Addressing complex, cross-cutting issues requires more sophisticated and collaborative policy development approaches. This chapter explores how Thailand can enhance its policy development practices to support whole-of-government and co-ordinated action, focusing on the role of the centre of government (CoG). It draws on the net zero transition as a case study to examine how the CoG can support better co-ordination, disseminate good policy development practices, strengthen inter-ministerial co-operation, engage citizens and stakeholders, and create the conditions for more coherent and inclusive policy design.
Governing Cross‑cutting Challenges from the Centre in Thailand
Abstract
A co-ordinated and holistic approach to policy development is required to manage cross-cutting issues, ensuring that policy actions align with strategic objectives. Thailand has strong centre of government (CoG) institutions that could be further enhanced to strengthen co‑ordination across government.
Building and leveraging the right set of tools, such as frameworks, can elevate policy development capabilities across government. Thailand’s CoG can play a key role in this.
Well-co-ordinated policy development processes require the right structures and a culture that supports the collaboration. Careful consideration and streamlining of existing structures could make Thailand’s progress more efficient.
Creating the right enabling environment by strengthening leadership and building public service capacity is fundamental to the government’s ability to develop and respond to cross-cutting issues. Further, resource prioritisation needs to be integrated to ensure that the budget is allocated across interconnected actions.
The sandbox environment offers potential for further innovative action and partnerships across sectors. However, Thailand must continue shifting regulations and fiscal incentives to allow for greater private sector interactions.
Policy making should be inclusive, incorporating varied opinions from diverse stakeholders, and include a system for ongoing feedback to refine and evolve.
Governments are increasingly dealing with cross-cutting issues involving many stakeholders and a range of policy responses, such as net zero. In this context, governments need to challenge traditional ways of policy making and find more advanced approaches that reflect the complexity of today’s issues. More holistic and co‑ordinated approaches are necessary to transcend traditional silos and align individual policies or actions with the broader strategic framework (OECD, 2024[1]).
Cross-cutting issues require the involvement of a diverse set of actors with different interests and who play different roles in developing and implementing policies. Governments need to use more collaborative approaches in policy development that allow the views of citizens and stakeholders to be incorporated. In practice, this requires effective feedback loops for learning, ensuring policies are adapted to the shifting environment and stakeholder needs (Latham, 2014[2]). In Thailand’s net zero context, the magnitude of policies needs to align with the national strategic planning framework but are also developed and implemented in a co‑ordinated, collaborative and adaptive way.
Despite an increased sense of urgency and proliferation of commitments around net zero, systemic reforms at the national government level have not kept pace to translate all of Thailand’s ambitions into action. Indeed, net zero’s long-term and cross-cutting nature represents a unique and complex challenge for traditional government practices. Thailand should continue to improve its policy development approaches to support whole-of-government, co‑ordinated action. This could include establishing or enhancing frameworks, tools and mechanisms for enhancing co‑ordination and stakeholder involvement and fostering an enabling environment to support this.
This chapter explores Thailand’s approach to policy development for cross-cutting issues such as net zero, paying particular attention to the role of the CoG. The conclusion of this chapter presents a summary of opportunities to enhance policy development practices for cross-cutting issues through the CoG. The chapter is structured as follows:
Guiding good policy development practices from the CoG.
Strengthening inter-ministerial co-ordination mechanisms from the CoG for cross‑cutting issues.
Systemically enabling citizens and stakeholders in the development of cross-cutting issues: Enhancing the role of the CoG.
Enabling conditions to support more co-ordinated policy development.
Thailand has a strong strategic planning framework with clear net zero goals as discussed in Chapter 2. This framework, supported by the National Strategy 2018-2037 and master plans, outlines the priorities for government action. The importance of net zero action is being further institutionalised, with the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MNRE) making progress on Thailand’s first Climate Change Act. Considering the diversity of stakeholders and the broad spectrum of policy actions required, success in operationalising this framework will be dependent on Thailand’s ability to harmonise and co‑ordinate policy efforts across government and ensure that all stakeholders are appropriately involved (OECD, 2024[1]).
Thailand has already acknowledged the need to adopt a more holistic and co‑ordinated approach to policy development, including a view of how each agency’s efforts contribute to outcomes. Despite this acknowledgement, Thailand currently lacks a whole-of-government policy development process, standards and frameworks for complex or cross-cutting issues. Workshop participants and interviewees during the OECD fact-finding process noted the existence of key steps around developing proposals, submitting them to the CoG for Cabinet and budget approval, and identifying key performance indicators for monitoring. One interviewee provided open government principles and model used during sandbox processes, as discussed in Box 3.3. However, a whole-of-government policy development framework, standards, tools, guidance, systematic training or capacity-building programmes could contribute to a more robust policy development.
Guiding better policy development through frameworks and standards
Frameworks and standards play a crucial role in policy co‑ordination (OECD, 2024[1]), particularly given the complexity of policy challenges today. They act as guidance, ensuring policies are aligned with the government’s vision and of high quality. Many OECD countries rely on their CoGs to create such standards and promote these across the public administration. They do this in various ways, including events, toolkits and websites (Brown, Kohli and Mignotte, 2021[3]). Figure 3.1 outlines the various roles CoGs play in this regard. Seventeen out of 26 CoGs surveyed in the 2023 Survey on Strategic Decision-making at the Centre of Government provide line ministries with policy development frameworks or standards. In 88% of countries, setting frameworks, standards, guidance and building the capacity of public administration in policy development is a priority for the CoG. In ten countries, the CoG is primarily responsible for setting standards, defining requirements and providing guidance to line ministries and agencies (OECD, 2023[4]). The OECD survey also shows that CoGs provide support through guidelines and templates, review of draft policy proposals and ad hoc support to ministries, providing input into strategy documents, plans or instruments (OECD, 2023[4]).
Note: n=26 (2023). Respondents to the OECD survey were asked: “What support does the CoG provide line ministries and other agencies in policy development?”.
Source: OECD (2023[4]), “Survey on strategic decision making at the centre of government”, Unpublished, OECD, Paris.
The CoG could establish frameworks, standards and guidance to improve policy development for cross-cutting issues
Box 3.1 outlines examples from countries such as Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and, in particular, Northern Ireland, of establishing frameworks and setting standards from the CoG on policy development. Northern Ireland has created practical toolkits and guidance documents that help integrate international principles and standards into its context. Australia undertook a collaborative design approach with all public service staff to help develop policy development mindsets, and better understand and own the guidance and principles. The United Kingdom’s CoG embeds contemporary, more holistic and open policy-making practices into its guidance.
New Zealand
The New Zealand government recognises that great policy advice is the foundation of effective government decision making. It underpins the performance of the economy and the well-being of all people. The CoG established the Policy Project initiative, aiming to build a high-performing policy system that supports and enables good decision making.
The initiative develops and promotes common standards, equipping policy practitioners, teams and agencies with tools, information and advice to develop their skills and capabilities in policy development, making use of tools such as newsletters for communication.
Australia
The Australian Government sets standards and provides guidance and resources to the public administration on policy frameworks, proposal processes and policy impact analyses. The policy impact analysis guidance framework is well established and helps policy makers reflect on how policies can affect people, businesses and communities. Through this approach, there is a stronger policy development process, and decision makers have better information about the costs and benefits of proposals. The CoG has released a framework with standards on this and created forms, templates, guidance on processes, self-assessments and training videos.
Northern Ireland
The Policy Toolkit provides a centralised set of key principles for good policy making intended for policy makers within the Northern Irish government to apply within the policy development process. The Policy Toolkit was developed internationally but contains practical, targeted guidance for applying the collection of better practices and guidelines within the specific policy context. It details practical understanding of key steps and stages of policy development processes in Northern Ireland and is divided into individual “workbooks”, which allow policy makers easy access to the most relevant information for their needs. The toolkit follows the policy lifecycle, beginning with justification and setup, evidence development, identification and analysis of policy options, impact assessment and consultation and announcements.
United Kingdom
The Open Policy Making toolkit is a centralised and well-resourced set of guidelines and resources for the development of a more open and user-led policy. It recognises that policy must be better informed and designed to allow the government to effectively implement its agenda in a fast-paced and increasingly digital world. The toolkit focuses on bringing together collaborative approaches, new analytical techniques and iterative testing methods to develop high-quality policy. It is structured around the policy lifecycle and also offers a centralised method to access tools for further development and resources for policy development activities such as workshops or prototyping.
Source: New Zealand Government (2023[5]), The Policy Project, https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project; Australian Government (2023[6]), Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis, https://oia.pmc.gov.au/resources/guidance-impact-analysis/australian-government-guide-policy-impact-analysis; Government of Northern Ireland (n.d.[7]), A Practical Guide to Policy Making in Northern Ireland, https://www.executiveoffice-ni.gov.uk/articles/policy-making; UK Government (2016[8]), Open Policy Making Toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-policy-making-toolkit.
As indicated in Chapter 2, the NESDC within the Thai CoG in partnership with the MNRE and DCCE could play a greater role in establishing such frameworks and standards to promote good, consistent policy development practices for net zero issues. In doing so, Thailand could integrate desired techniques and approaches into a single framework. For example, Thailand is already seeking to incorporate open government policies; establishing centralised standards and frameworks could encourage such practices.
Emerging practices in policy development for cross-cutting issues
Policy development frameworks, standards and guidance could also incorporate more advanced approaches for cross-cutting issues, including systems thinking, foresight and behavioural insights.
