Effective governance is essential for a responsive skills system. As skills policies intersect with multiple policy areas, their success depends on the effective co‑ordination of government efforts, active engagement with non-governmental stakeholders, and the integration of comprehensive skills information systems. This chapter outlines the key elements of successful governance of skills systems and underscores its significance for Thailand. It also evaluates Thailand’s current governance practices and identifies four key opportunities for improvement: (1) Enhancing the strategic capacity to design and implement skills policy; (2) Strengthening a whole-of-government approach to skills policy; (3) Strengthening stakeholder engagement in skills policy; and (4) Improving skills information systems.
OECD Skills Strategy Thailand
Abstract
Well-functioning governance arrangements are the foundation of an effective and responsive skills system, where skills policy design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation are impactful, mutually reinforcing and rooted in an extensive and robust evidence base. Policies aimed at developing skills throughout life and ensuring their effective use in workplaces and society, will only realise their full potential if embedded in strong governance arrangements (OECD, 2019[1]).
Establishing well-functioning arrangements for governing skills systems is particularly challenging due to the complexity of skills policies and the wide range of actors involved in their design and implementation. Skills policies sit at the intersection of multiple policy domains including education, labour, innovation, industry, migration, and more. A diverse array of governmental and non-governmental actors are engaged in these policy areas. In Thailand, ministries such as the Ministry for Education, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, and the Ministry of Labour have important responsibilities in skills related policies. Outside of government, actors such as employers, trade unions, education and training providers, and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) also play important roles in skills systems.
This complexity is compounded by rapid global trends such as aging populations, the digital transformation – encompassing Artificial Intelligence (AI) and robotics – the green transition, migration, and globalisation, all of which shift labour market demand. Unexpected shocks such as the Covid-19 pandemic, wars, political changes, and natural disasters further necessitate rapid adjustments and adaptations to skills policies. To help countries govern skills systems effectively in the face of these complex pressures, the OECD Skills Strategy (OECD, 2019[1]) identifies four building blocks of strong governance arrangements for skills policy, as shown in Figure 4.1.
Source: OECD (2019[1]), OECD Skills Strategy 2019: Skills to Shape a Better Future, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264313835-en.
Promoting a whole-of-government approach to skills policy (building block 1) is central to fostering a common skills vision and strategy, and minimising inefficiencies, gaps, and overlaps in skills policy. A whole-of government approach includes: 1) horizontal co-ordination between different governmental departments and agencies; and 2) vertical co-ordination between different levels of government (i.e. national and subnational levels).
Effectively engaging stakeholders (building block 2) throughout the skills policy cycle is an equally important aspect of well-functioning governance arrangements. Stakeholder engagement allows policy makers to tap into stakeholders’ on-the-ground expertise and insights into the real-world effects of skills policies and regulations. It also increases the perceived legitimacy of skills reforms and builds support for policy changes, while holding the government accountable. This helps ensure continuity in policy through changes in government (OECD, 2020[2]).
Integrated skills information systems (building block 3) allow policymakers to effectively assess and anticipate skills needs, identify policy priorities, evaluate the impact of skills policies, and disseminate skills information among different target groups, thereby informing individuals’ education and career choices.
This chapter provides a detailed assessment of governance arrangements of the skills system in Thailand across the first three building blocks (see Figure 4.1). It then identifies four opportunities to strengthen the governance of the Thai skills system and presents specific recommendations for each.
This section examines the governance arrangements of Thailand’s skills system and evaluates its performance across key dimensions of the governance arrangements of skills policy. To improve skills performance, Thailand has implemented several initiatives, ranging from the establishment of co‑ordination bodies for skills policies, to the adoption of strategic documents and the collection of skills data. Despite these efforts, an assessment of these arrangements and governance performance indicators highlights significant opportunities for Thailand to enhance its governance arrangements of skills policy.
Overview of Thailand’s current governance arrangements
Given the multifaceted nature of skills policies, responsibilities for skills span multiple actors in Thailand. Table 4.1 offers an overview of the key governmental actors in Thailand’s skills system and details their roles and responsibilities.
At the national level, skills policy is overseen by multiple ministries and agencies, some of which also oversee associated regional and local structures. To start, the Ministry of Education (MOE) is tasked with promoting and overseeing education at all levels, spanning from pre-primary to higher education across both state and private sectors. The Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation (MHESI) plays a crucial role in advancing and supervising higher education to align with global changes, such as technological advancements, shifting labour market demands, and international education standards, while also addressing national skills priorities. Similarly, the Ministry of Labour (MOL), among other responsibilities, conducts labour market analyses, supports skills development initiatives for workers and entrepreneurs.
Several government agencies and offices also play key roles within the skills system. These include, for instance, several organisations overseen by the MOE, such as the Office of the Permanent Secretary, the Office of the Education Council, the Office of the Basic Education Commission, and the Office of the Vocational Education Commission, as well as the Office of the Higher Education Commission, which is overseen by the MHESI. The ministry also supervises seven other independent agencies, such as the Teachers’ Council of Thailand and the Office of the Welfare Promotion Commission for Teachers and Educational Personnel. Furthermore, the Department for Skills Development, overseen by the Ministry of Labour, works to advance skill standards and align them with international benchmarks, as well as promotes collaboration between key actors in the Thai skills system.
Source: Descriptions of roles and responsibilities are taken from each ministry’s respective websites; the Questionnaire – OECD Skills Strategy Thailand; and Ministry of Education (2017[3]), Education in Thailand, www.bic.moe.go.th/images/stories/pdf/EDUCATION_IN_THAILAND_2017.pdf
Beyond these central ministries, other governmental bodies have tasks and mandates related to skills policy within their respective domains. Agencies such as the Royal Thai Police, and ministries such as the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Public Health, and others are responsible for developing curricula and training personnel tailored to their distinct needs.
Provincial and local authorities in Thailand are also key actors in the Thai skills system. Thailand is divided into 77 provinces (changwat) of which two specially governed districts: the capital Bangkok and Pattaya (Thailand Embassy, 2024[4]). Local Administration Organisations (LAOs), which include provinces, municipalities, sub-districts, and special LAOs (Bangkok and Pattaya), have the authority to provide education services at any or all levels. These LAOs are supervised by the Ministry of Interior and follow procedures established by the Ministry of Education. In addition, each province has its own Provincial Education Committee, chaired by the Provincial Governor or Deputy Governor, and its own Provincial Education Office (Department of Local Administration, 2024[5]).
In addition to the independent provision of education services by LAOs, the Ministry of Education also holds responsibilities at the regional level. The Area Committee for Education comprises Educational Service Areas, each responsible for supervision of the educational service area and schools under their jurisdiction. Furthermore, the Office of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Education also supervises Regional Education Offices that set strategies for education development in alignment with national development objectives, the Ministry of Education’s policies, and Provincial Cluster Development Strategies (MOE, 2017[3]).
Similarly, the Ministry of Labour operates Provincial Labour Offices in each province, which play a central role in implementing skills-related labour market policies and services. These offices oversee labour affairs in line with national policies, ensuring that labour laws are enforced, and that workers’ rights and welfare are protected. In relation to skills, the Provincial Labour Offices promote employment and workforce development through local employment initiatives and training programmes that respond to labour market needs. They are also responsible for issuing work permits to foreign workers, preventing illegal labour practices, and mediating disputes between employers and employees. Through these functions, the Provincial Labour Offices contribute directly to aligning workforce skills with local labour market demands and ensuring that employment and training services are delivered effectively at the provincial level.
Thailand’s performance in strengthening the governance of the skills system
While Thailand has made significant strides in introducing policies and initiatives to strengthen the governance of its skills system, it is important to assess whether these arrangements are effective and ensure that skills policies have their full potential impact. This section presents Thailand’s performance in key governance indicators.
Thailand has made efforts towards promoting a whole-of-government approach to skills policies, but there is room to strengthen and expand these efforts
A whole-of-government approach aims to improve the co‑ordination of government activity, ensuring greater policy coherence and optimal use of resources. This approach encompasses horizontal co‑ordination – across ministries, agencies, and departments – and vertical co‑ordination – between different levels of government. It applies to both formal and informal processes in the development, implementation, and management of policies, programmes, and service delivery (OECD, 2020[2]).
Thailand has established several mechanisms to promote horizontal co‑ordination and collaboration on skills-related matters. Inter-ministerial bodies in Thailand such as the Education Council, Vocational Education Council, Board of the Equitable Education Fund (EEF), and National Qualifications Framework Committee play a key role in fostering horizontal co‑ordination in education and skills policies by bringing together diverse actors from across the skills system to address specific policy challenges. Furthermore, Thailand developed high-level strategic documents that help to steer skills policy. Several strategies set out broad policy priorities for the country, including the National Strategy 2018-2037 (Office of the Prime Minister, 2017[6]) and the Thirteenth National Economic and Social Development Plan (2023-2027) (Office of the Prime Minister, 2023[7]) . These documents play a crucial role in aligning high-level goals across ministries and bringing together experts and official from various policy domains, which in turn helps to ensure that skills policies are co‑ordinated and contribute effectively to achieving these priorities and objectives.
Despite these efforts, there is still considerable room to strengthen horizontal co‑ordination and collaboration in Thailand. When assessing the government's ability to co‑ordinate conflicting objectives into a coherent policy, Thailand ranks lower than both the OECD and ASEAN averages (see Figure 4.2). The ASEAN Human Resources Development Readiness report on Thailand further highlights this issue (ASEAN, 2021[8]). Based on a survey of key ministries, institutions, and stakeholders within the skills system, the report indicates that the structures supporting human capital development are not sufficiently robust. Moreover, agencies consulted as part of this project have also noted that co‑ordinating across multiple ministries often leads to increased bureaucracy, which can slow down decision-making and implementation, particularly when ministries have priorities or agendas.
Vertical co‑ordination between national and subnational levels is also key to strong governance of skills systems, given the role and position of subnational government in Thailand’s skills system. LAOs play a key role in implementing skills policies, delivering public services, and engaging with local communities (Department of Local Administration, 2024[5]). With their increased responsibilities in education and skills policies in recent years (MOE, 2017[3]), strong co‑ordination mechanisms between the national and subnational levels of government are essential. The central link between LAOs and the national government is the Department of Local Administration (DLA) under the Ministry of Interior, which oversees and supports the LAOs. However, the Ministry of Education sets guidelines for education provided by LAOs and manages the Area Committee for Education, which supervises Educational Service Areas and schools under their jurisdiction, aligning their strategies with national development objectives. Additionally, LAOs are represented on the Education Council, offering a potential avenue for co‑ordinating national and local government efforts. The Ministry of Labour’s Provincial Labour Offices also implement labour market policies and programmes at the sub-national level, co‑ordinating with LAOs and other key actors.
Index value (1-10)
Note: Inter-ministerial co‑ordination refers to scores that countries are assigned by experts in response to the question “To what extent can the government co‑ordinate conflicting objectives into a coherent policy?”. This includes the extent to which a country “introduces horizontal forms of co‑ordination to mediate between different departments of the state administration”. Scores range from 1 to 10, with higher scores indicating better performance.
Source: Bertelsmann Stiftung (2022[9]), Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI), www.sgi-network.org/2022/Good_Governance/Executive_Capacity/Interministerial_Coordination.
Despite these connections between the national and subnational levels, more could be done to improve vertical collaboration and co‑ordination. LAOs are not well represented in national co‑ordination bodies beyond the Education Council and are not strongly involved in policy design. Consulted agencies noted that, while subnational governments are well-positioned to adapt national policies to local contexts, co‑ordination between national and subnational levels can introduce bureaucratic complexities, slowing down decision-making and implementation. This complexity not only risks delays but also inconsistencies in policy application and diminished effectiveness in achieving national objectives. The involvement of multiple ministries at the subnational level further complicates co‑ordination, necessitating stronger inter-ministerial co‑operation at this level.
Despite recent efforts towards engaging non-governmental stakeholders in skills policy, there is room for better involving labour market actors and civil society
Effective skills policies require active engagement with non-governmental stakeholders who play key roles within the skills system. Strong governance enables these stakeholders – ranging from educational institutions and employers to trade unions and NGOs – to leverage their strengths, knowledge, and networks to complement each other and achieve shared policy objectives. This collaborative approach fosters a sense of ownership across the skills ecosystem, ensuring that skills policies effectively respond to labour market needs and contribute to broader socio-economic goals (OECD, 2021[10]).
