LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 The Core of the Tourism Development Plan of Thailand and Implementation Situation
2.1.2 Issues in Policy Implementation in Tourism: A Critical Analysis According to findings of social phenomenon in the national economic and According to findings of social phenomenon in the national economic and
social development plan and the national tourism development plan, as mentioned earlier, there were consistent academic studies of many researchers on the issues of integrated implementation between sectors. Therefore, there are various studies of researchers as follows;
First of all, the study of Kachai Soprasert (1996) regarding “Tourist-police and Crime-Related to tourism: Problems of Policy Implementation” found that most problems that tourists suffer derived from the cooperation of other relevant agencies.
Not only there are obstacles and problems in coordinating with the tourist police but also the role and mission of the tourism agency in relation to tourism policy inconsistent.
Secondly, the study of Rawipa Homsettee (1 9 9 8 ) about “Effectiveness of Tourism Policy Implementation: A Case Study of Chiang Rai” demonstrated that not only factors of policy qualification, but mechanism of driving policy process like human resources was very important including collaboration process and cooperation in a similar direction in order to encourage the filling in gap or factors that will generate problems in the future.
Thirdly, the study of Duangta Jatuporn (2000) about “Effectiveness of Policy Implementation: A Special Case Study of Thailand’s tourism from 1998 to 1999 found that Thailand’s tourism policy (The Amazing Thailand 1998-1999) was not consider in effective planning in terms of utilizing resources. As a consequence, there were environmental problems, pollution and decadence in tourist attractions.
Moreover, there were many tourism promotions into new tourist destinations without considering the fragility and limited natural and cultural resources. Then, it can be clearly seen that policy implementation was too much accelerated, discontinuity and carefulness in borrowing the knowledge, cooperation of knowledgeable sectors or expert in anticipation and protection that damages might appear.
Fourthly, the study of Oratai Krutwaysho (2006) about “Tourism Policy Implementation in the Developing World: the Case of Phuket, Thailand” indicated that the tourism policy of Phuket province has suffered problems about overlapping government administration, resource scarcity, lack of law enforcement action strictly, observations on policy implementation that are affected by organizational culture, social values and cultures, social class as well as social relationship and support system. Thus, the main problem is collaboration and participation that have affected.
Fifthly, the study if Sarochar Phraepasa (2014) regarding “Tourism Policy Implementation in Thailand” suggested that most successful tourism policy implementations were derived from collaboration between sectors, dependence on external sectors, attribute of sector that conducted essential duties and so on.
Furthermore, the research found that human resources did not have cooperation skill to work with external sectors including private sectors and civil society that should more participate. Importantly, dependence on external networks contained essential factors which were expenditure support.
Sixthly, the study of Chanapol Techvitul (2016) about “Policy Implementation of Tourism Development in Bangkok, A Case Study in China Town (Yaowarach) found that the activities in supporting and developing tourism in China Town (Yaowarach) organized various events during special festivals and activities for improving locations and encouraging the preservation of historical tourism. Also, the quantity of operating sector influenced on bargaining power of benefits from the participation of stakeholders in policies. Obviously, it was indicated in the political conditions when the implementation need the participation and integration of sectors.
Seventhly, the study of Praedau Foopanichpruk (2016) regrading “Policy Framework for Enhancing Sustainable Tourism Development: A Case Study of Chang Island, Trat Province” proposed the research findings about the conditions of tourism policy in Chang Island, Trat Province. In addition, it found out that Department of local administration in Trat province and Kochang municipality did not implement the first national tourism development plan (2012-2016) to combine in creating strategies of tourism administration and development sustainably. Also, the tourism and sports office did not pay attention continuously, regulations of government sector did not facilitate to generate the tourism administration and development and lacks of expenditures and human resources. Because lacks of integrated collaborations in policy-level and local level, it resulted in separating operations, discontinuously connecting and lacking of being holistic.
Eighthly, the study of Praedau Foopanichpruk (2017) regarding “Policy Framework and Strategic Measures for Enhancing Sustainable Tourism Development:
A Case Study of Samed Island, Rayong Province” proposed the research findings about the conditions of tourism policy in Samed Island, Rayong Province. Then, it
found out various problems and obstacles in tourism policy implementation based on the first national tourism development plan (2012-2016). Also, it was derived from policy-level that Ministry of Tourism and Sports did not distribute sufficiently for the national tourism development plan to sectors in local areas. Moreover, the problems in local areas were generated by not distributing sufficient expenditure for the tourism administration and development or the conflicts was happened because the regulations of government sector did not facilitate in joint operations. This would mean that it was not clear in the integrated collaboration in areas and different levels between sectors that generated the discontinuity and not united cooperation. Therefore, it resulted in the conflicts and inequality in expenditure allocation.
Lastly, the study of Praedau Foopanichpruk (2018) regarding “A Study of Policy Implementation under the National Tourism Development Plan, 2012-2016, by the Active Beach Tourism Cluster” found out that tourism policy implementation based on the first national tourism development plan (2012-2016) in the active beach tourism cluster suffered the problems that project which was supporting the strategy to promote participation process or the integration as much as it was necessary.
Furthermore, it suffered many problems in the tourism policy implementation such as Department of Local Administration slightly combined the first national tourism development plan (2012-2016) in creating the strategy of tourism administration and development, the operations between government sectors were not holistic and the integrated project, coordination and cooperation between sections were insufficient.
In addition, lacking of expenditure and human resource in quantitative and qualitative terms, participating in tourism administration and development in communities and private sectors were still insufficient. Therefore, all of these problems were derived from the integrated policy implementation.
According to all nine studies of researchers over the past 20 years, it was insisted in academic supports from the occurred studies of actual phenomena that the integrated policy implementation in the issue of the tourism administration and development was an important problem and issue that need to understand urgently in most areas of Thailand. This would mean that the majority of operations or implementations based on the tourism administration and development must depend on the cooperation and connection of knowledge and skills between sectors,
organizations or associations holistically in order to reach the highest accomplishment completely.
2.1.3 Driving the Tourism Development Plan into Implementation