Systems thinking approaches can complement policy design practices by emphasising co‑ordination, holism and involvement of all stakeholders. For example, some Australian agencies have started to embed systems approaches into their policy design (Kaur, 2021[9]), while the United Kingdom Design Council works closely with governments and has developed a strong set of frameworks and documents to guide this (Drew, 2021[10]; Design Council, 2021[11]). Such approaches have often been used in net zero action due to the complex nature of such issues (Kaur et al., 2023[12]) and integrating these is a major challenge and priority for many CoGs. For example, Box 3.2 shows how systems approaches have been incorporated into the United Kingdom’s net zero approaches.
Strategic foresight can prove to be a very useful tool to model and stress test policy strategies for net zero issues (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). The OPDC has already started using strategic foresight; however, such activities are not targeted to net zero issues and differ from the overall policy development process. The OECD Recommendation on the Governance of Critical Risks proposes members build preparedness through foresight analysis and risk assessment frameworks to better anticipate complex and wide-ranging impacts (OECD, 2014[13]). Over the last three years, governments, including CoGs, have increased the number of resources that they devote to dealing with crises such as climate change.
Behavioural insights draw from behavioural economics and psychology to understand how people make decisions and behave in specific contexts. By applying these insights, policy makers can design policies that account for behavioural biases and motivations, thus increasing the legitimacy and effectiveness of policy interventions. This is particularly important as climate action often relies on people’s behaviours, e.g. around recycling, energy usage and low-carbon transport (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). For Thailand, incorporating behavioural insights to reduce the energy consumption of individuals through real-time feedback on consumption (for example, in Canada) (OECD, 2019[14]) or for behaviour change around transport presents an opportunity. The OPDC could consider establishing a behavioural insight unit and integrating these processes into an overall policy development approach. Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom are examples of countries that have specialised units at the CoG.
The UK Government introduced systems approaches to the development of policy aimed at achieving the net zero goal. Among the elements considered were:
Establishing fora for delivering shared net zero goals and identifying key issues through cross‑system governance structures, including two new cabinet committees.
Working towards a shared understanding of interdependencies and risks across different parts of the net zero challenge, for example through GBP 2 million funding from the Shared Outcomes Fund to develop systems tools.
Testing and determining feasible net zero scenarios with a whole energy systems modelling suite and supporting work to identify high leverage, systemic actions such as carbon capture, use and storage that will be necessary in a wide range of scenarios.
Source: UK Government (2021[15]), Net Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UK%20Net%20Zero%20Strategy%20-%20Build%20Back%20Greener.pdf.
Use of contemporary approaches in addressing cross-cutting issues
Thailand already has examples of more advanced approaches and innovative methods in their development of cross-cutting issues such as net zero. One example is the OPDC sandbox (Box 3.3), a test environment that enables new and innovative solutions to be trialled. Feedback from the OECD fact‑finding process indicated that there could be significant potential in expanding the sandbox environment and in considering how to mainstream or embed its underpinning principles and processes more broadly into policy development. Yet a major challenge continues to be regulatory reforms. The CoG has a suite of programmes to improve regulatory governance (OECD, 2020[16]) and practices, as well as review outdated regulations; however, the impact of this is ongoing.
Finding innovative solutions is paramount for addressing cross-cutting challenges such as net zero action. A more agile and innovative public sector can equip the government to proactively address these challenges through a process of experimentation and iteration (OECD, 2020[16]).
Thailand has created a sandbox environment in the CoG’s OPDC to design, test and pilot new initiatives for top priorities (currently net zero issues). In its lower-regulation environment, the sandbox brings together stakeholders from all sectors to consider and enable new and innovative solutions.
The sandbox environment was established to address issues with the default policy development process, including misalignment with societal needs, organisational silos, complex regulations and adaptation to rapid technological changes. It grants freedom from standard regulatory constraints, using codesign and open participation principles, thereby inherently fostering collaboration.
The OPDC committees and sub-committee structures make decisions on sandbox priorities (e.g. reducing PM2.5 particles). The government must then approve reducing the scope of certain regulations or flexing certain laws to enable sandbox prototypes or pilots in certain provinces or sectors. Scaling sandbox initiatives begins with reporting results to the appropriate OPDC sub-commission, which can then feed recommendations to the Public Sector Development Commission to scale up piloting processes (e.g. in other provinces). The intention is for successful initiatives to be considered for long‑term approval and funding through the usual budget and cabinet processes. However, this could depend on significant legislative or regulatory reviews subject to approval.
The fact-finding process for this report uncovered widespread support for the sandbox environment: it was universally acknowledged as a lever for driving better solutions for net zero issues. The sandbox’s operation within a lower-regulation environment was identified as the primary benefit, permitting the experimentation of new approaches without traditional constraints.
However, determining how the OPDC can scale up the use of the sandbox environment, with better links to mainstream policy development practices, remains a challenge. Stakeholders note this is difficult due to a complex and outdated legislative and regulatory environment and that stronger political leadership would be necessary to address this. A few considerations for the OPDC include:
Securing political and senior official advocacy: Demonstrating the value of the sandbox and gaining buy-in from the highest levels was identified as a key enabler to evaluating and reducing outdated regulations. However, it is important to balance efforts to reduce regulations and allow more experimentation with upholding the integrity of the public sector (Kaur et al., 2022[17]). Scaling initiatives from the sandbox must not disregard established and important legal frameworks. The OPDC could nevertheless consider an expedited regulatory or review process for high‑potential prototypes while also prioritising the broader processes of reviewing outdated regulations.
Aligning interests across stakeholders to maximise success: The sandbox initiative already includes strong engagement with citizens and stakeholders. Aligning interests and goals across all levels of government, the private sector, academic institutions and communities will enable greater support for and adoption of selected initiatives or challenges. The OPDC could use this as an opportunity to also build greater awareness and understanding of net zero issues amongst citizens, and opportunities for them to participate in solutions.
Enhancing meaningful engagement with the private sector: Given the sandbox initiatives generally rely on the private sector or are based on public-private partnerships (PPPs), the OPDC must continue to intentionally acknowledge and cultivate the role of the private sector in these cross-cutting issues (see section on strengthening the role of the private sector). One approach that lends itself well to the sandbox environment could be a policy supporting the development of young firms, such as through making funding available or facilitating contact with the academic sphere. This was noted as an important element of policy design around industries with large net zero implications, specifically automobiles (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2023[18]).
Incorporating the principles of the sandbox into policy development frameworks: The OPDC can also consider how to incorporate the principles and operation of the sandbox initiative into broader public administration practices. One of the important principles it could build in is its focus on genuine codesign, a collaborative and inclusive approach involving the active participation of all stakeholders. For example, the OPDC could integrate these into policy development frameworks, standards or guidance, or showcase the sandbox initiatives, helping to raise staff awareness on what is possible. Broader consideration of how to tweak mainstream governance processes could also be considered to support mainstreaming more agile regulatory (OECD, 2021[19]) or policy approaches.
Source: Interview during OECD fact finding with a representative of the Government of Thailand; OECD (2020[16]), “Thailand Regulatory Management and Oversight Reforms: A Diagnostic Scan”, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2021/01/thailand-regulatory-management-and-oversight-reforms_747639d7/2dbaa2e5-en.pdf; Kaur, M. et al. (2023[12]), “Steering responses to climate change from the centre of government: A stocktaking”, https://doi.org/10.1787/b95c8396-en; Dechezleprêtre, A. et al. (2023[18]), “How the green and digital transitions are reshaping the automotive ecosystem”, https://doi.org/10.1787/f1874cab-en; OECD (2021[19]), Recommendation of the Council for Agile Regulatory Governance to Harness Innovation, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0464.
Building capacity for policy development of cross-cutting issues
The OPDC should also consider building the understanding and capacity of staff and stakeholders in policy development approaches for cross-cutting issues. First, the OPDC can take a role in establishing sound internal communication approaches to increase staff engagement around cross-cutting issues such as net zero and good policy development practices around this. When adequate, internal communication can foster information dissemination, increase staff engagement and strengthen its support for the government’s strategic priorities. Given the CoG’s role in supporting the Cabinet of Thailand (hereafter the Cabinet) and in articulating the government’s agenda, it can ensure consistent, clear and correct information across the government (OECD, 2024[1]). Through the fact-finding process for this report, stakeholders identified that the OPDC could have a greater role in communicating with line ministries to:
Raise awareness and understanding of good policy development practices in cross-cutting issues in collaboration with the NESDC.
Disseminate clear and accurate information about the government’s agenda and decisions on cross-cutting issues, such as net zero.
Share good practices, lessons learnt and other related messages.
Raise an understanding of what net zero means, its importance to the government and the contributions of line ministries and other actors in achieving net zero outcomes.
The OPDC could also develop and deliver training and technical support on any established standards, frameworks or guidance to staff in line ministries, subnational governments and even key stakeholders. This is particularly important for cross-cutting issues, given its complexity and need to use advanced techniques. This could be done by establishing knowledge-sharing fora, awards or other recognition initiatives and establishing champions or networks (OECD, 2024[1]).
Acting as a model by steering a greener public administration from the centre
Climate-friendly public administrations are increasingly important for many countries, as governments are often one of the largest real estate and fleet holders, energy consumers and purchasers of goods and services. Many countries’ CoGs are developing and implementing holistic and systemic reforms for the public administration to be “greener”, which can send a signal to countries about the importance of net zero (Kaur et al., 2023[12]).
Given the role of the OPDC in stewarding public administration reforms, it could consider establishing and co‑ordinating reforms to “green” the public administration. Thailand could draw on global examples of CoGs steering green public administration reforms, for example in Canada and France (Box 3.4). Senior officials already identified driving a greener public administration as a topic of interest during the fact-finding process and can help establish the government as a role model.