Thailand has made notable progress in establishing a legal framework for stakeholder consultation in the formulation of general policies. Key legislation, such as the Regulations of the Office of the Prime Minister on Public Consultation, B.E. 2548 (2005) (Office of the Prime Minister, 2005[11]) and the 2017 constitution, (Office of the Council of State, 2017[12]), mandates public information dissemination and consultations. The Act on Legislative Drafting and the Outcome of Law, B.E. 2562 (2019) provides detailed guidelines for conducting stakeholder consultations (Government of Thailand, 2019[13]). Additionally, Thailand has established a system that allows legislators to conduct online consultations, share information, and register stakeholders whose interests should be considered (Government of Thailand, 2019[13]). However, beyond public consultations on draft legislation and regulations, stakeholder participation in developing strategic documents remains largely voluntary (OECD, 2022[14]).
To effectively engage labour market actors, such as employers and employees, in skills policy, Thailand has established several bodies that convene public and private actors. Key examples include the Skill Development Promotion Committee, the Education Council, the National Qualification Framework Committee, and the Board of the Equitable Education Fund. Additionally, broader entities like the Joint Public and Private Sector Consultative Committee (JPPSCC) serve as effective forums for engaging both employers and workers in the development of skills policy. Specific departments within ministries, such as the Department for Skills Development, also play a crucial role in facilitating engagement with labour market actors.
In line with Thailand 4.0 (Thailand Board of Investment, n.d.[15]), which promotes an industry-led economic model, Thailand also established councils, such as the Thai Chamber of Commerce and industry-specific bodies, to collaborate with government agencies and align training programmes with industry needs.
However, consulted Thai officials expressed that there is insufficient active engagement of non-governmental stakeholders, who often merely participate as consulted entities but not as active participants. This issue is also reflected in the ASEAN Human Resources Development Readiness report on Thailand (ASEAN, 2021[8]) which presents findings from a survey sent out to representatives from key Ministries, institutions, and stakeholders. The survey indicates room for improvement in promoting engagement with the business sector.
In addition to involving labour market actors, Thailand has made efforts to engage with civil society organisations (CSOs), who play an important role in the skills system. For example, the Thailand Lifelong Learning & Education Expo 2023 which was an exhibition intended to promote “Lifelong Learning and Education for Lifelong Employability”, was led by non-profit lifelong learning organisations, in co‑ordination with the Ministry of Education.
However, civil society involvement in policy formulation in Thailand is low in comparison to other countries in the region as well as OECD countries. This is reflected in Figure 4.3, which presents civil society capacity and participation in policy formulation in Thailand and selected countries. The figure indicates potential for developing and strengthening mechanisms for civil society engagement for skills.
Note: Civil society participation refers to scores that countries are assigned by experts in response to the question “To what extent does the political leadership enable the participation of civil society in the political process?”. Scores range from 1 to 10, with higher scores indicating better performance. Scores for OECD countries are taken from the Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI) scores, where the relevant question is “Does the government consult with economic and social actors in the course of policy preparation?”
Source: Bertelsmann Stiftung (2022[16]), Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI), www.sgi-network.org/2022/Good_Governance/Executive_Capacity/Societal_Consultation; Bertelsmann Stiftung (2022[9]), BTI Transformation Index, https://bti-project.org/en/index/governance.
Thailand has various tools and mechanisms for collecting and using skills information, but the coverage, standardisation, accessibility, and effective use of skills data can be improved
High-quality and comprehensive data are essential for shaping effective skills policies by enabling the assessment and anticipation of skills needs and the identification of policy priorities. Robust information systems allow policymakers to monitor the effectiveness of existing policies and make data-driven decisions. Strong skills information systems also ensure the availability of relevant, high-quality data that empowers individuals and stakeholders to make informed decisions about education and employment. To achieve this, effective co‑ordination and information-sharing across the skills system are crucial. This ensures a holistic and accurate understanding of the skills landscape, integrating education, training, and labour market indicators into a cohesive framework.
In Thailand, several governmental bodies are responsible for collecting and maintaining skills data, including the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Labour, the Office of the Prime Minister, and the National Statistics Office. Additionally, Thailand participates in international assessments and surveys, such as the UNESCO Literacy and Educational Attainment Survey, the OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), and the World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Survey (see Opportunity 4 below for further details on skills data). While these international benchmarks offer valuable insights, over-reliance on them may limit Thailand’s ability to independently monitor progress and make data-driven decisions.
Despite Thailand's extensive data collection efforts, there remain gaps in data coverage, particularly in areas like adult learning and labour market skills indicators. The complexity of gathering labour market information on skills needs, use of skills, and workplace training, especially in the informal sector, presents a significant challenge. Figure 4.4 displays the data coverage rate in three skills related areas in Thailand and selected countries. The coverage rate measures the completeness of a country’s statistical offerings based on five elements: the availability of indicators and disaggregations, the availability of data within the last five and ten years, and availability of data at the first and second administrative geographic levels. While Thailand performs above the ASEAN average in labour market indicator coverage, its education indicator coverage lags behind both ASEAN and OECD averages, as well as other Southeast Asian countries, highlighting the need for improved skills data collection.
Coverage rates regarding education facilities, education outcomes, and labour market indicators
Note: coverage rates measure the extent to which a country’s data offerings are complete, based on data published on the national statistics office’s (NSO) website or any other official country website that is linked from the NSO website. Education facilities indicators considered in the analysis include: number of schools or classrooms, number of teaching staff, and education expenditures. Education outcome indicators considered in the analysis include: enrolment rates, completion or graduation rates, and competency exam results. Labour indicators considered in the analysis include: employment rate, unemployment rate, and employment distribution across industry, occupation, and sex.
Source: Open Data Watch (2022[17]), https://odin.opendatawatch.com/?aspxerrorpath=/Report/glanceReport.
Beyond coverage, it is crucial to invest in data generation and collection processes that ensure data is effectively used by policy makers. Although Thailand has implemented policies, standards, and guidelines on data management – such as the Digital Government Development Plan and the Data Governance Framework 1.0 – these do not focus on collection processes, but rather on data access and sharing after the data has been generated (OECD, 2022[14]). The lack of stringent standards for data collection processes has led many government agencies to disclose data in non-machine-readable formats, limiting the effectiveness of data use. For instance, 96% of business registrations are still processed on paper despite the availability of an online option, illustrating inefficiencies in current practices.
Furthermore, Thailand could further improve mechanisms to identify current and future skills needs to inform and guide skills policy decisions. Skills assessment and anticipation (SAA) exercises are key to identifying future skills needs in the labour market. However, SAA exercises in Thailand are fragmented and carried out sporadically. Furthermore, it is unclear to what extent the government promotes the use of SAA results through various policy measures (see more in Chapter 3).
To ensure government information is open and accessible, Thailand has put several policies in place, including the Official Information Act and the Royal Decree on Criteria and Procedures for Good Governance, which mandate that government agencies proactively publish information online. Platforms like govchannel.go.th, the Open Government Data Centre, and the Government Information Centre provide citizens with access to government data, services, and mobile applications (OECD, 2022[14]). The Official Information Act also allows all citizens to request information from all public organisations. Additionally, the Digital Government Development Plan (2017-2020) includes milestones for providing the private sector and citizens access government data (DGA, 2021[18]).
Despite these efforts, Thailand’s performance in information openness remains relatively low. Data from SAA exercises is not often fully exploited to inform neither education providers about which programmes to deliver, nor adult learners about which courses to invest in (OECD, 2020[19]). This lack of data openness is further highlighted by Figure 4.5, which reports openness rate in three skills related areas in Thailand and selected countries. Thailand preforms below both ASEAN and OECD averages in all fields, indicating room to improve access to information.
Openness rates regarding education facilities, education outcomes, and labour
Note: Openness scores measure the extent to which a country’s data can be downloaded in machine-readable and non-proprietary formats, are accompanied by metadata and whether download options exist such as bulk download and user-selection or APIs, and have an open terms of use or data license. Scores are based on data published on the national statistics office’s (NSO) website or any other official country website that is linked from the NSO website.
Source: Open Data Watch (2022[17]), Open Data Inventory, https://odin.opendatawatch.com/?aspxerrorpath=/Report/glanceReport.
In addition to making data available, Thailand offers career guidance services to support students and job seekers in accessing tailored information on career paths, educational opportunities, and required skills. However, a 2022 UNICEF report highlights several systemic challenges that undermine the effectiveness of these services. These include weak co‑ordination between the Ministry of Labour and Ministry of Education, limited collaboration among key stakeholders, and a tendency for organisations to operate in silos. The limited available mechanisms for joint planning, information sharing, or resource mobilisation, contributes to inefficiencies and limits the potential to improve both the quality and reach of guidance services. Furthermore, inadequate funding remains a critical constraint (UNICEF, 2022[20]).
Thailand’s performance in strengthening the governance of its skills system is influenced by a range of factors at the individual, institutional and societal level. Drawing on findings from a literature review, desk research, a policy questionnaire distributed to Thai policymakers, and in-depth virtual consultations with stakeholders, the following opportunities for improvement have been identified for strengthening the governance of Thailand’s skills system:
1. Enhancing the strategic capacity to design and implement skills policy.
2. Fostering a whole-of-government approach to skills policy making.
3. Strengthening stakeholder engagement in skills policy making.
4. Improving skills information systems.
Opportunity 1: Enhancing the strategic capacity to design and implement skills policy
Strategic capacity, in the context of this chapter, refers to a country’s ability to set high-level goals and priorities for its skills system, and translate them into effective actions to achieve maximum impact.
In Thailand, the main document that provides strategic direction for policy – both in the area of skills and more broadly – is the National Strategy 2018-2037 (Office of the Prime Minister, 2017[6]). This strategy is developed by the Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) under the Office of the Prime Minister, and it serves as a high-level framework guiding national policies across various domains, including national security, the economy, health, society, and the environment. This strategy emphasises human capital development, highlighting the importance of skills on Thailand’s policy agenda.
To support the implementation of the National Strategy 2018-2037, Thailand has established second-level plans, such as the Thirteenth National Economic and Social Development Plan (Office of the Prime Minister, 2023[7]). This plan provides a detailed analysis of Thailand’s economic and social conditions, setting specific objectives, targets, and milestones. Notably, it prioritises the development of human capital for the new global era, aiming to create a highly capable workforce committed to lifelong learning and adaptability.
Ministerial level plans, considered ‘third-level plans’, are required to align with the overarching goals set in the National Strategy 2018-2037 and the second-level plans. For instance, the Higher Education Plan for Thailand’s Manpower Production and Development (2021-2027) (The Ministry of Higher Education, 2022[21]) outlines a comprehensive strategy for enhancing human capital and lifelong learning, including pathways for improving education, higher education, vocational education and training (VET), and opportunities for re-skilling and upskilling.
This strategic, high-level three-tiered approach guides policy and aligns objectives across ministries. Skills policy is overseen by multiple ministries and agencies, making a comprehensive approach particularly important for its development and implementation. Figure 4.6 presents the structure of skills strategies in Thailand.
Source: NESDC (2023[7]), The Thirteenth National Economic and Social Development Plan (2023-2027), www.nesdc.go.th/article_attach/article_file_20230615134223.pdf.
This opportunity assesses Thailand’s current strategic framework and draws on insights from international best practices to assess how Thailand could further strengthen its strategic capacity for effectively designing and implementing skills policy. A recent OECD cross-country report (OECD, 2024[22]) has compiled key lessons from a decade of developing and implementing skills strategies in EU member states, identifying nine best practices for countries in this area (see Box 4.1). While the lessons were developed from the experiences of EU member states, they offer practical, evidence-based guidance on addressing challenges that are also relevant to Thailand, such as ensuring coherence across policies, fostering stakeholder collaboration, and building a strong evidence base for decision-making. Rather than applying all nine lessons equally, the analysis focuses on those most pertinent to Thailand’s specific challenges and opportunities, ensuring that the scope remains targeted and actionable.
The report “Insights from Skills Strategies in the European Union: Lessons Learnt for Developing and Implementing Effective Skills Policies”, identifies nine lessons that capture the essential characteristics of successful skills strategies in both their development and implementation (see Table 4.2). These lessons emerged from extensive research, including desktop research, insights from a questionnaire, consultations with government officials and other stakeholders, as well as interviews to examine selected case studies.
Figure 4.7 presents the alignment of the lessons with the identified recommendations for strengthening Thailand’s strategic capacity.
Note: Lesson number 2 is not used in the context of this report and is therefore marked in grey.
