Rethinking Thailand’s Local Elections: Beyond the Shadow of National Parties and Political Big Houses

On 1 February 2025, Thais elected the chairmen of 47 provincial administrative organisations (PAOs) to serve alongside governors appointed by the Ministry of Interior at the apex of subnational government. Election coverage centred on the performance of candidates representing national political parties and implications for Thailand’s next general elections.

During the campaign, Thaksin Shinawatra’s efforts on behalf of the governing Pheu Thai Party and the deployment by the opposition People’s Party of former premiership candidates Thanathorn Juangroongruangkit and Pita Limjaroenrat blurred the line between provincial and national politics like never before. Simultaneously, however, attention to these national-level figures risked obscuring local electoral dynamics.

A cleavage between electorates in Bangkok and the provincial hinterlands where most Thais live has been understood as a fundamental quality of Thai politics. It has explained the illiberalism of metropolitan elites and military juntas in resisting decentralisation and attacking elected governments. Media commentary and academic analysis stress the hold of powerful individuals and families on provincial voters. Previously labelled chao pho or “godfathers”, these families have more recently been referred to as ban yai or “big houses”. Offering access to state resources unattainable through dysfunctional formal channels, they are viewed as a defect in Thailand’s electoral order. Nonetheless, their ostensible yet undesirable clout with the provincial electorate is taken as a given.

Patronage does play a role in voter mobilisation across the Thai provinces. But, like focusing on local elections as indicators of parties’ prospects in national elections, emphasis on ban yai as a monolithic feature of provincial politics pushes to the margins of understanding the local concerns that political decentralisation aims to address.

The enhancement of PAO chairmen’s roles in 1997 reflected a determination to devolve budgetary power and authority over planning, sanitation and public health, and infrastructure from Bangkok to provincial actors, subject to the will of provincial voters. If, however, the logic of decentralisation is to privilege local concerns and decision-making, viewing PAO elections through the lenses of rivalries among national parties and a homogenising emphasis on ban yai is to fail to take that logic seriously.

To understand those elections through the comfortable, homogenising construct of the ban yai or to view them decisively as warm-ups for national elections is to diminish the significance to voters of those concerns, issues, and perspectives.

This year’s campaigns in a pair of neighbouring southern provinces illustrated this error.

Spurred by media attention, observers of national politics intently awaited whether the PAO election in Phuket, the only southern province won by People’s Party predecessor Move Forward in the 2023 national election, would swing the pendulum back to conservatism or let progressive momentum endure. But their fixation on the conservatism-versus-progressivism dichotomy downplayed the very real local challenges confronting Thailand’s overcrowded tourism powerhouse.

To address those challenges, candidates in the 2025 Phuket PAO chairman race offered policy proposals on traffic, safety, healthcare accessibility, and education. On health care, winning candidate Rewat Areerob emphasised upgrading and expanding infrastructure, whereas Lersak Leenanithikul stressed preventive measures, notably comprehensive cancer screening. The Phuket race also featured significant policy-focused discussions, exemplified by the 26 January debate at Phuket Rajabhat University. The event, closely attuned to local priorities, distinguished the province from national party and ban yai partisanship.

Less policy-focused, Phang Nga’s race centred on old rivalries. Bamroong Piyanamvanich bested incumbent Tharatip Thongjerm. Neither man has held national office, but both have long served local interests — Bamroong as PAO chairman multiple times and Tharatip as village chief, seven-time provincial council member, and deputy PAO chairman before his 2020 win.

The win defied both national and ban yai political logic. Coming from a corner of the province far from power centres like Takua Thung, Takua Pa, or Khao Lak, Tharathip was a dark horse without a national party affiliation or a ban yai profile. The Bhumjaithai Party backed him only after his 2020 victory, and, reflecting his lack of standing in a powerful ban yai, that backing was uncertain this year. Through a provincial lens, however, Tharatip’s gradually established local presence made his rise foreseeable. Bamroong’s return, though shaped by stronger ban yai elements, nevertheless reflected historical provincial dynamics rather than national politics: PAO leadership has now returned to Phang Nga’s political heartland.

Table 1. Results of the 2025 Phuket PAO Chairman Election

Name	Affiliation	Remarks	Total Votes (unofficial results)
Rewat Areerob	Phuket Yatdai (local group)	Former Phuket PAO chairman, elected in 2020, hailed as a representative of the conservative faction. He is also a former Phuket MP affiliated with the Democrat Party.	86,616
Lersak Leenanithikul	People’s Party	Neurosurgeon and former deputy director at Vachira Phuket Hospital, the province’s main public hospital. New to politics.	44,602
Srithep Udomlap	Independent	Ran unsuccessfully for Phuket MP in the 2023 election under the banner of the ultra-royalist Thai Pakdee Party.	2,228

Table 2: Results of the 2025 Phang Nga PAO Chairman Election

Name	Affiliation	Remarks	Total Votes (unofficial results)
Bamroong Piyanamvanich	Rak Phang Nga, Pattana Phang Nga (local group)	Takua Thung businessman and three-time Phang Nga PAO chairman who lost his post to Tharatip in 2020. Reportedly backed by Chakat Pattanakitwiboon, the current Phang Nga MP representing the Palang Pracharath Party.	54,248
Tharatip Thongjerm	Ruam Sang Phang Nga (local group)	Elected as Phang Nga PAO chairman in 2020. Has had ties to Bhumjaithai Party. From Thap Put District.	33,727
Sutthichok Thongchumnum	People’s Party	Former president of the Phang Nga Chamber of Commerce. Ran unsuccessfully for Phang Nga PAO chairman in 2020 under the Progressive Movement tied to the People’s Party.	17,174
Pisit Jongphongsa	Independent	A new, unknown contender.	2,468

In sociological make-up, attractiveness to migrants from other parts of the country, tourism-dependent economies, and historically outward-looking orientation, neither Phuket nor Phang Nga is representative of provincial Thailand as a whole. But that is really the point. Local officeholders may comprise the campaign infrastructure of national parties. Some voters may see local elections as a way to signal their preference among the parties.

However, no less than in Phuket and Phang Nga, local elections across provincial Thailand also turn on local issues, reflect local concerns, and capture local perspectives. To understand those elections through the comfortable, homogenising construct of the ban yai or to view them decisively as warm-ups for national elections is to diminish the significance to voters of those concerns, issues, and perspectives. Viewing Thailand’s local elections through a lens focused on that significance will not magically align the politics of the provinces with liberal-democratic principles and practices. However, privileging some of the perspectives and motivations of provincial electorates might — to quote one shrewd observer — “offer a good reminder of why we hold local elections in Thailand in the first place”.

2025/47