Canada
In response to the climate change related challenges in Canada, the Government of Canada has committed to greening government operations. The government will transition to net zero carbon and climate-resilient operations, while reducing environmental impacts beyond carbon emissions, including waste, water and biodiversity. Led by the Centre for Greening Government of the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, the Government of Canada will ensure that Canada is a global leader in government operations that are net zero, resilient and green.
The Centre for Greening Government provides strong mandates and political leadership, namely:
Lead and co-ordinate the federal emissions reduction, climate-resilience and greening government initiatives.
Integrate knowledge from other leading organisations and share best practices broadly.
Track and disclose government environmental performance information centrally.
Drive results to meet greening government environmental objectives.
The Greening Government Strategy is a set of government-approved commitments that apply to all core government departments and agencies. The strategy has commitments across all types of government operations and administration processes, property, workforce and fleets.
The strategy has a set of clear actions against each focus area. The CoG is accountable for the government’s environmental performance and committed to the principles of transparency and open data. In order to ensure oversight, the CoG publicly discloses detailed environmental performance information on government operations, including a complete inventory of federal greenhouse gas emissions.
France
France’s Ecological Transformation Plan for Eco-responsible Public Services, adopted in 2023, emphasises the state’s exemplary role in ecological transformation. By greening its public services, France aims to demonstrate the feasibility of this transition to other sectors and enhance the efficiency and attractiveness of its public administration.
The Plan consolidates previously separate initiatives related state’s environmental responsibility (e.g. State's decarbonisation strategy (2023-2050), the National Sustainable Procurement Plan, the Digital and Environmental Roadmap), thus simplifying and accelerating the implementation of envisioned greening initiatives. Overall, the Plan outlines 15 commitments, beginning with two cross‑cutting measures: i) training public agents in the ecological transition; and ii) tracking the state’s greenhouse gas emissions and respecting the decarbonisation trajectory. The remaining 13 commitments are organised into five key themes:
Getting around better.
Better production and consumption.
Eating better.
Better management of government buildings.
Better protect and enhance our ecosystems.
Each theme groups several measures and actions, supported by specific targets to be reached by the year of 2027.
Source: Government of Canada (2022[20]), Greening Government Strategy: A Government of Canada Directive, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/innovation/greening-government/strategy.html; OECD (n.d.[21]), “Greening public administration in OECD countries: Driving the green transition within the public sector”, OECD, Paris.
A holistic approach to cross-cutting issues, such as net zero, requires a co‑ordinated approach, particularly when implementation involves many stakeholders (OECD, 2020[22]), as is the case in Thailand.
The OECD Recommendation of the Council on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development details eight principles for the promotion of policy coherence, including whole-of-government co-ordination (OECD, 2019[23]). Key to this is the establishment of effective mechanisms for inter-ministerial co‑ordination. This can enhance the alignment of policies, resolve divergences and facilitate decisions on trade-offs to promote mutually supporting actions across sectors and institutions. For Thailand, such co‑ordination mechanisms could also help facilitate trade-off decisions required on cross-cutting issues and help undertake whole-of-government activities such as mapping and identifying which areas or sectors should be targeted and at what timescale, in view of achieving net zero ambitions.
CoGs play a key role in stewarding outcomes through co‑ordination of policy. Specifically for net zero policy initiatives, good co-ordination of the several ministries and agencies involved in their design can be complex (OECD, 2023[24]). The OECD’s 2023 NetZero+ report recommends that governments thus “take a genuinely whole-of-government approach to policy making” and recognise “the important role of “centres of government” in driving a co-ordinated approach” (OECD, 2023[25]). In Thailand, enhancing the role of the CoG, including the OPDC, in co‑ordination activities was also identified by several stakeholders through the OECD fact-finding process. A number of OECD countries have CoG units that co‑ordinate climate responsibilities. Box 3.5 outlines the example from France.
France
In 2022, the president asked the prime minister to lead inter-ministerial “ecological planning” and the Secretariat General for Ecological Planning was established to support her in this endeavour. The responsibility covers all areas of ecological transition (climate change mitigation and adaptation, biodiversity, natural resources, and health and the environment) and involves co‑ordinating the elaboration of policy, conflict resolution, monitoring implementation – including at the local level – and mobilising stakeholders.
Source: France Stratégie (2022[26]), Soutenabilités ! Orchestrer et planifier l’action publique, https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/publications/soutenabilites-orchestrer-planifier-laction-publique.
While Thailand does have such units within the Prime Minister’s Office, the fact-finding process suggests that there remains a lack of clarity around the role of this office, the OPDC and other co‑ordination units or focal points within line ministries. The stakeholder interviews suggested that CoG institutions did not have a strong role in directing policies or co‑ordination.
Other OECD countries utilise decentralised mechanisms to co‑ordinate cross-cutting issues such as net zero policy across the whole of government, including climate issues. These mechanisms typically take the form of highly centralised lead units in the CoG or more decentralised approaches such as inter‑ministerial or inter-departmental co-ordination bodies, working groups or focal points (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). Currently, Thailand primarily leverages committees and working groups for internal co‑ordination of cross-cutting issues, such as net zero.
Thailand’s committee structure for net zero
To facilitate the provision of cross-sectoral expertise and promote inter-ministerial co‑ordination, Thailand’s Cabinet relies on specialised National Cabinet committees, enabling focused and expert deliberation that informs government policy and decision making. The National Climate Change Policy Committee (NCCCP) and the National Energy Policy Council (NEPC) are relevant to net zero. The Prime Minister is the chair of both the NEPC and the NCCCP.
National Committee on Climate Change Policy
The NCCCP was created in 2007 and is Thailand’s main decision-making body for climate change policy. It is responsible for formulating national climate change strategies and policies, including for greenhouse gas mitigation and emissions management. The NCCCP monitors and evaluates the implementation of national climate strategies and policies and can review and support budget allocations to government agencies in order to promote climate change related initiatives. It promotes climate policies related co‑operation between the public and private sector entities. The Committee also develops principles, mechanisms and guidelines for international co‑operation on climate change related issues, ensuring alignment with Thailand’s national interests.
The prime minister chairs the NCCCP and the Minister of Natural Resources and Environment and the Minister of Foreign Affairs serve as Vice Chairpersons of the Committee. The NCCCP includes members from relevant government bodies, such as permanent secretaries of ministries of transport, finance, foreign affairs, labour, energy, commerce and others, as well as secretary generals from the NESDC and the National Water Resources Office. Experts can also be invited to the Committee and subcommittee meetings.
The NCCCP can establish subcommittees or working groups to enhance the implementation of its broad mandate. Eight subcommittees under the NCCCP focus on policy integration, knowledge base enhancement, international negotiations, public relations, climate legislation, carbon credits, GHG mitigation and national climate action conference (Figure 3.2). The NCCCP is supported by its secretariat, the Department of Climate Change and Environment (DCCE) under the MNRE.
Note: The full list of NCCCP members is as follows: the Prime Minister or the appointed Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Natural Resources and Environment, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Permanent Secretary of; Prime Minister’s Office; Ministry of Finance; Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Ministry of Tourism and Sports; Ministry of Transport; Ministry of Digital Economy and Society; Ministry of Energy; Ministry of Commerce; Ministry of Interior; Ministry of Labor; Ministry of Education; Ministry of Public Health; Ministry of Industry; Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives; Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation; Bangkok Metropolitan Administration; Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council; Office of the National Water Resources; Budget Bureau; five-nine experts on law, economics, the environment, science and technology, energy or climate change; one expert from the private sector.
Source: OPDC (2023[27]), “Presentation: Information for preparing a workshop to adjust roles and missions”, Unpublished, Office of Public Sector Development Commission.
The NESDC participates in the NCCCP at the sub-committee level. As the main entity overseeing policy development in the country, the NESDC provides consultations and guidance on policies. The NESDC’s Board, consisting of 12 members, reviews the newly developed action plans and can propose additional comments and feedback before submitting the document to the Cabinet. There may be further opportunities for the NESDC to engage in the work of the NCCCP, particularly by making sure all documents sustain the quality check provided by the NESDC.
National Energy Policy Council
The NEPC is tasked with formulating national energy policies and plans for energy management and development and comprises cross-industry specialists. The primary responsibility of the NEPC is to set the pricing framework for the sale of energy within Thailand. The Council monitors, co-ordinates and supports relevant ministries, agencies, state enterprises and private sector entities in their energy operations, ensuring alignment with national energy plans and policies. The NEPC is also evaluating national energy policies and management plans. Its work is supported by its secretariat, the Energy Policy and Planning Office, from the Ministry of Energy. With Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister, the participants include various ministers, including energy, natural resources and environment, defence, commerce, industry and others. Other participants involve Secretary-General of the Council of State, Secretary General of the NESDC and Director General of the Budget Bureau.
Outside the top-level committees (see those outlined above), new committees, sub-committees and working groups are frequently established to guide or provide direction on new plans, issues or policies (e.g. a committee is responsible for all integrated plans and each ministry has an extensive set of sub‑committees, often with common representatives or members). A challenge that Thailand could experience is the excessive use or proliferation of committees, which can create unnecessary administrative burden, create duplication or conflicts of responsibilities, or demand significant time from senior officials who are members of multiple committees. These issues were raised by officials across line ministries during the fact-finding mission. This is particularly risky when dealing with cross-cutting issues such as net zero, where a holistic approach is required; it can be difficult to clearly define which policy should sit under which committee.