Source: OECD, (2024[22]), Insights from Skills Strategies in the European Union: Lessons Learnt for Developing and Implementing Effective Skills Policies, https://doi.org/10.1787/0bf9e78e-en.
Two recommendations are proposed for enhancing the strategic capacity to design and implement skills policy: (1) Strengthening the coherence of skills policy through skills strategy development, and (2) Ensuring effective implementation of existing skills-related strategies.
Recommendation 1: Designing a national strategy to strengthen the coherence of skills policy building on the OECD Skills Strategy for Thailand
Thailand’s approach to the development of national strategies for skills policies is characterised by several notable strengths. First, it employs hierarchical three-tier structure (see Figure 4.6) ensuring that overarching priorities outlined in the first- and second-level strategies (National Strategy and the National Economic and Social Development Plan) effectively guide “third level” ministerial-level strategies and plans. Such third-level plans include multiple skills-related strategies such as the Higher Education Plan for Thailand’s Manpower Production and Development (2021-2027), the Vocational Education and Training Strategy, the National Skills Development Plan, and the National Plan for Education.
Second, the development of first- and second-level strategies, led by the NESDB under the Office of the Prime Minister, is grounded in data analysis and evidence, ensuring they address key national challenges across a wide range of policy topics. To achieve this, the NESDB consults with experts from various fields and engages high-level officials across ministries, establishing co‑ordination mechanisms between itself, relevant agencies, and state enterprises. This evidence-based and consultative approach reflects international good practices in strategy development.
Finally, in many instances, the creation of strategies or plans is mandated by government acts, ensuring accountability for their development. Oversight bodies, composed of representatives from relevant institutions are assigned responsibility for leading this process. For example, the Office of the Education Council, which includes representatives from key ministries such as Education, Labour, and Interior, as well as representatives from civil society and academia (see Opportunity 2), is tasked with developing and updating the National Scheme for Education under the mandate of the National Education Act (Office of the Prime Minister, 1999[23]). This inclusive structure, involving various ministries and stakeholders within the Education Council, supports coherence by aligning sectoral strategies with broader national objectives and strategies.
Addressing fragmentation, overlaps, and gaps in skills strategies
While Thailand’s strategic framework helps align high-level national priorities with sector-specific and ministerial objectives, further efforts are needed to enhance coherence across strategies. A key challenge is the varying scope and objectives of existing strategies, which can lead to misalignment and inefficiencies.
First, the fragmentation of strategies can lead to overlapping prioritises. For instance, the Higher Education Plan of the Ministry of Higher Education and the Vocational Education and Training Strategy of the Ministry of Education both address a wide range of topics related to skills development. Despite their distinct focuses, they cover similar topics, such as pathways for improving VET programmes, which can result in duplicated efforts or inconsistent initiatives, reducing the efficiency of policy implementation.
Second, gaps across strategies presents a risk of policy gaps in areas not explicitly addressed by any single document. For instance, lifelong learning is not directly addressed in existing strategic documents, limiting a comprehensive approach to workforce upskilling and reskilling.
Third, the absence of a unified framework establishing common strategic goals, aligning objectives, and co‑ordinating efforts, can lead to conflicting priorities. Ministries often develop their strategies independently, making it challenging to address cross-cutting issues – such as lifelong learning – cohesively and comprehensively. This lack of alignment can result in inefficacies and a misallocation of resources.
Additionally, there is insufficient collaboration ensure alignment between existing strategies. Ministries may align their strategies with high-level documents like the National Economic and Social Development Plan (NESDP), but there is often limited stakeholder involvement in developing ministerial-level plans and insufficient co‑ordination across strategies during their development. This challenge is further compounded by the lack of explicitly assigned roles and responsibilities in the NESDP itself. For instance, while the plan outlines broad goals for workforce development and lifelong learning, it does not clearly designate which ministries or agencies are accountable for co‑ordinating efforts to achieve these objectives. As a result, overlapping initiatives, inefficiencies, or overlooked priorities can emerge. Addressing these issues requires stronger co‑ordination mechanisms and consistency in strategic planning across the government.
Enhancing co‑ordination and stakeholder engagement
Thailand could adopt a more integrated approach to developing its skills-relevant strategies to strengthen coherence and reduce overlaps and gaps. One option is to create a unified national skills strategy, collaboratively developed by all relevant actors. This approach has been successfully implemented by several countries, including Bulgaria, Ireland and Lithuania, where a single strategy has helped to streamline efforts and ensure alignment across all policy domains (OECD, 2024[22]). Such strategies typically have broad scope, covering many levels of education for youth to adults, as well as guidance and transition policies for learners and workers. They also address the utilisation of skills in the labour market through the adoption of higher performance workplace practices.
The recommendations presented in this OECD Skills Strategy Assessment and Recommendations Report for Thailand could serve as a key reference in shaping the country’s skills strategy. Several countries, including Poland, Northern Ireland (OECD, 2024[22]), and Latvia (see Box 4.3), have successfully developed national skills strategies based on comprehensive OECD assessments and recommendations. This approach ensures that policy frameworks are both informed by international best practices and adapted to national priorities, enhancing their relevance and effectiveness.
Alternatively, Thailand could maintain distinct strategies for different ministries while strengthening alignment between them. Greece, for example, has developed two distinct but closely co‑ordinated skills strategies, each addressing different aspects of skills policy. One strategy focuses on formal education under the Ministry of Education, Religious Affairs, and Sports, while the other addresses non-formal education and training for the labour force, overseen by the public employment service under the Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance. These strategies are aligned through governance bodies that ensure coherence, with overlapping membership and mutual input on each strategy (see Box 4.2). Whether through a unified or multi-strategy approach, ensuring alignment with additional policy efforts in related domains such as the digital and green transitions will remain crucial.
Regardless of the structure of the strategy chosen, it is essential to foster a collaborative approach to strategy development. This requires engaging officials across ministries and levels of government (see Lesson 6 in Box 4.1) and ensuring the active involvement of stakeholders such as employers, training providers, and civil society organisations (see Lesson 7). Early involvement of these key actors helps ensure strategies are well-targeted, consider implementation mechanisms from the outset, and build long-term stakeholder commitment. For example, local-level KPI targets or strategic actions may necessitate the participation of sub-national governments to ensure alignment with local needs and priorities.
Thailand can leverage existing bodies, such as the Skills Development Promotion Committee and the Education Council, or establish new co‑ordination groups to support strategy development and alignment (see Opportunities 2 and 3). While this collaborative process may require additional time and resources, it aligns with international best practices and supports the creation of impactful, sustainable outcomes. Germany’s Continuing Education Strategy provides a valuable example of this approach, as it demonstrates how early and inclusive collaboration among government, industry, and social partners within a designated working group can create a cohesive strategy that addresses workforce needs and fosters stakeholder commitment (see Box 4.2).
Additionally, Thailand’s skills strategies should have a clearly stated objectives and mandates see (Lesson 1 in Box 4.1) and should outline the broad assignment of roles and responsibilities at the strategic level. Clearly defining mandates can reduce duplication, address gaps, and provide clarity for future implementation planning. Thailand should also leverage the existing practice of ensuring that strategies are backed by legislation or government acts. Such mandates clarify the strategy’s role, the actors involved, and their responsibilities, and they provide resources and administrative capacity to ensure the strategy’s success. This approach also ensures the long-term sustainability and accountability of strategies, particularly through provisions for development, oversight, and monitoring.
Strengthening evidence-based decision-making
A robust evidence base is critical for identifying priorities and designing effective policies (see Lesson 4 in Box 4.1). A skills strategy should be grounded on quantitative data on skills outcomes, shortages, mismatches, and labour market trends, complemented by qualitative insights from experts and stakeholders.
A thorough assessment of the skills system not only informs the strategy development but also builds broad support by presenting an impartial view of its strengths and challenges. This is particularly important in Thailand, where the prioritisation of challenges can be complex due to competing interests among ministries and stakeholders. Basing skills priorities on evidence facilitates consensus and enables the development of effective policy actions. Greece’s Labour Market Information tool, which supports the annual update of the Strategy for Labour Force Upskilling and Connection to the Labour Market, provides an example of using comprehensive evidence as a base to the development of a skills strategy. By providing a clear picture of the labour market, Greece could identify key challenges and opportunities for improving skills development. Opportunity 4 explores this approach in greater detail, focusing on the use of data for informing skills policy decisions.
Germany
Building on Germany’s strong tradition of inter-ministerial collaboration, the "National Continuing Education Strategy" (2019) and its follow-up “Continuation and Further Development: National Continuing Education Strategy” (2022) were developed through a joint initiative led by the Federal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) and the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy also contributed significantly, though it did not take a leading role.
The strategy involved 17 official partners across Federal, Länder, and Local levels, including the Federal Employment Agency and other key stakeholders. The Federal Institute for Vocational Education and Training (BIBB) supported the process by assisting the ministries and organising working group meetings. Effective power-sharing agreements at state and ministerial levels were essential, recognising that the broad scope of skills policy required collaboration among multiple governmental bodies. Co‑ordination was ensured through clear guidelines, including consistent communication, regular meetings, and continuous information exchange.
Greece
Greece employs a unique approach skills strategy development with two distinct but interrelated strategies. The “Strategic Plan for Vocational Education, Training, Lifelong Learning and Youth 2022‑2024,” led by the Ministry of Education, Religious Affairs, and Sports, targets vocational education and training (VET) for students and adult learners within the formal education system. In parallel, the “Strategy for Labour Force Upskilling and Connection to the Labour Market,” managed by the Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance, focuses on non-formal adult education, training, and informal learning aligned with labour market demands.
This dual-strategy approach was deemed more feasible and effective than a single strategy within the Greek context. To ensure coherence, two governance bodies play crucial roles: the National Skills Council oversees the labour market upskilling strategy, while the Central Council for Vocational Education and Training manages the vocational education plan. Shared membership across these councils facilitates inter-ministerial dialogue, ensuring strategic alignment and co‑ordination. Additionally, a working committee meets monthly with social partners to discuss issues and maintain co‑operation between the ministries and DYPA.
Additionally, Greece offers an example of building a skills strategy on a robust evidence base. The Strategy for Labour Force Upskilling and Connection to the Labour Market is updated annually to reflect evolving labour market needs. These updates are informed by an advanced online labour market information (LMI) tool, which records and analyses labour market trends, forecasts future skills demand, and monitors changes in occupations and technology. The tool serves a diverse range of users, including DYPA, the National Workforce Skills Council, public bodies, researchers, workers, and the unemployed. It tracks job trends across occupations, education levels, genders, age groups, and employment statuses at both regional and national levels. Additionally, the tool conducts surveys and research to identify mismatches between skills supply and demand. The resulting data is compiled into reports that guide the annual updates of the strategy, ensuring its continued relevance and responsiveness to labour market dynamics.
Source: OECD, (2021[10]), OECD Skills Strategy Implementation Guidance for Korea: Strengthening the Governance of Adult Learning, https://doi.org/10.1787/f19a4560-en.
Designing a national strategic document to strengthen the coherence of skills policy is important for Thailand to address various challenges. The fragmentation of skills policy guidance across multiple strategic documents, risks resulting in gaps, overlaps, and conflicting objectives. Furthermore, there is a lack of clearly assigned roles and responsibilities to ensure strategic objectives can then be implemented in practice. To address these issues, Thailand should therefore take measures to strengthen the coherence of strategic of skills policy development as well as build support and commitment from all relevant government ministries, agencies, and stakeholders from the outset of the development process.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to design a national strategy to strengthen the coherence of skills policy building on the OECD Skills Strategy for Thailand:
1.1 Adopt a more integrated approach to skills policy by either developing a single national skills strategy or strengthening the alignment of existing strategies. Thailand could strengthen its skills strategy by adopting a cohesive approach that fosters collaboration among all relevant actors. One option is to create a single national skills strategy, collaboratively developed by all relevant government ministries and agencies, as well as stakeholders, which would address a broad range of skills policy challenges. Alternatively, Thailand could retain its decentralised approach but strengthen alignment across related strategies. Engaging officials across ministries, sub-national governments, employers, training providers, and civil society organisations early in the development process ensures that strategies are well-targeted, align with implementation mechanisms, and foster long-term stakeholder commitment. Existing structures such as the Skills Development Promotion Committee and the Education Council can support this collaborative process, which is essential for creating strategies that are inclusive, comprehensive, and sustainable.
