Toei residents still live there. Their continued presence demonstrates that economic opportunities remain heavily concentrated in Bangkok, but their benefits are unevenly shared, even among those living in the capital. The stark contrast tells us more about the country’s development than any graph at the venue could.

The 2026 IMF-WB meetings have brought renewed attention to Thailand’s economic future. However, turning recommendations into action requires sustained political commitment. A meaningful outcome of the meetings would be an implementation roadmap with clear responsibilities and deadlines, better coordination of industrial policies, greater local fiscal autonomy, rigorous evaluation of public spending and more equal access to economic opportunities. With Thailand’s population ageing and economic growth remaining sluggish, there is little time to postpone difficult reforms. The real test is whether the discussions in Bangkok lead to lasting change.

2026/303