Thailand may wish to map out its full committee structure and how it relates to net zero policies, and regularly review these for opportunities to rationalise. Box 3.6 outlines an example of Australia in rethinking its co‑ordination structures.
In 2020, the Australian National Cabinet reviewed ministerial councils and fora to rationalise and reset their structures and programmes of work. The report set out recommendations on the following key themes: i) a streamlined intergovernmental structure; ii) other national bodies; iii) interactions with the National Cabinet infrastructure; iv) mirroring and building on the National Cabinet model; v) encouraging delivery and good process; vi) reducing bureaucracy; vii) maintaining a streamlined and fit-for-purpose structure.
The review, therefore, took a holistic approach to reviewing existing fora and set forth criteria for new bodies based on the review of existing structures, with the aim of meeting the key themes discussed in the recommendation to the National Cabinet. These aim to reduce the potential for new bodies, which might prevent Australian co-ordination structures from achieving the goals of streamlined, fit-for-purpose and minimally bureaucratic structures that are able to meet their delivery goals.
Source: Australian Government (2020[28]), Guidance for Intergovernmental Meetings, https://federation.gov.au/ministerial-councils/guidance-ministerial-councils, Guidance for Intergovernmental meetings.
Thailand could consider other co‑ordination mechanisms within an overall co‑ordination system. For example, while many committees have been established for setting directions, there was no evidence of the existence of systemic co‑ordination meetings between the various CoG agencies and the co‑ordination units within line ministries (such as the Department of Climate Change and Environment). Not all OPDC divisions are involved in the long term or in the high-level planning meetings for net-zero, which could reduce opportunities for the OPDC to take more leadership in co‑ordination and be involved in the priority-setting process and policy co-ordination.
Collaboration culture across ministries
Inter-departmental co‑ordination relies not just on organisational structures but also on a collaborative culture. OECD evidence demonstrates that common barriers to good collaboration include siloed working practices, cultures and budgets (OECD, 2024[1]). Lack of recognition for inter-departmental initiatives, inadequate leadership engagement and limited accountability of cross-departmental fora can also impede effective collaboration (OECD, 2023[29]).
A central observation from fact finding was that line ministries in Thailand have clarity of their individual purpose but nearly all lack a “bird’s-eye view”, critical to enable co-ordination for cross-cutting issues. Stakeholders also indicated that while collaboration was a strength within a ministry, siloed ways of working were still the default across the administration. Despite the use of inter-agency committees and councils and co‑ordination mechanisms, collaborative mechanisms between line ministries are lacking or not fully effective. For example, some line ministries were unaware of the research priorities of the Department of Climate Change and Environment (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment). This could limit opportunities to utilise emerging research findings relevant to their areas of work. The lack of collaborative ways of working could be due to siloed mentality, red tape, lack of direct incentives and different mandates and priorities.
The OECD found that there is also limited use of co‑ordination tools for cross-cutting issues in Thailand. While there are certain reporting systems, for example, the “eMENSCR” (Electronic Monitoring and Evaluation System of National Strategy and Country Reform) used by the NESDC and the OPDC’s “eSAR” (Electronic Self-Assessment Report) to support monitoring and evaluation of reforms, stakeholders are seeking tools that can support better exchange of information and collaborative ways of working. Thailand is seeking to further integrate and collect data on net zero, which can be leveraged to promote collaboration across ministries in the future.
Tackling cross-cutting issues, such as net zero, is a challenge that governments cannot take up alone (Kaur et al., 2023[12]) (OECD, 2025[30]). From 2019 to 2023, the number of stakeholders CoGs regularly liaise with (e.g. scientific experts, business associations and civil society organisations) has increased in 16 of the 26 surveyed countries (OECD, 2023[4]). Stakeholder engagement is the third most frequently cited major challenge for CoGs (42% of CoGs noted this as a major or moderate challenge) (OECD, 2023[4]). The 2023 SIGMA Principles for Public Administration highlight in Principle 5 that a good public administration will feature active consultation of all key internal and external stakeholders and the general public during policy development (OECD, 2023[31]).
Thailand’s Strategy for Public Sector Rebalancing and Development strives for more openness, transparency and integrity in government. The strategy highlights that “government agencies should be open to intersectoral operations and participation from all relevant parties to ensure quick and transparent responses to public needs”. Thailand’s legal and regulatory mechanisms for stakeholder participation are considered robust (OECD, 2025[32]). Section 77 of the constitution requires that prior to the enactment of every law, the state should consult with stakeholders. To implement Section 77, the Prime Minister’s Office Regulations on Public Consultation, B.E. 2548 (2005), require public agencies to engage in substantive consultations prior to finalising major regulations. Thailand’s commitment to meaningful stakeholder participation has been consistently strengthened in recent years:
2019: An act on legislative drafting and evaluation of law was passed, mandating stakeholders be consulted in the drafting of legislation. This was followed by Notification B.E. 2562 (2019), which required the Secretariat of the Parliament to carry out regulatory impact assessments (RIA) and stakeholder engagement for all legislative proposals submitted by Members of Parliament or the electorate (OECD, 2025[32]). Draft legislation must be uploaded to a central portal accessible to government and civil society for a minimum of 15 days. Other methods to gather public opinion may also be used.
2021: A centralised, digital portal was established for public consultation (OECD, 2022[33]).
2022: The prime minister issued a ministerial regulation entitled Prescribing Draft Regulations Which Must Conduct Public Consultation and Impact Assessment, B.E. 2565, in September 2022, extending requirements for regulatory impact assessments (OECD, 2022[33]). The requirements regarding the analysis of potential impacts of laws have also been integrated into Section 77 of the country’s constitution.
Engaging citizens and academic stakeholders
International attitudes towards climate policies show that 75% of surveyed respondents perceive net zero as “an important problem” and that their country “should take measures to fight” it (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022[34]). In this context, strengthening channels for citizens to directly partake in the policy development and planning process is paramount to respond more ambitiously to net zero and its effects. However, these platforms and mechanisms must be carefully designed and integrated within existing governance frameworks to ensure they become a means of empowerment for the public.
OECD guidelines emphasise the need for systematic and transparent citizen participation in policy making. Citizens must be engaged early and continuously, ensuring that the process is inclusive and that their input is integrated throughout the policy cycle (OECD, 2022[35]). This includes:
Identifying genuine problems where public input can make a difference.
Defining clear objectives and expected outcomes for participation.
Selecting appropriate groups for engagement.
Choosing the right participation methods and digital tools.
Communicating effectively about the process.
Evaluating the effectiveness of the participation process.
Fostering a culture of participation within the community and government.
Yet, there is no fit-for-purpose approach for the effective participation of stakeholders and citizens in policy making, as these need to be tailored adequately. Approaches can range from stakeholder participation platforms tied to a commitment, a permanent stakeholder engagement platform embedded in the national or local climate governance framework, or a citizen assembly (Kaur et al., 2023[12]).
Thailand uses a range of mechanisms for engaging with citizens and other stakeholders, including through public consultation processes, working groups and provincial and local government structures. However, during the fact-finding process, interviewees highlighted that current approaches to engaging with citizens on net zero can be hindered due to insufficient awareness amongst the public of such processes and a lack of understanding of their impacts. Some interviewees stated that consultation processes are process-oriented rather than genuinely seeking citizen feedback that can be incorporated into decision making. This was also echoed by Thai civil society organisations (CSOs), outlining that only a few actors have access to communications with policy makers (ACT, 2019[36]). In a positive light, line ministries are also embracing “open government” frameworks and models in their policy development; however, the 2022 OECD review found that these were often siloed and that a co‑ordinated approach could support greater coherence (OECD, 2022[37]), which is key for cross-cutting issues such as net zero.
Steering better engagement with citizens and stakeholders from the CoG
As net zero issues reach all aspects of policy and public life, engagement approaches can benefit from becoming more integrated and streamlined under the leadership of the CoG (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). In this regard, the OPDC could play a key role in supporting a more co‑ordinated approach to citizen engagement and integrating this into policy making, in view of delivering better public outcomes (Wellstead, 2022[38]; Kaur et al., 2023[12]). The OPDC can set standards and foster good, consistent practices on citizen and stakeholder engagement in policy development and build the capacity of line ministries in this. In Canada, for instance, the Privy Council Office has elaborated and published a wide array of engagement tools and resources, including a Designing Public Engagement Experiences toolkit and a Public Engagement Community of Practice available to all ministries and public agencies (Government of Canada, 2020[39]). Thailand could consider establishing standards and good practices as part of its broader integrated frameworks and guidance on policy development (see above), providing training and capacity building to support a more open and citizen-centred culture.
Some CoGs also take a lead role in citizen engagement on priority topics, such as the case of net zero for Thailand. In Luxembourg, for instance, the Klima-Biergerrot (KBR), a participatory citizen’s initiative, was established in January 2022 as a way for citizens to express their opinions and expectations on how climate policy in Luxembourg should evolve. The government made a conscious decision to place the KBR within the CoG (Ministry of State in Luxembourg) rather than the Ministry of the Environment, based upon the recognition that net zero is a horizontal issue calling for policy action across multiple sectors.1
Citizen assemblies are one mechanism for countries to engage with stakeholders. Ireland recently held two citizen assemblies on climate change and biodiversity loss; Austria has a climate assembly and dialogue, while Box 3.7 presents the examples of Canada, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom, where citizen assemblies were carried out to identify recommendations to achieve national climate objectives.