1.2 Establish a formal mandate for the national skills strategy with clearly defined roles and responsibilities. To ensure alignment and accountability, Thailand’s skills strategy should include a formalised mandate that clearly defines the roles and responsibilities of ministries and agencies at the strategic level. By assigning responsibilities broadly, the strategy can reduce duplication, address gaps, and provide clarity for implementation planning. Backing the strategy with legislation or government acts strengthens its legitimacy and ensures adequate resources and administrative capacity for its success. A clear mandate also supports long-term sustainability by defining the strategy’s objectives, providing provisions for oversight and monitoring, and enabling ministries and agencies to work toward shared goals with well-defined accountability.
1.3 Ground the strategy in robust evidence and analysis. A skills strategy grounded in robust evidence is critical for identifying priorities and designing effective policies. Quantitative data on skills outcomes, shortages, mismatches, and labour market trends, alongside qualitative input from experts and stakeholders, provides a comprehensive understanding of the skills system’s strengths and gaps. In Thailand, this approach is particularly important for addressing competing interests among ministries and stakeholders, helping to build consensus and ensuring the strategy focuses on the most pressing challenges. Evidence-based planning also aligns national objectives with local needs, ensures strategies are responsive to changing workforce demands, and generates broad support through impartial and transparent assessments.
Recommendation 2: Ensuring effective implementation of existing skills-related strategies
Despite the existence of multiple high-level strategies outlining ambitious goals across a broad range of skills policy areas, a significant gap remains between these strategic goals and the actual skills outcomes attained in Thailand (as described in Chapter 2 and Chapter 3). While these strategies demonstrate strategic planning, their implementation is often hindered by bureaucratic complexities and budgetary constraints, as noted by consulted Thai officials. Addressing these challenges requires strengthening Thailand’s capacity to translate strategic goals into tangible results. Drawing on international best practices for successful strategy implementation (see Box 4.1) can enhance the effectiveness of these strategies and help ensure they deliver their intended impact.
Enhancing implementation through structured planning and monitoring
Identifying and securing champions, particularly among high-level officials, can help to raise awareness, sustain momentum, and drive implementation forward (see Lesson 5 in Box 4.1). By actively promoting the strategy’s importance and aligning it with the interests of various actors, these champions can help build consensus and ensure that all relevant stakeholders are committed to its long-term success. Such efforts can create greater clarity, with all actors understanding their roles and motivated to contribute to the strategy’s objectives.
A structured approach to implementation is also critical (see Lesson 8 in Box 4.1). Countries can enhance execution by developing formal implementation plans that outline detailed action steps, clearly defined responsibilities, allocated resources, and specify timelines for executing the strategy. These actions plans can be integrated within the main strategic documents or exist as separate, complementary documents. Furthermore, actions plans help to ensure alignment across different levels of government, which is especially important given Thailand’s fragmented structure of strategies, with overlapping and sometimes complementary topics (see Recommendation 1). Latvia provides a useful example, having developed short-term implementation plans that complement its main strategy and detail specific actions with assigned roles and responsibilities, along with key performance indicators (KPIs) (see Box 4.3).
Effective monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are essential to track progress and maintain the impact of these strategies. Tailored to Thailand’s specific context, these mechanisms should employ a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods, such as KPIs, benchmarks, surveys, and case studies. Regular reporting requirements can further support ongoing assessment, enabling timely adjustments to enhance strategy effectiveness. Bulgaria, for example developed a dedicated monitoring and reporting framework for its Action Plan for Skills (see Box 4.3), including indicators, responsibilities and governance mechanisms. In this context, oversight and co‑ordination bodies, such as the NESDB and Skills Development Promotion Committee, could play an important role in reviewing progress of the implementation and holding implementing authorities accountable (see Opportunity 2).
Ensuring flexibility and adequate resourcing for long-term impact
An effective implementation and monitoring system should also allow for flexibility, enabling strategies to adapt to evolving skills needs, driven by trends such as the digital and green transitions, and shocks such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Maintaining flexibility helps ensure strategies remain relevant to changing conditions on the ground that may not have been fully considered during the strategy’s development, while still aligning with national objectives. This could entail periodic adjustments to the strategy and its action plan to address as demonstrated in the example of Latvia (see Box 4.3). Some countries, such as Greece (see Recommendation 1), adopt strategies with shorter lifespans to facilitate regular updates and ensure alignment with evolving priorities.
Finally, sufficient resources – human, financial, and institutional – must be allocated to support both implementation and monitoring and evaluation efforts. This will ensure that Thailand’s strategies are not only well-designed but also effectively implemented, allowing for sustained impact and adaptability in response to changing needs.
Bulgaria
Bulgaria's Action Plan for Skills highlights the importance of monitoring and evaluation in strategy implementation. Supported by the European Commission's Technical Support Instrument, Bulgaria developed the Action Plan for Skills, building on the findings and policy recommendations of the 2023 OECD Skills Strategy. The plan details measures and activities for each priority area, assigns responsible entities, sets timelines (short-term [under two years], medium-term [two to four years], and long-term [four to six years]), and identifies potential funding sources. This approach aimed to turn OECD recommendations into practical steps for efficient implementation.
A key component of this plan is a monitoring and reporting framework that includes indicators, assigned responsibilities, and governance mechanisms. Capacity-building workshops were held to prepare Bulgarian authorities for independent implementation after the project's completion.
Latvia
Latvia’s Education Development Guidelines (EDG) 2021-2027, demonstrate effective implementation through structured action plans. In the EDG, a clear distinction is made between the overarching goals set for the Latvian education and skills system and the detailed implementation plans. The Guidelines from the EDG span a period of six years (2021-2027), whereas the implementation plans have shorter lifespans. Currently, Latvia has separate implementation plans for 2021-2023, 2023-2025, and 2026‑2027, which distinguishes it from other strategic documents that generally have only two implementation phases.
As part of the update process, Latvia integrates opinions and recommendations derived from mandatory national framework reporting, alongside EU data, to inform decision-making. The State Chancellery oversees the monitoring of implementation and is responsible for authoring these reports, which contributes to the coherence of Latvia's policy documents.
Philippines
The National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan (NTESDP) 2023-2028, developed by the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), serves as a comprehensive roadmap to empower the Filipino workforce with the skills and knowledge necessary for success in a rapidly evolving global economy.
The TESDA was mandated to develop such a strategy under Republic Act No. 7796 and has received strong endorsements from high-level officials. TESDA’s secretary general, Suharto Mangudadatu, was instrumental in championing the NTESDP, as well as in ensuring alignment with broader national visions and plans such as the Philippine Development Plan (PDP) and the Philippine Labor and Employment Plan. President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has also expressed public support for the NTESDP, thereby helping foster broad support among relevant stakeholders.
Source: OECD, (2021[10]), OECD Skills Strategy Implementation Guidance for Korea: Strengthening the Governance of Adult Learning, https://doi.org/10.1787/f19a4560-en; TESDA (2025[24]), National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan (NTESDP), www.tesda.gov.ph/About/TESDA/47;TESDA (2023[25]), National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan (NTESDP) 2023-2028, www.tesdacalabarzon.com.ph/node/147#:~:text=The%20National%20Technical%20Education%20and%20Skills%20Development%20Plan,to%20provide%20Filipinos%20with%20smart%20and%20innovative%20skills.
Ensuring effective implementation of existing skills-related strategies is important for Thailand to achieve its ambitious goals, aligning the implementation with lessons from international best practices. This recommendation highlights the importance of securing a champion that can advocate and raise awareness of the strategy, establishing strong implementation practices, and developing robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to ensure effective implementation of existing strategies, in line with international best practices:
2.1 Secure a champion(s) that can promote broad awareness and support for the strategy(s). To ensure the successful implementation of Thailand’s strategic goals, it is essential to foster broad awareness and support across all levels of government and among key stakeholders in the skills system. This involves securing champions, such as senior officials within key ministries, such as the Ministers of Education or Labour, or influential figures in key bodies or agencies, like the National Economic and Social Development Council (NESDC). These champions can advocate for the strategy, raise awareness, and drive its objectives forward. By actively promoting the strategy’s importance and aligning it with the interests of various actors, these champions can help build consensus and ensure that all relevant stakeholders are committed to its long-term success. They can also secure the strategy’s mandate and support legislative or structural changes needed to implement the strategy.
2.2 Establish strong implementation practices that ensure effective achievement of strategic goals. Effective implementation practices are crucial for translating Thailand’s strategic framework into tangible outcomes, which would entail the development of formal action plans that clearly outline responsibilities, allocate resources, and timelines for implementing actions. This would help to ensure that the efforts of different governmental bodies are aligned, which is especially important for Thailand because of the complexity, overlap and fragmentation of strategic documents. It is also essential to ensure flexible and responsive management of the strategy, ensuring that it remains aligned with both national objectives and on-the-ground realities.
2.3 Establish mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating the strategy’s implementation. Establishing robust monitoring and evaluation mechanisms is crucial for ensuring the successful implementation of Thailand's skills strategies. These mechanisms should combine quantitative and qualitative tools, such as KPIs, benchmarks, surveys, and case studies, to track progress and allow for timely adjustments. Oversight bodies like the NESDB and the Skills Development Promotion Committee could play a pivotal role in reviewing progress, holding implementing authorities accountable, and ensuring alignment with national objectives. To maintain relevance in the face of evolving skills needs, strategies should incorporate flexibility through periodic reviews and adjustments, as seen in countries like Latvia and Greece. Additionally, sufficient resources – human, financial, and institutional – must be allocated to support these processes, ensuring strategies are not only effectively monitored but also adaptable to changing conditions.
Opportunity 2: Fostering a whole-of-government approach to skills policy making
As outlined in the overview section of this chapter, responsibilities for skills policies in Thailand are shared across multiple ministries, agencies, and sub-national authorities. While collaboration across governmental entities is important when developing and aligning strategic priorities, as is described in the previous opportunity, establishing mechanisms to facilitate ongoing collaboration and co‑ordination among these entities is crucial to ensure the long-term responsiveness and effectiveness of the country’s skills system. This opportunity explores the current mechanisms for fostering a whole-of-government collaboration on skills policy in Thailand as well as potential actions towards enhanced co‑ordination and collaboration.
Two recommendations are proposed for fostering a whole of government approach to skills policies: (1) strengthening horizontal collaboration and co‑ordination among government ministries and agencies, and (2) strengthening vertical collaboration and co‑ordination across the national, provincial, and local levels.
Recommendation 3: Strengthening horizontal collaboration and co‑ordination among government ministries and agencies
Thailand has established several inter-ministerial and inter-agency bodies to enhance horizontal co‑ordination and collaboration on skills policies, summarised in Table 4.3.
Source: Ministry of Labour, (2014[26]), the Skills Development Promotion Act B.E. 2545 (A.D. 2002), www.mol.go.th/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/02/311en.pdf
The bodies presented above play a crucial role in aligning high-level goals, increasing transparency among governmental institutions, identifying gaps and overlaps in policies, and providing a strong foundation for collaboration on specific issues. They also offer critical advice to high-ranking officials on policy decisions or organisational reforms and serve as consultative platforms in the development of policies and strategic documents.
Ensuring clear mandates for effective co‑ordination
The mandates, goals, scope of topics, and levels of representation of these collaborative bodies vary significantly. For instance, the Education Council is a body with a broad mandate and diverse representation, comprising 41 members, including representatives from six ministries, the Office of the Council of State, and several non-governmental organisations such as local administrative organisations (LAOs), professional organisations, religious groups, and academics. This Council is tasked with developing and implementing educational policies, as well as fostering collaboration to advance education and human resource development. In contrast, other bodies have more narrowly defined mandates. The Board of Directors of the Equitable Education Fund, for instance, focuses specifically on managing the fund designed to provide financial support to disadvantaged children and youth. This body includes representatives from various ministries, government agencies, civil society, and the private sector, reflecting its more targeted scope compared to the broader mandate of the Education Council.
Another notable collaborative body is the National Qualifications Framework (NQF) Committee. The Committee is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the new NQF, ensuring that quality standards are maintained across occupations and training programmes. It also works to align these standards with the ASEAN Qualifications Reference Framework and develops systems for recognising learning achievements and accumulating credits. The Committee’s membership includes policymakers, public and private sector representatives, and experts, with the Secretary-General of the Education Council serving both as a member and as the secretary. To fulfill its responsibilities, the Committee may establish subcommittees and working groups as necessary. Although the NQF Committee has a broader scope compared to the Board of the Equitable Education Fund, it operates with a clearly defined mandate that focuses on specific policy topics and levers, ensuring a structured and targeted approach to its work.