United Kingdom
In June 2019, the United Kingdom held the Climate Assembly UK to examine a pressing question, “How should the UK meet its target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050?”. The assembly gathered 108 members from different backgrounds and representatives of the population of the United Kingdom. Twenty‑five principles developed by the participants support the work of the assembly. The assembly convened during six weekends, where they heard presentations on each of the ten topics up for discussion. One of the outcomes of the assembly is a series of key recommendations to attain the country’s goal of net zero carbon emissions by 2050.²
Luxembourg
Klima-Biergerrot (KBR), a participatory citizen’s initiative, was established in January 2022 as a platform for citizens to express their opinions and expectations on how climate policy in Luxembourg should evolve, based a representative sample of 100 people. The government made a conscious decision to place the KBR within the CoG (Ministry of State in Luxembourg) rather than the Ministry of the Environment, based upon the recognition that climate change is a horizontal issue calling for policy action across multiple sectors. The recommendations derived from this activity were presented and discussed in the parliament and will inform the next plan.
Canada
In creating the National Action Plan on Open Government 2022-2024, the Government of Canada allowed citizens to participate via virtual feedback and comments on the plan’s commitments. Participation took place on the Let’s Talk Open Government website, through which citizens could engage in several discussions of interest, including a topic on climate change and sustainable growth. Citizens were provided a summary of the topic and questions to stimulate open debate. The Government of Canada additionally hosted a series of live consultation sessions over a five-week period in November and December 2020. The consultation data have since been made public as part of the government’s initiatives as a member of the Open Government Partnership. Other examples of engagement with citizens on climate-related issues include the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act, which recognises the importance of engagement to inform the development of climate plans and targets. Moreover, the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan reflects submissions from over 30 000 citizens and the National Adaptation Strategy was also informed by public, partner and expert input.
Spain
On 21 January 2020, the Council of Ministers of Spain approved the Declaration of Climate and Environmental Emergency, one commitment being to strengthen existing participation mechanisms by convening a Citizens’ Assembly for Climate, a commitment enshrined in Law 7/2021 of 20 May. The assembly contributes to the decision-making process on climate change by providing the citizens’ perspective.
The assembly is designed as a forum for citizen participation, a deliberative participatory exercise to generate reflection and collective knowledge, enable citizens to be informed, deliberate and reach consensus on the necessary solutions for the significant transformations required to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 and make the country more resilient to the impacts of climate change, all in a fair and supportive manner. The goal is to establish a social dialogue about the major issues entailed by the ecological transition, focusing on the question that will mark the assembly’s inaugural mandate: “Creating a safer and fairer Spain in the face of climate change. How do we achieve this?”.
The assembly consists of 100 individuals, randomly selected to reflect the diversity of Spanish society. Six working sessions have been conducted in which participants have undergone a preliminary phase of learning concepts and general reflections related to the energy transition, followed by an intermediate phase of deliberation and debate, as well as a final phase of crafting recommendations that have been integrated into a final report submitted to the government and the Congress of Deputies.
Source: Climate Assembly UK (2019[40]), The Path to Net Zero: Climate Assembly UK Full Report, https://www.climateassembly.uk/report/read/final-report.pdf; Government of Luxembourg (2022[41]), 56 propositions pour accélérer et intensifier la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique au Luxembourg, https://www.klima-biergerrot.lu/_files/ugd/dcac1d_5bb495b5584b4618815bb5fd8d9ad66d.pdf; Government of Canada (2022[42]), What We Heard Report - National Action Plan on Open Government, https://open.canada.ca/en/content/what-we-heard-report; Haro (2022[43]), “The Spanish Citizen Assembly for Climate: Input from 100 randomly selected Spanish citizens on how to tackle climate change”, https://www.unsdsn.org/spanish-citizen-assembly.
Integrating more citizen participation is a natural progression in Thailand’s ambitions and pathway to better policy development and co‑ordination approaches, building on the notable enhancements made in 2019, 2021 and 2022. Thailand could consider the next step of systematically incorporating citizen input as a core aspect of the policy cycle and embedding this into its frameworks. This would align with the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Open Government (2017[44]) and the OECD Good Practice Principles for Public Service Design and Delivery in the Digital Age (OECD, 2022[45]), and enhance democratic resilience, ensuring that policies are shaped by a diverse spectrum of voices, leading to more representative outcomes and more effective policies. The OPDC could also consider a capacity-building programme for citizens to build awareness of climate issues, their role in addressing these and how they can be involved in the policy processes.
Academic institutions and scientific experts
Feedback from the fact-finding process also indicated that academic experts could also be better integrated into the policy development processes for cross-cutting issues such as net zero in Thailand. Currently, experts from academia and the scientific community engage with government policy making through committee structures; however, there is little evidence of more continuous or informal engagement with academic institutions in policy processes. For example, Thailand could draw on New Zealand’s network of chief scientific advisors who are appointed to each line ministry, sharing information and providing collective views on policy proposals (New Zealand Government, n.d.[46]).
For net zero policies, academic institutions and scientific experts do not only support evidence-based decision making and offer opportunities for joint innovative projects with the private sector, government and citizens. While this cannot replace CSO engagement, academic institutions also have regional or local ties, enabling them to engage citizens locally (Silva et al., 2023[47]). This is important in Thailand, given the diverse geographic landscape and approaches to living across the provinces.
Strengthening the role of the private sector on cross-cutting issues
Addressing cross-cutting issues such as net zero often requires a significant mobilisation of support from all sources: public, private, domestic and international (OECD, 2023[48]). The private sector plays a key role in many ways; it is a key stakeholder in driving down emissions but can also support innovation and provide financial investments in climate action.
The role of the private sector in cross-cutting net zero action has been recognised as important by Thailand and the private sector equally. Government commissioned reviews (Somboonpakorn, 2023[49]) and OECD fact finding highlighted a private sector willing to contribute and a public service ready to embrace new partnerships. Several examples of PPPs can be found across the energy, transport, waste and pollution sectors. One example that participants of the fact-finding mission widely raised is the Saraburi Sandbox initiative (Box 3.8); the sandbox environment can drive innovative solutions that leverage the role of the private sector (see Box 3.3 for information on the sandbox).
In the wake of the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26), Siam Cement Group (SCG) crafted its Thailand Concrete and Cement Industry Roadmap, thus setting a course for net zero by 2050. As engagement with the private sector was highlighted as a necessary key factor to drive net zero emissions during the OECD fact finding process, the Saraburi Sandbox initiative emerged as a strong example of a flexible and innovative governance mechanism that effectively leverages the role of the private sector. Acknowledging the need for swift innovation, SCG took the initiative with the Saraburi Sandbox, spearheading 18 pilot projects. The initiative is the first PPP endeavour to develop a low-carbon city model in the Saraburi province, demonstrating the use of well-considered place-based project design. Eighty percent of the SCG’s cement production now occurs in Saraburi. The initiative has been a testament to industrial agility, leading to the development and subsequent governmental endorsement of low-carbon cement.
Despite its triumphs, the Saraburi model grapples with substantial institutional challenges, most notably the prevailing dependency on coal for energy as well as regulatory issues (e.g. inability to operate outside the Saraburi Sandbox). The initiative has an expansive scope including industrial processes and product use, waste and land-use change and offers significant opportunities for cross-sectoral work.
Source: Interview from OECD fact finding with a representative of the Government of Thailand; Government of Thailand (2023[50]), “Thailand’s side event at COP28 features net zero emission initiative by Thai cement industry”, https://www.nxpo.or.th/th/en/22105/.
Despite the recognition of the important role of the private sector, participants during the OECD fact-finding process agreed on the need for more meaningful engagement with the private sector. The draft National Determined Contribution (NDC) Action Plan (Government of Thailand, n.d.[51]) produced by the new DCCE emphasises the imperative for enhanced public-private collaboration, provides a framework, measures and timeframe for implementing this collaboration. However, the Action Plan is still to be adopted.
Interviews during the fact-finding process highlighted that better private sector engagement requires better alignment between government policies, national targets and private sector initiatives and targets. For example, one private sector interviewee noted that more priority at a national level is needed to upgrade Thailand’s energy infrastructure if Thailand wishes to pursue PPPs in this sector. The provision of infrastructure will be necessary over the coming decades to transition to net zero sustainably (IEA, 2021[52]). Another example is that the private sector often utilises industry and global standards that do not always match national targets and ambitions.
Stakeholders interviewed suggested that more continuous dialogue between the private sector and government is needed to understand the environment, create shared goals and identify joint opportunities. For example, stakeholders suggested that Thailand could reinvigorate the existing Joint Committee between Industry and Government (includes the Federation of Thai Industries, the Chamber of Commerce and the Thai Bankers’ Association), which has not been used as much recently. A recently commissioned government review in Thailand equally recognised this issue and suggested the creation of “a platform that connects the government and private sectors in implementing greenhouse gas reduction operations in Thailand, to enable every sector to operate in the same direction” (Somboonpakorn, 2023[49]).
Interviewees also noted that rethinking regulations and incentives are a barrier to improving engagement and the role of the private sector in net zero ambitions. While outside the scope of this report, Thailand should continue to address recommendations in a previous OECD study that highlighted the absence of specific regulations which can create potential conflicts of interest during policy development (OECD, 2021[53]). Consideration could also be given to fiscal or regulatory policies that steer private sector behaviour (OECD, 2020[22]). This would require a change in mindset from introducing rules a priori to instead directing the economy by facilitating the necessary enabling conditions to drive collective change (OECD, 2020[16]). In this regard, Thailand could draw insights from Indonesia’s approach to promoting PPPs in pursuit of net zero (Box 3.9).