The Skills Development Promotion Committee also stands out as a key co‑ordination body. This Committee includes representatives from relevant ministries, the Board of Investment, the Tourism Authority of Thailand, the Thai Chamber of Commerce, the Industrial Federation of Thailand, the Thai Bankers Association, and the Travel Industry Council of Thailand. Additionally, four members appointed by the prime minister (two experts and two representatives of employers and employees) contribute their expertise. Chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare, the committee was established under the 2002 Skills Development Promotion Act. It is tasked with developing and implementing skills policies, providing policy advice to ministers, setting and enforcing standards for skills development programmes and standardised testing, raising awareness of standards among employers, and promoting the establishment of training centres. The committee can also form sub-committees as needed (Ministry of Labour, 2014[26]).
Establishing a dedicated mechanism for inter-ministerial co‑ordination
All these co‑ordination bodies in Thailand include both governmental representatives and non-governmental stakeholders. While this inclusive approach offers many benefits, Thailand could consider establishing a dedicated mechanism for inter-ministerial co‑ordination that operates independently of non-governmental participation. Such a mechanism would provide government actors with a focused platform to discuss policy matters openly and candidly, fostering constructive dialogue and consensus-building on key issues. By facilitating direct discussions among ministries and agencies, this mechanism could strengthen a whole-of-government approach to skills policies, ensuring greater alignment of government efforts and a more coherent and effective policy framework.
This mechanism for inter-ministerial co‑ordination could take the form of a dedicated body that would bring together representatives from various ministries and agencies, including both senior management and operational-level staff, to discuss and align overarching goals, formulate a unified strategic approach to addressing key skills challenges, and identify areas for improvement or potential synergies. This body would focus on co‑ordinating efforts across ministries and agencies, driving institutional changes where necessary or initiating new measures when critical gaps are identified. As mentioned in Opportunity 1, such a body could also be tasked with developing and overseeing implementation of a national skills strategy. The High-Level Skills Implementation Group (HLSIG) in Ireland (see Box 4.4) is a strong example of effective inter-ministerial co‑ordination. It provides a streamlined platform for government actors to align skills policy priorities, enabling candid discussions and co‑ordinated decision-making.
Strengthening mandates, membership, and informal collaboration
In establishing a new co‑ordination body, Thailand can draw on international good practices (OECD, 2024[27]) to help ensure its long-term success. These practices can also inform the improvement of existing bodies where needed, to support their effectiveness.
First, a clear mandate and well-defined roles are essential for co‑ordination bodies to function effectively. Collaborative efforts are more likely to yield meaningful results when objectives and responsibilities are explicitly articulated and supported by an official mandate. In Thailand, bureaucratic complexities and misalignments between ministries – often stemming from overlapping or unclear missions and responsibilities – frequently hinder co‑ordination, making clarity in mandates particularly important. For instance, bodies with broad responsibilities such as the Education Council play a valuable role in gathering insights, sharing information, and aligning objectives across stakeholders. However, their wide-ranging responsibilities and lack of specificity can make it challenging to translate objectives into concrete outcomes. In contrast, more narrowly focused entities, such as the NQF Committee, operate under more clearly defined mandates with specific decision-making powers, enabling them to achieve tangible results within their defined areas of expertise. This comparison highlights the importance of equipping all co‑ordination bodies, regardless of their scope, with clear mandates and specific goals. A well-structured mandate strengthens collaboration, enhances accountability, and increases the likelihood of translating policy objectives into meaningful action.
While many councils and committees in Thailand derive their mandates from government acts, as noted in Opportunity 1, the level of specificity in the mandates varies. In some cases, the legal framework establishes the existence of a body and its broad purpose but does not clearly articulate its operational goals or mechanisms for achieving them. This lack of detail can lead to overlapping responsibilities, gaps in co‑ordination, or limited impact. By refining its approach to defining mandates through legislation, Thailand could ensure that each body has explicitly detailed roles, objectives, and decision-making authority. Strengthening these mandates would help shift co‑ordination efforts beyond discussion and information-sharing, enabling bodies to drive meaningful and sustained policy outcomes.
Second, it is important to curate the appropriate membership for the body’s purpose. Involving high-ranking officials in governance bodies is essential for securing support and driving internal changes within their organisations. However, it is equally important to include technical-level experts who can continuously implement decisions, drive outcomes, and provide valuable insights from the operational level (see the Labour Market Advisory Council in Ireland, Box 4.4). In Ireland’s LMAC, for instance, formal sub-groups (with more technical-level officials and experts) convene more frequently than the main council to allow continued discussion. Beyond seniority, the success of a co‑ordination body hinges on assigning personnel with strong expertise and excellent co‑operation skills. Moreover, effective facilitation of discussions and robust secretariat support are crucial, requiring highly skilled professionals capable of managing conflicting views while steering the group toward tangible results.
Third, collaborative bodies need adequate and targeted funding to function effectively. Allocating sufficient time for members to participate and fostering relationships that build trust between institutions are also important, as these relationships often take time to develop.
Last, when multiple collaborative bodies exist to address different sub-topics within the broader skills domain (e.g. one addressing academic education and another focused on vocational training), strong communication mechanisms are essential to ensure coherence and promote synergies. For example, in Ireland, co‑ordination is maintained through regular high-level meetings – typically held every two to three months – between the departments that oversee the High-Level Skills Implementation Group (HLSIG) and other key bodies. These meetings allow for alignment of strategies and decision-making across related initiatives (see Box 4.4). Overlapping representation, as employed in Greece (see Opportunity 1), could also help enhance alignment across bodies.
To complement and support these co‑ordination bodies, Thailand could establish dedicated co‑ordination functions, such as a dedicated individual or position, within each relevant ministry and agency. These functions would help map existing policies from across the skills system, promote bilateral collaborations, help align policies and actions with those of other governmental institutions, and encourage participation in collaborative bodies.
In addition to formal bodies, informal channels – such as joint events and workshops – can further strengthen inter-ministerial connections and collaboration. In Thailand, where co‑ordination between ministries and agencies is often hindered by bureaucratic silos, informal mechanisms can serve as valuable tools for breaking down barriers and encouraging co‑operation. These channels promote the formation of positive relationships between officials from various institutions, facilitating knowledge sharing and information exchange that may not occur in more formal settings. Informal collaboration can also create opportunities for piloting innovative initiatives and identifying synergies across policies. For example, in Singapore, the Civil Service College (CSC), under the Public Service Division (PSD), offers various programmes and events to foster professional and informal connections between civil servants at various levels from across the government. These initiatives span from leadership development programmes to events and seminars on various cross-cutting topics.
In Thailand, informal mechanisms could be leveraged to complement existing co‑ordination bodies, particularly in addressing cross-cutting issues like skills mismatches, lifelong learning, and regional disparities. For example, regular cross-ministerial workshops focused on specific skills challenges, such as preparing for the digital transition or addressing regional labour shortages, could encourage open dialogue, build trust, and generate actionable insights. Additionally, informal mechanisms could support the implementation of Thailand’s skills strategies by encouraging collaboration between central and subnational government actors, who may otherwise have limited opportunities to interact.
Ireland
The High-Level Skills Implementation Group (HLSIG)
The High-Level Skills Implementation Group (HLSIG) is a newly established governmental body aimed at promoting a whole-of-government approach to skills policy implementation in Ireland. It comprises of representatives from five governmental departments and twelve national agencies with roles and responsibilities in skills policy. The group meets approximately every two months (as needed) in closed sessions, involving senior civil servants (e.g. Director-general level). The establishment of the this purely governmental body in 2023 came as a result of an evaluation of the National Skills Council (NSC). Unlike the NSC, which had included both governmental and non-governmental stakeholders, the HLSIG is exclusively composed of government representatives.
The primary objective of the HLSIG is to support high-level skills policy priority setting and alignment across the government, drawing on guidance from the NSC. The NSC has been transformed into forum for stakeholders to provide insights on current labour market needs and offer recommendations on skills policy to the government, while the HLSIG drives the implementation of these policies. By operating without non-governmental stakeholders, the HLSIG serves as focused platform for internal government co‑ordination, enabling frank discussions and more direct decision-making on skills policy matters. This separation also strengthens stakeholder engagement forums by ensuring they are dedicated to collecting insights and feedback from external actors, free from government influence, thereby enhancing their effectiveness.
The Labour Market Advisory Council (LMAC)
The Labour Market Advisory Council (LMAC) serves as an advisory body to the Minister for Social Protection and the Government concerning the efficient operation of the labour market.
Chaired by an independent labour market expert, the Council includes representatives from various government departments. Additionally, within its subgroups it comprises representatives from relevant state agencies, employer bodies, unions, individual employers, academics, and community and voluntary sectors.
The LMAC is responsible for providing labour market situation analysis and evaluations, collecting perspectives and inputs from key labour market stakeholders, and providing policy advice to the government on labour market policy. The Council also has an active role in implementing and developing governmental labour market strategies. To effectively achieve these goals, the Council has two, technical-level, operational subgroups: The Evaluation Subgroup, and the Employer Engagement Subgroup. These groups help drive results and engage governmental and non-governmental actors at the implementation level.
Full council meets quarterly, with each session lasting approximately four hours, in addition to one annual full-day meeting. The sub-groups convene more frequently (once every 1-2 months) than the main council and consist of technical experts, government officials, and social partners who focus on implementing the Council’s strategic priorities. Meetings are held in closed session, though membership may vary, especially in subgroup meetings, depending on the topic under discussion. The minister for social protection attends Council meetings, and subgroup meetings occasionally include participation from high-level officials, such as junior ministers and senior officials, reflecting strong governmental engagement in the Council’s work.
Alignment across bodies
Given the related and sometimes overlapping themes of the LMAC, NSC and HLSIG, the Department of Social Protection (DSP) and the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science (DFHERIS) hold high-level meetings every 2‑3 months, in the context of an existing DSP-DFHERIS High-Level Group. Moreover, the DSP is represented at the HLSIG.
Singapore
The Civil Service College (CSC) in Singapore, a statutory board under the Public Service Division of the Prime Minister’s Office, serves as the central institution for learning and development within the nation's public service. Its mission is to develop public officials into effective leaders and skilled professionals, fostering a future-ready public service.
A notable CSC initiative is the Learning and Development Community Engagement Series, which aims to strengthen the capabilities of public service officials. For instance, in April 2024, CSC organised an event at the Housing and Development Board's My Learning Space, binging together approximately 500 officers from over 80 agencies to explore topics such as competency-driven growth and redefining purposeful work.
These events (typically closed to the public) not only enhance individual competencies but also promote inter-agency collaboration and knowledge sharing. Additionally, CSC offers targeted training programmes, such as Partnership and Engagement 101, designed to equip officials with essential skills for stakeholder engagement. Participants learn to identify engagement opportunities, communicate effectively, and establish meaningful relationships, thereby enhancing their collaborative efforts across various sectors.
Source: OECD, (2024[27]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System: Final Report, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1ecc914-en; Civil Service College Singapore, (2024[28]), Annual Report 2023-2024, www.csc.gov.sg/files/CSC_Annual_Report_FY2023.pdf; Civil Service College Singapore, (2025[29]), Civil Service College Singapore, www.csc.gov.sg/.
Strengthening horizontal collaboration and co‑ordination among government ministries and agencies is important since responsibilities for skills policies are shared across multiple ministries and agencies. Effective co‑ordination through strong formal and informal mechanisms is crucial to enhance ongoing alignment of goals and activities, addressing any gaps, overlaps, and fostering synergies.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to strengthen horizontal collaboration and co‑ordination between ministries and government agencies:
3.1 Establish a dedicated inter-ministerial co‑ordination body for skills policy. Thailand could benefit from a dedicated inter-ministerial co‑ordination body focused exclusively on aligning governmental efforts in the skills policy domain. This mechanism would operate independently of non-governmental stakeholders and bring together representatives from key ministries at both senior and operational levels. Its primary role would be to align overarching goals, identify key skills challenges, and uncover opportunities for institutional improvements or synergies. It could also be charged with the development and oversight of a national skills strategy. To strengthen existing co‑ordination bodies, Thailand could establish dedicated co‑ordination functions within each relevant ministry or agency. These functions would help to map policies, foster bilateral collaboration, align actions across institutions, and enhance participation in inter-agency co‑ordination efforts.
3.2 Strengthen co‑ordination bodies for skills policy, including newly established ones, in line with international best practice. To ensure the effectiveness of Thailand’s existing or newly established inter-ministerial and inter-agency co‑ordination bodies, Thailand can align them with lessons drawn from international best practices. This includes clearly defining the mandates, roles, and decision-making powers of these bodies to ensure that their efforts lead to tangible outcomes. Carefully curating the membership of the bodies is key, ensuring a mix of high-ranking officials to secure institutional support and technical experts who can implement decisions and provide ground-level insights. Moreover, adequate and targeted funding, alongside skilled facilitation and secretariat support, is essential for these bodies to function effectively and manage conflicting views while driving concrete results. When multiple, closely related bodies exist, it is important to ensure alignment in their activity through regular meetings and shared membership.
3.3 Leverage informal co‑ordination and collaboration mechanisms to better support a whole-of-government approach to skills. In addition to formal co‑ordination bodies, Thailand can enhance inter-ministerial collaboration through informal mechanisms such as joint workshops, leadership development programmes, and cross-agency seminars. These channels can help break down bureaucratic silos, facilitate knowledge sharing, and foster stronger relationships between officials across government agencies. Informal mechanisms could complement existing co‑ordination structures, particularly for addressing cross-cutting skills challenges such as digital transformation, lifelong learning, and regional labour market disparities. Regular cross-ministerial workshops and targeted networking opportunities could help align policy efforts, encourage innovation, and strengthen co‑operation between central and subnational authorities.
Recommendation 4: Strengthening vertical collaboration and co‑ordination between the national, provincial, and local levels
To foster a whole-of-government approach to governance of Thailand’s skills system, it is also essential to strengthen vertical co‑ordination and collaboration between the national, provincial, and local levels. Enhanced co‑ordination across these levels can leverage local expertise and insights, ensuring that national policies are adaptable and responsive to the diverse needs and contexts of Thailand's provinces, while remaining consistent with national priorities and standards.
Provincial and local authorities in Thailand play a central role in Thailand’s skills system. The country is divided into 75 provinces (changwat) and two specially governed districts: the capital Bangkok, which is often counted as the 76th province, and Pattaya (Thailand Embassy, 2024[4]). A variety of actors at the provincial and local levels hold responsibilities for skills policy (see Table 4.1 in the overview and performance section of the chapter).
Local Administration Organisations (LAOs) play an important role in implementing policies, providing public services, and engaging with local communities (Department of Local Administration, 2024[5]). These organsiations encompass all levels of subnational government, including provinces, municipalities, sub-districts, and special LAOs (Bangkok and Pattaya). LAOs have the authority to provide education services at all levels, making them key actors in education and skills development.
The Department of Local Administration (DLA), under the Ministry of Interior, oversees and supports the LAOs by developing and advising the LAOs on local development plans, offering guidance on policy implementation, and providing financial support in to strengthen the capacity and efficiency of the LAOs in public service provision (Department of Local Administration, 2024[30]). Concurrently, the Ministry of Education establishes the conditions and guidelines that determine when and how LAOs can take responsibility for providing education services, including the specific requirements they must meet to manage schools and allocate educational resources. Recent decentralisation efforts have transferred responsibilities such as overseeing sub-district libraries and child development centres from the Ministry of Education to the LAOs. Additionally, each province has its own Provincial Education Committee, chaired by the Provincial Governor or Deputy Governor, alongside a provincial education office. These structures provide oversight and co‑ordination for education within their jurisdictions, ensuring alignment with national priorities.
Strengthening the capacity and resources of subnational authorities
Although the LAOs are independently responsible for the provision of education services, the Ministry of Education retains certain key responsibilities at the subnational level to ensure alignment between national policy design and local implementation. The Area Committees for Education, under the Basic Education Commission of the Ministry of Education, oversee Educational Service Areas, their offices, and the schools under their jurisdiction. These committees are responsible for academic supervision, budgeting, personnel management, and general administration, helping to maintain coherence between national and local educational policies.
In addition, the Office of the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Education supervises 18 regional education offices, which play an important role in aligning provincial education strategies with national objectives, ministry policies, and Provincial Cluster Development Strategies. These offices support provincial development through academic initiatives, research and development, and the monitoring and evaluation of provincial education offices, (The Governemnt of Thailand, 2013[31]; MOE, 2017[3]). Similarly, the Ministry of Labour operates Provincial Labour Offices in each province, tasked with implementing labour market policies, programmes, and services while co‑ordinating with other LAOs and key actors.
In countries where subnational authorities have significant responsibilities in the skills system, ensuring alignment between local policies and national priorities is very important. This can be achieved by involving national agencies in subnational activities and establishing clear lines of authority, structured co‑ordination mechanisms, and strong supervision. These measures can help prevent policy fragmentation, ensuring that local initiatives complement rather than duplicate or contradict national efforts. This structured approach enhances policy coherence, mitigates inefficiencies, and strengthens the effectiveness of the skills system.
As responsibilities are delegated to provincial and local levels, it is essential to empower LAOs to adapt national policies to local contexts. while maintaining oversight to ensure alignment with national level priorities. This is particularly important in Thailand, where significant regional disparities in education outcomes and labour market characteristics present unique challenges. However, Thai experts consulted during this project indicated that subnational authorities often lack the resources to fully implement skills policies and effectively govern local skills systems.
To overcome the challenge of limited resources and capacity among subnational authorities – hindering their ability to fully implement skills policies and effectively govern local skills systems – Thailand should strengthen support for these authorities. Strengthening their human, institutional, and strategic capacity Is essential to ensuring the effective design and implementation skills policies. This could be achieved through nationally funded pilot programmes designed to build local-level skills policy capacity. A relevant example is Thailand’s National Village and Urban Community Fund, which supports local villages in developing vocational trainings infrastructure for local human capital development (The National Village and Urban Community Fund Office, 2024[32]).
These pilot programmes should be collaboratively developed with selected LAOs and scaled up based on their success. Pilots offer a cost-effective method to test initiatives on a smaller scale before broader implementation. Furthermore, these pilot programmes can help align local initiatives with national objectives and strengthen sub-national capacities to ensure nationally funded programmes and skills policies meet local needs and are effectively implemented. Importantly, these pilots can also help to address challenges that result from having multiple ministries overseeing the same bodies at the subnational level. For instance, while the Ministry of Interior oversees LAOs, specific functions, such as education, fall under the purview of ministries like the Ministry of Education. Designing pilot programmes in partnership with selected LAOs provides an opportunity to clarify governance arrangements, improve co‑ordination among ministries, and reduce inefficiencies, which can otherwise be costly.
To strengthen support for provincial and local levels, it is important to dedicate special attention and outreach to underperforming and under-represented LAOs to address specific challenges and gaps. Such efforts can help reduce regional disparities and ensure that underperforming regions receive the necessary support to improve their performance.
Establishing a network for subnational representation in national policy making
While top-down approaches, where the national government guides and supports subnational authorities, are essential, it is equally important to establish robust bottom-up co‑ordination channels. These channels can facilitate the collection of insights on what works, foster stronger commitment to national decisions, and leverage subnational strengths to enhance national policies. Representation of LAOs in the Education Council is subnational involvement in policy making in Thailand (see Recommendation 3). However, additional efforts are needed to ensure that subnational inputs are systematically reflected in national policy decisions. Increasing the representation of subnational authorities at the national level is particularly challenging due to the large number of provinces and the significant variation between them in terms of labour markets and educational needs.
To address the challenge of ensuring meaningful and systematic representation of subnational authorities in national policy making, Thailand could establish a network of officials across regions to strengthen co‑ordination among LAOs and enhance their representation at the national level. More specifically, Thailand could establish a structure where designated provincial skills development co‑ordinators are tasked with leading discussions on skills in their respective regions. These co‑ordinators would facilitate collaboration across LAOs, ensuring that local perspectives are heard. To be effective, the managers should have a specialised knowledge of skills policies and possess a clear understanding of the unique skills needs of their province or locality.
In addition to fostering collaboration across regions, provincial skills development co‑ordinators would play an important role within their own respective provinces by leading local skills fora. These fora would convene key stakeholders – such as Provincial Labour Offices, Provincial Education Committees, education providers, and non-governmental actors – to facilitate co‑ordination and dialogue (see more in Opportunity 3). By aligning local initiatives with regional needs, these fora could play a key role in addressing local skills-related challenges, aligning initiatives with local needs, and improving the implementation of national policies.
At the national level, a network of provincial skills development co‑ordinators could help strengthen co‑ordination and capacity-building among provinces by facilitating regular discussions on regional and local skills challenges, promoting the exchange of information, and sharing effective practices across LAOs. By fostering peer learning and collaboration, this network could help provinces adopt proven strategies, improving the overall effectiveness of skills policies at the subnational level. Additionally, by systematically identifying regional needs and successful local initiatives, the network would contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of provincial and local priorities, helping to inform national-level decision-making. The co‑ordination of this network could be managed by a dedicated officer or director responsible for representing the LAOs in national discussions. This officer, potentially housed within a national agency such as the Department of Skills Development (DSD), would focus on representing the provincial and local perspectives at the national level, advocating for local skills needs, and recommending policy adjustments where necessary. Given the large number of provinces, smaller focus groups could be established as needed, focusing on specific policy areas, with focus group outputs then distributed across the broader network.
To further amplify the voice of the sub-national level in national discussions, the network should appoint representatives to participate in national co‑ordination bodies and discussions. These representatives would present consolidated view of subnational challenges, share successful practices, and advocate for policy changes that reflect local priorities. representatives could be periodically rotated to balance the large number of provinces with equal geographical representation. Norway’s Regional Skills Fora and Regional Directors Network can provide an example for such a structure (see Box 4.5).
Norway
Regional Skills Fora
The Norwegian Regional Competence Fora (RCF) play a key role in enhancing regional economic growth and workforce development. Established in seven regions, each RCF aims to foster collaboration among educational institutions, businesses, and government entities at the national, regional, and local levels to address specific regional skills needs. They focus on improving the quality of education and training programmes and promoting lifelong learning initiatives. Each RCF tailors its efforts to the unique needs and priorities of its region, working closely with stakeholders to support skills development, economic growth, and competitiveness. Their activities include mapping and aligning local and regional skills supply with demand.
Regional Directors Network and connection to national level
Co‑ordination across regions, is managed by a network of Regional Directors of Skills and Education who meet regularly. A smaller group of these Directors has been chosen to prepare for these network meetings and meets monthly with the Ministry of Education and Research to ensure alignment between national and regional levels of government. Additionally, a network of regional officials responsible for skills and education policies has been established to enhance collaboration among regions and other key stakeholders, with quarterly meetings.
Regional Competence Fora (RCF) also engage in both formal and informal networks and ad hoc meetings to foster co‑operation. Interaction between regions/RCF and the national government primarily occurs through the Skills Policy Council. The network of Regional Directors has appointed one Director to represent regions/RCF in both the Skills Policy Council and its operational group.
Source: OECD, (2024[27]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System: Final Report, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1ecc914-en.
Strengthening vertical collaboration and co‑ordination between the national, provincial, and local levels is crucial for Thailand because of the important role that subnational authorities and subnational ministerial offices play in the skills system.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to strengthen vertical collaboration and co‑ordination between the national, provincial, and local levels of government:
4.1 Strengthen subnational skills policy capacity through pilot programmes, direct engagement, and targeted support. Thailand could enhance subnational skills policy capacity by implementing nationally funded pilot programmes, fostering direct engagement with Local Administrative Organisations (LAOs), and providing targeted support to underperforming regions. These programmes should be collaboratively developed with selected LAOs and then scaled up based on their demonstrated success. Particular attention should be given to underperforming and underrepresented LAOs to address gaps and challenges, ensuring they receive the targeted support needed to improve their performance. By directly involving subnational authorities in these pilots, the programmes can facilitate active engagement in policy development, align national strategies with local needs, and build stronger local governance capacity. Furthermore, the national government should provide tailored support to ensure these efforts result in improved outcomes, particularly in regions facing persistent challenges.
4.2 Establish provincial skills development co‑ordinators and a collaborative network to foster collaboration and peer learning across LAOs. Thailand should introduce provincial skills development co‑ordinators within each province to enhance co‑ordination among local stakeholders, including labour offices, education providers, and non-governmental actors. These co‑ordinators would lead local skills fora in their respective regions to address skills-related challenges, align initiatives with local needs, and improve the implementation of national policies. To promote collaboration across LAOs, a network of these provincial skills development co‑ordinators should be established. This network would meet regularly to share information, promote peer learning, and identify opportunities to scale up or replicate successful policies across regions. By connecting provincial skills development co‑ordinators, the network would strengthen communication and knowledge sharing, thereby helping to address regional disparities, build local capacity, and facilitate the adoption of innovative approaches throughout the Thai skills system.