More meaningful and intentional collaboration is crucial for initiatives like the Saraburi Sandbox to be successful and turn into concrete, scaled-up action. The OPDC in partnership with Saraburi province and the private sector, is currently working on a mapping exercise to identify the key stakeholders and their roles for net zero and this could serve as an important step in more intentionally and explicitly shaping the desired role of the private sector in these issues, and to identify what steps need to be taken to achieve this. Further, the sandbox initiative and the OPDC’s capacities for innovation put Thailand in a position to consider missions-based approaches to harness the private sector and drive innovation (see Box 3.10 for an example of this in the Netherlands).
Indonesia has been taking assertive steps to leverage the private sector to achieve its net zero objectives, recognising the private sector’s significant role in advancing sustainable development. The main areas of the Indonesian strategy include:
Fiscal incentives: Providing tax holidays, tax allowances and import duty exemptions to reduce the financial burden on renewable energy investments.
Regulatory support: Streamlining licensing processes to facilitate easier market entry for private sector participants.
Long-term business permits: Granting extended business permits to companies, providing more certainty for investors in the environmental sector.
Presidential regulation: Issuing directives to emphasise renewable energy development and to ensure government agencies support with fiscal and non-fiscal incentives.
Goods import facilitation: Introducing a “green line” for faster import of capital goods, aiding quicker business operations setup.
Investment licensing system: Adjusting the system to provide better assurance to investors and assisting them in the planning stages.
Investment targets: Setting ambitious targets to attract green investment through the Investment Coordinating Board.
Source: Shofa, J. (2022[54]), “Indonesia offers incentives, cuts red tape for green investment”, https://jakartaglobe.id/business/indonesia-offers-incentives-cuts-red-tape-for-green-investment.
In 2011, the Netherlands advanced reforms to develop a new form of public-private collaboration in nine key economic areas known as “top sectors”. The top sectors policy approach was developed in recognition of the complex nature of cross-cutting issues and understanding that disciplinary-specific co‑operation and technological innovation are not adequate alone. The top sectors approach connects business, science and public society to specific government policy targets across four main societal themes: energy transition, agriculture, health and care, and security.
Private industry is instructed to work together to form a comprehensive plan called Integral Knowledge and Innovation Agenda in each of the four areas. Each agenda must include clear goals to be achieved within certain timelines. The Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs leads the policy effort, co-ordinating other line ministries to shape and execute the agendas.
Source: Larrue, P. (2021[55]), “The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies: A new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges”, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f6c76a4-en.
In any effort, Thailand, however, should also ensure that gaps identified by the OECD regarding regulations and public service guidelines for interacting with the private industry (OECD, 2021[53]) are treated as a priority to ensure that integrity is preserved and conflicts of interest are avoided.
Establishing new frameworks, processes or practices for enhancing policy development and co‑ordination for cross-cutting issues in Thailand also requires consideration of certain enabling factors. The fact-finding process highlighted four that stakeholders believed were crucial to this endeavour:
Leadership.
Building workforce competencies at the centre.
Better integrating the budget process with cross-cutting issues such as net zero.
Data and information for evidence-informed decisions.
Leadership
The quality of policy depends on the senior officials translating the decisions of the political leadership into manageable, actionable initiatives and harnessing the necessary human and financial resources to implement (OECD, 2020[22]). In line with the OECD Recommendation of the Council on Public Service Leadership and Capability (OECD, 2019[56]), senior officials must foster a culture of continuous learning and adaptability within the public service to respond effectively to complex challenges (such as net zero).
The OECD fact-finding process observed motivation for transformation from senior officials in public administration. Many leaders highlighted the necessity to “work differently”, recognising the need to transform work culture, priorities and work processes and build genuine commitment. Senior leaders did emphasise that political advocacy is also essential in driving transformations for achieving net zero and that recent crises may have hampered this. Sustained political advocacy is particularly important for net zero, given the process of achieving change requires balancing short-term priorities with continuity over the longer term, beyond political terms of office (Kaur et al., 2023[12]).
Senior leaders in the civil service should continue to promote strong collaboration across the public administration, promoting a holistic and co‑ordinated approach to cross-cutting issues. Interviewees during the fact-finding process echoed that senior leaders needed to do more to improve collaboration between ministries. One approach to be considered is the use of mobility programmes for senior leaders. Senior leaders experiencing different roles across portfolios enable the development of a more holistic perspective and help to dismantle organisational silos (OECD, 2023[57]). Thailand could draw from examples from OECD countries, such as Belgium’s Talent Exchange programme or even Japan or Slovenia’s mobility programmes between the public and private sectors (OECD, 2023[57]). Interviewees during the fact-finding process also noted the importance of leaders in conveying the importance of priorities. In the context of this project, communicating the importance of achieving net zero and the overall approach the government is taking to get there is crucial for senior leaders in Thailand.
Building workforce competencies at the centre
The largest resource that CoGs have is their workforce. It is thus imperative to consider how a workforce can undertake its role. Some governments are placing specific focus on developing a workforce to support climate issues; yet this is not well mapped or understood. One example of a jurisdiction working on strengthening the capabilities of its workforce is the United Kingdom (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). There, the Government Skills and Curriculum Unit (GSCU), in collaboration with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero are working towards embedding specific training on climate in the competency frameworks and training activities (Box 3.11). In enhancing the role of the CoG for cross-cutting issues, Thailand could consider specific competencies at the CoG, including navigating the politics of policies, co‑ordination, data analysis and good public management. This could be considered as part of extending talent programmes (for example, the fast-track programmes or overseas scholarships), which could be tailored for CoG staff and ensure ample career pathway opportunities for graduates.
The GSCU, in collaboration with the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero, is working towards embedding specific training on climate in competency frameworks, training activities and curricula. This approach highlights the use of targeted units with expertise in capacity building to enhance public administration capacity by building the necessary skills and competencies to address cross-cutting issues. They have identified four levels of climate competencies expected of officials across the administration.
Source: UK Government (2021[15]), Net Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UK%20Net%20Zero%20Strategy%20-%20Build%20Back%20Greener.pdf.
The OCSC in close contact with the DCCE the OPDC could also consider building the right skills and competencies across line ministry staff for cross-cutting issues, which is important for a civil service fit for the future (OECD, 2021[58]). This was reinforced through the fact-finding process, where participants highlighted that technical capabilities, policy methods, data analysis and co‑ordination capacities could be strengthened. The OECD review also found that, while strong ambitions for a more open and participatory government existed, there was no specific skills development framework to enhance such capabilities (OECD, 2022[37]). This can be done through:
Establishing and promoting good practices through frameworks and guidance (see OECD (2022[37]) above). Frameworks and processes underpin the ability of public servants to navigate day-to-day responsibilities with efficiency and consistency (Washington, 2023[59]). Frameworks should not only include the process and approach; civil servants require a framework for skills. Accordingly, the OECD report Skills for a High-Performing Civil Service finds that “civil servants work directly with citizens and users of government services. New skills are required for civil servants to effectively engage citizens, crowdsource ideas and co-create better services” (OECD, 2017[60]). In this regard, the OPDC could work closely with the Civil Service Commission (CSC) to integrate required competencies more fully for cross-cutting issues into existing or new competencies frameworks.
Developing and delivering more relevant learning programs in collaboration with OCSC, DCCE, and OPDC. The OCSC, working closely with the OPDC and DCCE, could co-develop tailored training programs that build staff capacities to address cross-cutting issues and embed policy development standards in their work (Washington, 2023[59]). Currently, the fact-finding process indicates that learning may not be sufficiently anchored in a competency framework and that existing learning opportunities could be made more accessible and relevant. Training programmes could even include mobility opportunities or staff shadowing in other line ministries or provinces.
Box 3.12 outlines an example of Finland’s CoG in enhancing the capabilities of line ministry staff.
The Prime Minister’s Office of Finland has conducted workshops with line ministries to identify capacity and other needs across the public service and the potential support functions that the CoG could provide to address those. Considering the findings of the workshops, the Prime Minister’s Office has taken a more prominent role with regard to line ministries, offering capacity building around “key competence of seeing the big picture” and “challenging the line ministries to step out of siloes”.
Source: Interview with a representative of the Prime Minister’s Office of Finland, 2 May 2022.
Better integrating the budget process with cross-cutting issues such as net zero
Aligning national budgetary practices with cross-cutting issues such as net zero enables governments to progress actively towards sustainable development. Given its importance for public governance, the OECD developed the Recommendation of the Council on Budgetary Governance (OECD, 2015[61]), which advocates for the alignment of budgets with the strategic priorities of government via co‑ordination from the CoG. One example is the Chilean Ministry of Finance’s Financial Strategy on Climate Change, which seeks to align planning with the budget by integrating climate considerations in planning and budgeting across the government, setting clear goals for mitigation and adaptation and applying sustainability criteria in project evaluation.
While a comprehensive review of Thailand’s budgeting processes is beyond the scope of this report, stakeholders identified the budget as a key challenge during the fact-finding process. Like many countries, the process in Thailand requires ministries to submit individual budget proposals, which are assessed on alignment with the agency’s strategic framework and other criteria, such as cost-benefit analysis.2 While this ensures that submissions are thoroughly evaluated, OECD fact finding consistently reported it has led to a segmented approach, with resources allocated within siloed frameworks.
Thailand has acknowledged the importance of a more integrated resource allocation model to address this challenge and better support cross-cutting issues, such as net zero policies (Somboonpakorn, 2023[49]). In 2018, through the Budgetary Procedures Act B.E. 2561, legislative reforms were enacted to enable agenda-based budget allocations. For example, this has been applied to net zero in the water management approach across multiple ministries. To better guide agenda-based budget allocation practice across the administration, an integrated plan is created by a lead ministry covering the multiple actions and projects across various line ministries. Unlike the usual process, integrated plans require approval from an oversight committee. After approval, a “funding envelope” can be released, allowing the disbursement of funds between the ministries.