4.3 Amplify the voice of subnational authorities in national skills policy discussions through the network of provincial skills development co‑ordinators. To ensure that the perspectives of subnational authorities are reflected in national policy making, Thailand should designate a main officer or director for the provincial skills development co‑ordinators’ network. This officer, potentially housed within a national agency, such as the Department of Skills Development (DSD), would serve as a liaison between the network and national authorities. Their role would be to represent subnational perspectives, advocate for local priorities, and provide input to inform national strategies. Furthermore, the network should appoint representatives to participate in national co‑ordination bodies and discussions. These representatives would present a consolidated view of subnational challenges, share successful practices, and propose policy changes to address local needs. This approach would not only amplify the voice of LAOs at the national level but also strengthen vertical co‑ordination and alignment between local and national skills policies.
Opportunity 3: Strengthening stakeholder engagement in skills policy making
Strengthening engagement with non-governmental stakeholders is essential for enhancing the governance of Thailand’s skills system in. Their expertise and diverse perspectives help to ensure that skills policies are responsive to both societal and economic objectives, fostering more effective and inclusive policy development.
Thailand has made significant progress in establishing a legal framework for stakeholder consultation in policy formulation. The regulations of the Office of the Prime Minister on Public Consultation, B.E. 2548 (2005) require government institutions to share information about projects with significant public impact and conduct credible consultations where necessary, with oversight by the relevant minister or governor to ensure compliance (Office of the Prime Minister, 2005[11]). Section 77 of the 2017 Constitution further strengthens these requirements by mandating stakeholder consultations before enacting laws, requiring public disclosure of outcomes, and incorporating post-implementation impact evaluations (Office of the Council of State, 2017[12]). Additionally, the 2019 Act on Legislative Drafting and the Outcome of Law specifies consultation mechanisms, including an online system managed by the Digital Government Development Agency to ensure transparency and stakeholder inclusion (Government of Thailand, 2019[13]). Despite these advancements in legislative and regulatory consultations, stakeholder engagement in strategic planning remains voluntary. Ministries and agencies are responsible for fostering participatory governance and developing effective mechanisms for meaningful engagement highlighting the need for further institutional support to enhance stakeholder involvement in broader policy processes (OECD, 2022[14]).
This opportunity explores avenues for enhancing engagement with non-governmental stakeholders in skills policy, including strengthening stakeholder engagement bodies, building a culture and capacity for stakeholder involvement, and developing strategies to engage hard-to-reach groups in skills policy discussions.
Two recommendations are proposed to strengthen stakeholder engagement in skills policies: (1) Strengthening mechanisms and capacity for effective stakeholder engagement, and (2) Strengthening engagement with hard-to-reach stakeholders.
Recommendation 5: Strengthening mechanisms and capacity for effective stakeholder engagement
One important mechanism for strengthening stakeholder engagement is the establishment of designated bodies or structures for to promote co‑ordination and collaboration between government and stakeholders. Thailand has established several such entities, including the Education Council, the National Qualifications Framework Committee, and the Skills Development Promotion Committee. These bodies bring together governmental and non-governmental actors to shape skills policies (see Opportunity 2). By doing so, they foster greater involvement of diverse stakeholders in skills policy development and enhance co‑ordination between the government and private sectors.
While national level bodies are important, engaging stakeholders at the sectoral level is also very important for identifying specific labour market needs and aligning curricula and skills policies accordingly. Thai agencies such as OVEC and the Basic Education Committee (BEC) have established sector-specific committees to engage with industries. Additionally, Thailand is currently promoting the 4.0 economic model, which encourages competition and innovation by supporting specific geographical zones and industries. The model includes a sector-based approach with several incentive schemes to drive productivity and innovation, including investment in human capital, advanced technological training, specialised training centres, and more (Thailand Board of Investment, n.d.[15]). As part of this effort, Thailand has established sectoral skills councils, some led by the DSD, to work closely with government agencies to align training programmes with industry needs.
Enhancing stakeholder engagement bodies and structures
Despite the activities of these bodies, officials consulted for this project have indicated that the full potential of stakeholder engagement remains unrealised. A particular challenge is that stakeholders often do not actively participate in policy development and implementation. Instead, their involvement is often limited to providing general input, rather than engaging in meaningful, collaborative decision-making or contributing to the implementation of policies. Additionally, many of these councils or committees lack the mandate and resources necessary to make a meaningful impact. To address these gaps, these bodies can be strengthened by drawing on lessons from international best practices in effective stakeholder engagement (OECD, 2024[27]).
One key lesson is the importance of carefully selecting members to ensure the engagement body effectively serves its purpose. Membership should include experts and professionals who possess both field-specific knowledge and a strong commitment to policy development. An open call and selection process – such as that used for Ireland’s National Skills Council – can help ensure that participants are both highly qualified and genuinely motivated to contribute to policy discussions (see Box 4.6). Through an open call, clear criteria can be established in advance, specifying the number of representatives needed from different stakeholder groups – such as businesses, trade unions, industry associations, and civil society organisations – while maintaining a balanced and inclusive composition. This approach allows for the selection of individuals who not only bring relevant expertise but also demonstrate an active interest in shaping skills policy, reducing the risk of purely ex officio representation, where organisations simply appoint a delegate without regard to their level of engagement.
Another key lesson is the importance of clear and effective communication throughout the engagement process. Stakeholders should have a clear understanding of the body’s purpose and their specific roles within it. Transparency should be maintained at every stage, enabling stakeholders to provide feedback on outputs or decisions and ensuring they understand how their inputs will be utilised. Demonstrating the impact of their contributions is critical to building trust, fostering active participation, and sustaining engagement. Moreover, transparent communication promotes accountability on the part of the government, ultimately contributing to more effective and impactful outcomes.
When defining the role and mandate of a body or any engagement mechanism, it is important to ensure they are both realistic and aligned with stakeholders’ capacity to participate effectively. Bodies with vague or overly ambitious scopes may struggle to deliver meaningful outcomes. A project-based approach can help address this challenge by establishing short-term working groups within a body (e.g. a council or committee), each tasked with achieving specific objectives. Such an approach provides a more targeted and effective means of engaging stakeholders in policy design and implementation, making participation more focused and effective, even within broader, high-level governance structures.
Strengthening sectoral-level engagement and co‑ordination
While national level bodies are important, engaging stakeholders at the sectoral level is also very important for identifying specific labour market needs and aligning curricula and skills policies accordingly. Thai agencies such as OVEC and the Basic Education Committee (BEC) have established sector-specific committees to engage with industries. Additionally, Thailand is currently promoting ‘Thailand 4.0’ as a new economic model, which encourages competition and innovation by supporting specific geographical zones and industries. The model includes a sector-based approach with several incentive schemes to drive productivity and innovation, including investment in human capital, advanced technological training, specialised training centres, and more (Thailand Board of Investment, n.d.[15]).
To further support this new economic model, enhance workforce skills and align education and training with industry requirements, Thailand has established Sectoral Skills Councils (SSCs). Many SSCs are supported by the DSD and include representatives from government, education and training institutions, and industry. SSCs are currently in place for sectors such as automotive, tourism, construction, information and communication technology (ICT), and agriculture and food. Their core responsibilities include identifying skills gaps, developing industry-recognised skill standards, collaborating with training providers to adapt curricula, offering policy advice, and promoting lifelong learning opportunities in response to evolving sectoral demands.
Despite this progress, challenges remain. Skills training content is not always updated quickly enough to reflect fast-changing technological developments. Moreover, co‑ordination among ministries and agencies remains fragmented, resulting in a duplication of efforts as employers and associations are often asked to provide the same information multiple times to different actors. Engagement with small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) also remains limited in many sectors, and there is scope to develop more targeted training for emerging industries, such as green energy and the creative economy.
To better capture the specific skills needs of the labour market, Thailand could further strengthen the structure and effectiveness of its sectoral engagement frameworks. Building on existing SSCs and other mechanisms across ministries and agencies, Thailand can enhance co‑ordination to minimise redundancy, improve clarity in stakeholder roles, and expand outreach to SMEs and underserved sectors (see Recommendation 6). Strengthening the mandate of SSCs and providing them with adequate tools, funding, and institutional support would ensure they can play a more central role in aligning workforce development with sectoral needs. In doing so, Thailand could draw on international models – such as Korea’s sector councils – which provide an integrated platform for stakeholder engagement, skills forecasting, and curriculum reform across economic sectors (see Box 4.6).
Diversifying stakeholder engagement mechanisms
Beyond formal bodies, additional tools and mechanisms can be used to engage stakeholders more actively. These include more informal mechanisms such as public consultations on policy proposals, stakeholder workshops or roundtables, online platforms, and targeted communication with key actors. Adopting such tools, as explored further in the following recommendation, can diversify engagement and make it more inclusive.
To sustain these efforts, Thailand can strengthen its capacity for stakeholder engagement on skills policies by developing resources to support ministries and agencies in establishing impactful stakeholder engagement mechanisms and fostering a culture of stakeholder involvement. For example, Israel’s Governance and Society Department in the Prime Minister’s Office developed a user-friendly toolkit outlining key considerations and steps for effective stakeholder engagement (see Box 4.6). Another example is Jobs and Skills Australia (JSA)’s Engagement and Outreach Strategy which aims to guide the organisation’s approach in developing and nurturing meaningful partnerships with stakeholders. Adopting such approaches and providing support and training to civil servants in Thailand could help governmental bodies determine the most appropriate engagement tools for various scenarios and how to use them effectively.
Australia
Jobs and Skills Australia (JSA)’s Engagement and Outreach Strategy aims to guide the organisation’s approach in developing and nurturing meaningful partnerships with stakeholders, aligning with JSA’s mission to advise Australia’s government and other stakeholders on current, emerging, and future skills needs.
The strategy is built on five key principles: inclusivity, effectiveness, two-way communication, transparency, and ease of engagement. These principles ensure that stakeholder input significantly influences the design, delivery, and enhancement of JSA’s initiatives, fostering a dynamic and responsive engagement process. Moreover, the strategy identifies various engagement risks (e.g. consultation fatigue, stakeholder conflicts of interest, etc.) and outlines corresponding mitigation measures. It also defines success metrics to measure the effectiveness of engagement efforts.
Ireland
Ireland’s National Skills Council (NSC) was established in 2017 by Ireland’s National Skills Strategy 2025. Between 2017 and 2023, the Council served as an advisory body to the Government of Ireland on skills policy, bringing together relevant departments (ministries), education and training providers, and business representatives. In 2023 the NSC was reformed in order to establish a more “industry-led” approach. The membership was therefore reformed to give greater prominence to non-governmental stakeholders.
In order to identify new NSC members, DFHERIS opened an “expression of interest” process, receiving many applicants from a broad range of stakeholders including large companies and SMEs, education and training providers, and others. DFHERIS then shortlisted candidates based on an assessment against internally defined criteria, including the aim to include diverse representation from across the skills system held follow‑up discussions with the shortlisted candidates. This process was intended to help sort through and identify potential NSC members with genuine motivation to facilitate active participation and engagement in NSC meetings later on. It is expected that NSC members would also raise awareness of the importance of effective skills development and use through their networks on the ground, underscoring the importance of selecting the right candidates as NSC members.
Israel
The Public Participation Guide in Government Work in Israel serves as a comprehensive guide for integrating public participation into government decision-making processes. The document outlines the principles, methodologies, and tools for effectively involving the public in various stages of policy development and implementation. It emphasises the importance of transparency, inclusiveness, and responsiveness in governance, and aims to strengthen public trust in governmental institutions. It also provides tools for identifying the most relevant engagement mechanism in different scenarios as well as the types of stakeholders to engage, providing best practice examples.
Korea
Industrial skills councils were established in Korea in 2015 to promote industry-led skills development. These councils now cover 17 industries and are responsible for developing National Competency Standards (NSC), recommending appropriate training options, overseeing the work-study dual system, monitoring developments in the labour force, and publishing annual “industrial manpower status reports”, among other duties. Financed by the Ministry of Employment and Labour (MoEL), each council comprises 20 representatives from employer associations, unions, the MoEL and other experts.
In addition to industrial skills councils, Korea has sectoral human resource development councils established by the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy. Efforts have been made to enhance co‑ordination between these councils to minimise overlap and foster synergies in their operations.