Yet, interviewees during the fact-finding process highlighted a lack of awareness of the integrated plan process. One department expressed that they were not able to participate in the process because there were disagreements on whether their project was directly related to the achievement of net zero. This is related to the challenge raised by the Budget Bureau, acknowledging difficulties in tagging and connecting initiatives that may have indirect contributions to net zero goals. In this regard, Thailand could draw on approaches from OECD countries who employ “green” tagging to classify budget measures according to their climate and environmental impact and to enhance the transparency of governments’ green actions (OECD, 2021[62]; Kaur et al., 2023[12]). For example, France used this tool as a first step in assessing the relationships between the budget and climate and environmental goals, while Spain is doing something similar, mandating the identification of resources in the state budget for the fight against net zero and energy transition. Ireland is developing definitions under its climate action plan 2023 to identify and track government spending that may have a negative impact on climate outcomes.
The Budget Bureau also acknowledged that some line ministries found the process for integrated plans overburdensome, hampering flexibility rather than promoting it. In this regard, Thailand could consider approaches to streamline the process and reduce administrative burden (for example, by reconsidering the additional committee approval layers). Further, the CoG could consider raising awareness of the agenda-based budgeting approach and working across line ministries to develop an integrated plan for cross-cutting issues such as net zero. The development of any net zero integrated plan must include all line ministries involved in net zero and should reinforce any enhancements made to the clarity of roles and responsibilities, including co‑ordination from the CoG.
Data and information for evidence-informed decisions
The quality of policies is influenced by the evidence that is used to develop them, including for policies aimed at addressing net zero (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). Collecting, processing and managing data on net zero is important to guide evidence-informed policy decisions and build trust in the administration’s actions. Evidence-informed policy development supports the development of responsive policies that are attuned to real-world conditions and the needs of citizens. It can be defined as a process where multiple sources of information are consulted and incorporated into policy development (OECD, 2020[63]).
Discussions with countries during the OECD informal Expert Group on Strategic Decision Making at the CoG identified data and evidence for decision making as a key challenge and point of importance to respond to policy challenges and analyse potential trade-offs, such as climate issues (Kaur et al., 2023[12]). This was echoed through the OECD fact-finding process in Thailand where stakeholders noted several issues related to current data infrastructure and capacities in the country. Feedback included the following:
Data, information and research activities are fragmented or managed by individual teams or functions within ministries.
There is a lack of understanding of what data are available and how data are valuable or interoperable, including at the provincial level and in the private sector.
There is an absence of formal information mechanisms and information-sharing culture.
There are no centralised co‑ordination approaches for the collection, synthesis and sharing of data related to cross-cutting issues such as net zero.
Further work needs to be done on data integration capabilities (Thailand notes that work on data integration for net zero policies is underway). This is echoed by the OECD review, noting a continued lack of operational expertise and understanding to deal with the heterogeneity of the data and the complexity of data integration at the execution level (OECD, 2022[37]).
There is a lack of technical expertise for data collection, synthesis and use.
A thorough examination of Thailand’s data system and potential improvements is outside the scope of this report. However, the Thai government should continue to implement the recommendations outlined in the OECD review, particularly in working with the Digital Government Development Agency to improve data governance and leverage data access and sharing (OECD, 2022[37]). Further, Thailand could consider centralised approaches for synthesising and sharing cross-sectoral data for net zero policies from the centre, as in the case in Finland (Box 3.13).
Finland has developed a data room at the CoG to support decision making in the administration. It gathers information from a wide range of entities and topics and facilitates the use of evidence to inform decisions in an uncertain and rapidly changing environment. Public officials can access data room information from the CoG and in line ministries and promote information exchange across institutions.
The data room’s work is organised in teams, including a team on energy issues and another on green transition, which provides an example of how CoGs are incorporating streams of evidence at the centre.
Key partners include the ministries, national statistics office (Statistics Finland) and the Helsinki Graduate School of Economics.
Source: VATT (2022[64]), “Newly launched Data Room produces rapid information for decision-making”, https://vatt.fi/en/-/newly-launched-data-room-produces-rapid-information-for-decision-making-director-s-position-now-open-for-applications-1.
Thailand could consider the following opportunities to enhance policy development approaches and the role of the CoG, for cross-cutting issues:
Establish and embed good policy development practices through the NESDC:
Develop a policy development framework, including standards, guidance and tools, incorporating contemporary principles and methods for cross-cutting issues (see section on Thailand using policy development frameworks to incorporate advanced approaches).
Share good practices and guidance, e.g. targeted guidance stemming from an overall framework or set of standards, case studies, practical guidance for a specific method or principle or guidance for broader processes such as submissions of policy proposals.
Deliver capacity building for civil servants and relevant stakeholders on policy development practices, specifically for net zero. This could be done through a mix of training programmes, mentoring, seminars, workshops or knowledge-sharing fora.
Work with the Office of the Civil Service Commission (OCSC) and DCCE to integrate key skills for CoG staff and other civil servants into competency frameworks, incentives and recognition programmes.
Build awareness and understanding of government priorities, including achieving net zero, and of how different departments contribute to these.
Build the role of senior leaders in promoting good practices and a culture of collaboration that will enable co‑ordinated action.
Design the overall co‑ordination system and required mechanisms for cross-cutting issues such as net zero, with a particular focus on the role of the CoG:
Design the overall governance and structure for co‑ordination of cross-cutting issues. This could include a stocktake of current mechanisms and consideration of improved mechanisms. Any new unit would need to be designed intentionally to fit into the existing structure and enable conditions such as formal or informal mandates and digital platforms.
Enhance mechanisms for integrated action, such as supporting line ministries in using integrated plans and reducing the administrative burden for these.
Avoid the creation of parallel committees or discussions on cross-cutting issues.
Harness the role of the CoG to improve citizen and stakeholder engagement in the development of cross-cutting issues such as net zero:
Integrate standards and guidance on engaging with citizens and stakeholders in policy development frameworks. This can build on the foundational work that Thailand has done on using open government principles.
Enhance consultation processes with citizens and stakeholders by incorporating meaningful forms of engagement throughout the entire policy process and by building awareness amongst citizens of and their capacity to engage with the process.
Consider the establishment of a network of scientific or academic experts that supports cross‑cutting issues at the line ministry or departmental level and for the co‑ordination units.
Utilise current ecosystem mapping exercises to determine where Thailand can further leverage the roles of other stakeholders, in particular, the private sector.
Incorporate meaningful engagement approaches for the private sector, such as through more continuous dialogues, values and interests mapping workshops, or through existing fora. Thailand will also need to consider how to foster an enabling environment more conducive to private sector collaboration and action.
Continue to improve data governance, integration and data use practices for cross-cutting issues, in line with the OECD review (OECD, 2022[37]).
Continue to strengthen workforce competencies and learning.
Improve workforce skills on navigating the politics of policies, co‑ordination, data analysis and good public management through the stable provision of learning opportunities at all levels.
Extend talent programmes (for example, the fast-track programmes or overseas scholarships) and tailor them for CoG staff, ensuring ample career pathway opportunities for graduates.
Consider establishing green public administration reform in the CoG.
Develop the greening strategy for the public administration setting objectives (for example, emission reduction for public entities, greener transportation for public servants and employees in the public sector) and concrete measures how the public administration can contribute to the country’s net zero achievement.
Raise awareness about the importance of the public administration greening activities and how each public servant can contribute to this effort. For this purpose, training public servants on their climate impact and what behaviour could reduce it is paramount. Additionally, identifying and collaborating with senior officials across public entities is crucial to gather high-level support for the reform.
The OPDC could expand on the sandbox initiative and other opportunities for innovative action:
Consider the opportunity areas outlined in Box 3.3.
Continue to showcase how the sandbox initiative and other innovative approaches are helping Thailand address cross-cutting issues such as net zero.
Identify other contemporary policy development techniques, such as foresight and behavioural insights, for driving innovative action.
Continue to reform and improve the implementation of good regulatory practices by continuing to implement regulatory impact assessments and stakeholder engagement activities, as well as increasing the number of ex post evaluations of existing regulations. These good regulatory practices will be analysed in greater detail, with recommendations for reform, in the forthcoming OECD Regulatory Reform Review of Thailand (OECD, forthcoming[65]).
References
[36] ACT (2019), “Why hasn’t corruption decreased?”, Anti-Corruption Organization of Thailand, http://www.anticorruption.in.th/2016/en/detail/1427/1/%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%B3%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%8C%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%9B%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%84%E0%B8%A1%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%87%20? (accessed on 11 January 2024).
[6] Australian Government (2023), Australian Government Guide to Policy Impact Analysis, Office of Impact Analysis, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, https://oia.pmc.gov.au/resources/guidance-impact-analysis/australian-government-guide-policy-impact-analysis (accessed on 31 October 2023).
[28] Australian Government (2020), Guidance for Intergovernmental Meetings, https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/resource/download/guidance-intergovernmental-meetings.pdf (accessed on 18 January 2024).
[3] Brown, D., K. Kohli and S. Mignotte (2021), Tools at the Centre of Government - Research and Practitioners’ Insight, https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-09/Tools%20at%20the%20centre%20of%20government%20-%20Practitioners%27%20Insight%202021.pdf.
[40] Climate Assembly UK (2019), The Path to Net Zero: Climate Assembly UK Full Report, House of Commons, https://www.climateassembly.uk/report/read/final-report.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2023).
[18] Dechezleprêtre, A. et al. (2023), “How the green and digital transitions are reshaping the automotive ecosystem”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 144, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f1874cab-en (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[34] Dechezleprêtre, A. et al. (2022), “Fighting climate change: International attitudes toward climate policies”, OECD Economics Department Working Papers, No. 1714, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3406f29a-en (accessed on 23 August 2022).
[11] Design Council (2021), Beyond Net Zero: A Systemic Design Approach, https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/fileadmin/uploads/dc/Documents/Beyond%2520Net%2520Zero%2520-%2520A%2520Systemic%2520Design%2520Approach.pdf (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[10] Drew, C. (2021), “Developing our new Systemic Design Framework”, Medium, https://medium.com/design-council/developing-our-new-systemic-design-framework-e0f74fe118f7 (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[26] France Stratégie (2022), Soutenabilités ! Orchestrer et planifier l’action publique, https://www.strategie.gouv.fr/publications/soutenabilites-orchestrer-planifier-laction-publique (accessed on 11 August 2023).
[20] Government of Canada (2022), Greening Government Strategy: A Government of Canada Directive, https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/innovation/greening-government/strategy.html (accessed on 23 June 2023).
[42] Government of Canada (2022), What We Heard Report - National Action Plan on Open Government, Government of Canada, https://open.canada.ca/en/content/what-we-heard-report (accessed on 3 May 2023).
[39] Government of Canada (2020), Design an Engagement Experience – A Toolkit, https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/services/public-engagement-resources/designing-public-engagement-experiences.html (accessed on 22 June 2023).
[41] Government of Luxembourg (2022), 56 propositions pour accélérer et intensifier la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique au Luxembourg, https://www.klima-biergerrot.lu/_files/ugd/dcac1d_5bb495b5584b4618815bb5fd8d9ad66d.pdf (accessed on 2 May 2023).
[7] Government of Northern Ireland (n.d.), A Practical Guide to Policy Making in Northern Ireland, https://www.executiveoffice-ni.gov.uk/articles/policy-making (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[50] Government of Thailand (2023), “Thailand’s side event at COP28 features net zero emission initiative by Thai cement industry”, Office of National Higher Education Science Research and Innovation Policy Council, https://www.nxpo.or.th/th/en/22105/ (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[51] Government of Thailand (n.d.), “Department Climate Change and Environment draft NDC action plan”.
[43] Haro, M. (2022), “The Spanish Citizen Assembly for Climate: Input from 100 randomly selected Spanish citizens on how to tackle climate change”, Sustainable Development Solutions Network, https://www.unsdsn.org/spanish-citizen-assembly (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[52] IEA (2021), Net Zero by 2050 - A Roadmap for the Global Energy Sector, International Energy Agency, Paris, https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050 (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[9] Kaur, M. (2021), “Systemic design in the Australian Taxation Office – Current practice and opportunities”, Australian Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 80/4, pp. 1017-1031, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12516.
[17] Kaur, M. et al. (2022), “Innovative capacity of governments: A systemic framework”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 51, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/52389006-en (accessed on 29 January 2024).
[12] Kaur, M. et al. (2023), “Steering responses to climate change from the centre of government: A stocktaking”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 65, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b95c8396-en.
[55] Larrue, P. (2021), “The design and implementation of mission-oriented innovation policies: A new systemic policy approach to address societal challenges”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 100, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3f6c76a4-en (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[2] Latham, N. (2014), A Practical Guide to Evaluating Systems Change in a Human Services System Context, https://www.evaluationinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Systems-Change-Evaluation-Toolkit_FINAL.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2024).
[5] New Zealand Government (2023), The Policy Project, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, https://www.dpmc.govt.nz/our-programmes/policy-project (accessed on 31 October 2023).
[46] New Zealand Government (n.d.), Homepage of the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Science Advisor, https://www.pmcsa.ac.nz/ (accessed on 29 January 2024).
[30] OECD (2025), Open Government for the Green Transition: Panorama of Good Practices Towards Meaningful Citizen Participation, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bfa02935-en.
[32] OECD (2025), Regulatory Reform in Thailand: Reinforcing an Effective Regulatory Environment, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7892759c-en.
[1] OECD (2024), Steering from the Centre of Government in Times of Complexity: Compendium of Practices, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/69b1f129-en.
[25] OECD (2023), Net Zero+: Climate and Economic Resilience in a Changing World, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/da477dda-en.
[24] OECD (2023), OECD Economic Surveys: Thailand 2023, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/4815cb4b-en.
[57] OECD (2023), Public Employment and Management 2023: Towards a More Flexible Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/5b378e11-en.
[48] OECD (2023), Scaling Up the Mobilisation of Private Finance for Climate Action in Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunities for International Providers, Green Finance and Investment, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/17a88681-en.
[29] OECD (2023), Strengthening Policy Development in the Public Sector in Ireland, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6724d155-en.
[4] OECD (2023), “Survey on strategic decision making at the centre of government”, Unpublished, OECD, Paris.
[31] OECD (2023), The Principles of Public Administration, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7f5ec453-en (accessed on 18 December 2023).
[45] OECD (2022), “OECD Good Practice Principles for Public Service Design and Delivery in the Digital Age”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 23, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/2ade500b-en (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[35] OECD (2022), OECD Guidelines for Citizen Participation Processes, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f765caf6-en.
[37] OECD (2022), Open and Connected Government Review of Thailand, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1593a0c-en.
[33] OECD (2022), Supporting Regulatory Reforms in Southeast Asia, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/aad87f86-en.
[62] OECD (2021), Green Budgeting in OECD Countries, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/acf5d047-en (accessed on 4 August 2022).
[53] OECD (2021), OECD Integrity Review of Thailand 2021: Achieving Effective Integrity Policies and Sustained Reform, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e8949f1b-en.
[58] OECD (2021), Public Employment and Management 2021: The Future of the Public Service, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/938f0d65-en (accessed on 26 January 2024).
[19] OECD (2021), Recommendation of the Council for Agile Regulatory Governance to Harness Innovation, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0464.
[63] OECD (2020), Building Capacity for Evidence-Informed Policy-Making: Lessons from Country Experiences, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/86331250-en (accessed on 26 January 2024).
[22] OECD (2020), Policy Framework on Sound Public Governance: Baseline Features of Governments that Work Well, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c03e01b3-en.
[16] OECD (2020), Thailand Regulatory Management and Oversight Reforms: A Diagnostic Scan, OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform, OECD, Paris, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2021/01/thailand-regulatory-management-and-oversight-reforms_747639d7/2dbaa2e5-en.pdf (accessed on 26 January 2024).
[14] OECD (2019), Delivering Better Policies Through Behavioural Insights: New Approaches, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6c9291e2-en.
[23] OECD (2019), Recommendation of the Council on Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0381.
[56] OECD (2019), Recommendation of the Council on Public Service Leadership and Capability, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0445.
[44] OECD (2017), Recommendation of the Council on Open Government, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0438.
[60] OECD (2017), Skills for a High Performing Civil Service, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264280724-en.
[61] OECD (2015), Recommendation of the Council on Budgetary Governance, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0410 (accessed on 26 January 2024).
[13] OECD (2014), Recommendation of the Council on the Governance of Critical Risks, OECD, Paris, https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0405.
[21] OECD (n.d.), “Greening public administration in OECD countries: Driving the green transition within the public sector”, OECD, Paris.
[65] OECD (forthcoming), Regulatory Reform Review of Thailand, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[27] OPDC (2023), “Presentation: Information for preparing a workshop to adjust roles and missions”, Unpublished, Office of Public Sector Development Commission.
[54] Shofa, J. (2022), “Indonesia offers incentives, cuts red tape for green investment”, Jakarta Globe, https://jakartaglobe.id/business/indonesia-offers-incentives-cuts-red-tape-for-green-investment (accessed on 29 January 2024).
[47] Silva, M. et al. (2023), “Unlocking co-creation for green innovation: An exploration of the diverse contributions of universities”, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Policy Papers, No. 163, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b887f436-en (accessed on 29 January 2024).
[49] Somboonpakorn, A. (2023), “Suggestions for future public administration”, Unpublished.
[15] UK Government (2021), Net Zero Strategy: Build Back Greener, https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/UK%20Net%20Zero%20Strategy%20-%20Build%20Back%20Greener.pdf (accessed on 1 May 2023).
[8] UK Government (2016), Open Policy Making Toolkit, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/open-policy-making-toolkit (accessed on 30 January 2024).
[64] VATT (2022), “Newly launched Data Room produces rapid information for decision-making”, VATT Institute for Economic Research, https://vatt.fi/en/-/newly-launched-data-room-produces-rapid-information-for-decision-making-director-s-position-now-open-for-applications-1 (accessed on 2 May 2023).
[59] Washington, S. (2023), “An infrastructure for building policy capability – Lessons from practice”, Policy Design and Practice, Vol. 6/3, pp. 283-298, https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2022.2139952.
[38] Wellstead, A. (2022), “Finding the sweet spot in climate policy: Balancing stakeholder engagement with bureaucratic autonomy”, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, Vol. 54, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101155.
← 1. Information shared in the context of the OECD informal Expert Group on Strategic Decision Making.
← 2. According to information shared with the OECD during the fact-finding process, higher value proposals (e.g. over THB 1 billion) require additional layers of scrutiny, including review by NESDC committees before progression to the Cabinet of Thailand.