Source: OECD, (2024[27]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System: Final Report, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1ecc914-en; Office of the Prime Minister, (2020[33]), Public Participation Guide in Government Work, www.gov.il/he/pages/public_sharing_guide; Jobs and Skills Australia (2023[34]), Engagement and Outreach Strategy, www.jobsandskills.gov.au/about/engagement-and-outreach-strategy; OECD, (2021[10]), OECD Skills Strategy Implementation Guidance for Korea: Strengthening the Governance of Adult Learning, https://doi.org/10.1787/f19a4560-en.
Strengthening mechanisms and capacity for effective stakeholder engagement is essential for effective governance of the skills system in Thailand. These stakeholders – such as employers, unions, and training providers – offer valuable expertise and diverse perspectives that are crucial for shaping skills policies that align with both societal and economic objectives. While Thailand has established methods for stakeholder engagement, such as dedicated bodies and legal frameworks, more could be done to refine and expand these efforts.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to strengthen engagement with non-governmental stakeholders:
5.1 Strengthen the effectiveness of stakeholder engagement bodies. Thailand should strengthen existing stakeholder engagement bodies, such as the Skills Development Promotion Committee and the Education Council by ensuring that membership is carefully curated to include experts with relevant expertise and a commitment to policy development. The inclusion of professionals who can effectively represent their organisations and contribute to the policy making process is crucial. Moreover, ensuring clear and transparent communication throughout the engagement process is important for fostering trust and active participation among stakeholders, who should be informed about the body’s purpose, mandate, their roles within it, and the impact of their contributions. Additionally, employing a project-based approach, where short-term working groups are established to achieve specific goals, can help actively involve stakeholders in policy design and implementation, driving more effective and targeted outcomes.
5.2 Strengthen and co‑ordinate sectoral stakeholder engagement mechanisms through existing and emerging structures. Building on Thailand’s existing Sectoral Skills Councils (SSCs) supported by the Department of Skill Development (DSD), as well as other sectoral engagement efforts across ministries, Thailand should enhance and formalise sectoral-level stakeholder engagement mechanisms to more effectively respond to the evolving skills needs of key industries. This includes strengthening the mandate and capacity of SSCs, ensuring their sustained collaboration with training providers, and expanding representation to include SMEs and emerging sectors. Efforts should also be made to co‑ordinate sectoral engagement across government institutions to minimise redundancy and reduce the burden on stakeholders. These mechanisms should be informed by international good practices and equipped with adequate tools and resources to carry out skills gap analysis, curriculum development, and policy advice in their respective sectors.
5.3 Enhance stakeholder engagement by adopting additional tools and strengthening capacity-building efforts. Thailand can incorporate a range of tools for stakeholder engagement such as public consultations, stakeholder workshops or roundtables, online platforms, and targeted communication. To ensure sustainable and impactful stakeholder engagement, ministries and agencies should be supported with tools, resources, and training tailored to their needs. For example, Thailand could develop a stakeholder engagement toolkit or provide training to civil servants in stakeholder engagement strategies. These efforts can help foster a culture of collaboration while ensuring consistent and impactful interactions with stakeholders and enhance Thailand’s overall ability to design and implement skills policies that align with labour market needs.
Recommendation 6: Strengthening engagement with hard-to-reach stakeholders
Effective stakeholder engagement is critical to ensuring that skills policies are inclusive, responsive, and representative of all economic actors. However, existing mechanisms often fail to incorporate the perspectives of harder-to-reach groups, such as SMEs, minority communities, CSOs, and informal sector workers. Strengthening engagement with these stakeholders requires targeted strategies, innovative consultation methods, and institutional support to ensure their voices contribute meaningfully to policy discussions.
Improving the representativeness of existing stakeholder engagement mechanisms
Engaging effectively with non-governmental stakeholders is essential for the development and implementation of inclusive and responsive skills policies. However, traditional stakeholder engagement mechanisms often prioritise employer associations, trade unions, or other representative organisations, which may not adequately capture the perspectives and needs of harder-to-reach groups. These groups include SMEs, minority communities, civil society organisations (CSOs), and informal sectors. Such actors often lack the financial capacity to participate in policy making or are not represented by unions or umbrella organisations capable of voicing their needs. In Thailand, the informal sector is particularly significant due to its size and the unique skills challenges it presents (see Chapters 1 and 3).
Several existing efforts in Thailand could be leveraged to engage these groups more effectively. As outlined earlier in this section, Thailand’s legal framework requires government bodies to consult affected parties under certain conditions. However, while these laws and regulations facilitate communication with some hard-to-reach groups, they do not establish a formal framework specifically for consulting these stakeholders on skills policies or define mechanisms for doing so effectively.
In parallel, steps have been taken to expand stakeholder representation in certain contexts. For example, the Thai Chamber of Commerce has taken steps to broaden its membership to include SMEs (The Thai Chamber of Commerce, 2024[35]). In line with this approach, Thailand’s formal stakeholder engagement bodies for skills policies, described in Opportunity 2 and in Recommendation 5, could be expanded to strengthen representation from a wider range of hard-to-reach groups, including SMEs, CSOs, and others. For example, the Skills Development Promotion Committee includes important stakeholders such as the Thai Chamber of Commerce, the Industrial Federation of Thailand, the Thai Bankers Association, and the Travel Industry Council of Thailand, but does not include representatives from groups such as small businesses or from key sectors in the informal economy, where there are high rates of informal employment, such as agriculture. Expanding representation in such bodies could strengthen their capacity to develop policies that are responsive to the needs of all economic actors.
Leveraging local partnerships to engage hard-to-reach groups
Several promising initiatives in Thailand demonstrate how partnerships can facilitate engagement with hard-to-reach groups. For instance, public-private partnerships at the provincial level can help identify local skills needs and strengthen collaboration between employers and education and training providers. For example, Phetchaburi Province has established partnerships with important sectors such as tourism and hospitality, enabling employer representatives to communicate skills needs and collaborate on improving regional skills policies.
The Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA) Destination Marketing Forum 2024, held in Cha-Am, Phetchaburi, illustrates the benefits of such partnerships in addressing skills gaps. Organised in partnership with Phetchaburi Province, the Thailand Convention and Exhibition Bureau (TCEB), and the Designated Areas for Sustainable Tourism Administration (DASTA), and with support from the Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT), the event promoted community-based tourism as a driver of local employment and economic opportunity. Discussions at the forum highlighted how local tourism businesses can build capacity in areas such as sustainable tourism management, digital marketing, and service excellence to meet industry needs. The event also demonstrated how collaboration between national and provincial authorities, in co‑ordination with the private sector, can help shape training opportunities that align with local labour market demands, ensuring that skills development efforts effectively support workforce needs in tourism and hospitality. While Similar partnerships were more widespread in the 1980s, their sustainability now depends largely on the priorities and resources of individual provinces. Many provinces face challenges in sustaining these initiatives due to funding constraints, underscoring the need for sustained national support.
Expanding inclusive and innovative engagement mechanisms
Strengthening engagement with hard-to-reach groups requires adopting more inclusive and flexible approaches. A variety of consultation methods – such as workshops, information-sharing events, and both virtual and in-person discussions – can make participation more accessible. Diversifying engagement approaches can help accommodate the varying logistical needs and preferences of different actors, particularly those in the informal economy. For example, Korea has successfully implemented Civic Participatory Service Design Teams, where citizens, civil servants, and experts collaborate to design new public policies or services (see Box 4.7). This approach enables participation from a wide range of stakeholders, including those without formal organisational representation.
Digital tools can also offer significant potential for broadening engagement. Platforms like online surveys and consultations allow stakeholders to provide input more easily. For instance, Seoul, Korea’s “mVoting” app facilitates real-time citizen participation by enabling individuals to propose, comment, and vote on policy solutions. Such tools can enhance civic engagement and provide the government with direct feedback from a diverse array of stakeholders.
Provincial and local authorities are particularly well-placed to lead engagement efforts with communities, SMEs, and informal economy actors. Their in-depth knowledge of local dynamics enables these authorities to tailor strategies to meet community-specific needs. Establishing provincial skills councils or forums, as practiced in countries like Norway (see Opportunity 2), could provide structured platforms for local engagement. These councils could convene stakeholders to discuss local skills needs, share information, and collaborate on policy initiatives, fostering more responsive and co‑ordinated approaches to skills development.
Provincial skills development co‑ordinators, as proposed in Opportunity 2, could play an important role at the subnational level by leveraging relationships with community leaders and small enterprises. Acting as intermediaries, they can ensure the needs of these groups are effectively communicated to national policymakers. Their role could be important for building trust and fostering relationships, especially with actors in the informal economy who may require additional support to transition into the formal economy and access skilled labour, trainings, and other governmental services.
Building institutional support for underrepresented groups
To ensure that the voices of hard-to-reach groups are heard in policy making, Thailand could establish and strengthen representative advisory bodies focused on the needs of SMEs, minority communities, and informal sector workers. In the United States, Presidential Advisory Commissions provide tailored recommendations to policymakers on advancing educational and economic equity for historically underrepresented groups such as Black Americans (see Box 4.7). Thailand could adopt a similar approach by establishing and supporting advisory bodies that represent SMEs, minority communities, or actors in the informal economy. Government support – through dialogue sessions, funding, and training – could facilitate the formation and sustainability of such bodies. Ministries could also play an important role in helping raise awareness of these bodies and conducting outreach to ensure broad participation from diverse groups.
Supporting networks and umbrella organisations that unite stakeholders with shared policy goals can significantly amplify their collective voice in policy discussions. For example, the United Kingdom’s National Council for Voluntary Organisations (see Box 4.7) play a vital role in bringing together smaller or less visible groups, ensuring their concerns are considered in policy debates. By providing these organisations with sufficient resources and capacity-building support, the government can enhance their advocacy efforts, fostering more inclusive and representative policy making that reflects the diverse needs of Thailand’s population.
To further institutionalise engagement, advisory bodies and umbrella organisations representing hard-to-reach groups could be included in national engagement bodies. Their participation in formal discussions would help ensure that Thailand’s skills policies reflect the full diversity of its workforce, fostering a more inclusive and resilient labour market.
Korea
Civic participatory service design teams
The Korean government introduced civic participatory service design teams to actively involve citizens in shaping public policies and services. These teams consist of citizens, civil servants, and experts, who collaborate to design new policies or improve existing ones. Each team, comprising 8-15 members, works on specific policy tasks for three to four months, using methods like field studies and brainstorming to identify citizens’ needs more effectively. Unlike traditional approaches, this service design process closely examines customer experiences, behaviours, and environments to uncover deeper insights. The initiative was piloted in 2014 and has formed over 200 such teams in various fields due to their success.
The “mVoting” app in Seoul, Korea
Seoul's “mVoting” mobile application has enables citizens to propose policy solutions and participate in decision-making at any time. The app is accessible to anyone who can verify their identity with a Korean phone number or social media account, ensuring secure and fair participation by preventing duplicate votes. While this authentication method excludes those without mobile phones, a PC version of mVoting is available for online participation. The app also ensures that intermediate voting results remain hidden to prevent bias and offers social network sharing options that can be controlled to avoid conflicts over sensitive issues. These features promote broad participation while safeguarding citizens’ privacy and personal information.
United Kingdom
The National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) is an umbrella body for the voluntary and community sector in England. It provides support, resources, and a collective voice for its members, which include charities, social enterprises, and community groups. It advocates for the interests of the sector and helps shape policies that affect these organisations.
United States
In the United States, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Advancing Educational Equity, Excellence and Economic Opportunity for Black Americans advises the President on improving educational outcomes of Blank Americans. The Advisory Committee on Veterans Employment, Training, and Employer Outreach supports the U.S. Department of Labour in assessing the employment and training needs of veterans. The committee provides recommendations on training initiatives and employer outreach activities to promote veteran employment.
Source: OECD, (2021[10]), OECD Skills Strategy Implementation Guidance for Korea: Strengthening the Governance of Adult Learning, https://doi.org/10.1787/f19a4560-en, Seoul City (2020[36]), mVoting: Online Participation at the Municipal Level in Seoul, https://participedia.net/case/5554; NCVO, (NCVO, n.d.[37]), About NCVO, www.ncvo.org.uk/about-us/.
Strengthening engagement with hard-to-reach non-governmental stakeholders, such as small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), minority communities, civil society organisations (CSOs), and actors in the informal economy, is essential for enhancing the Governance of the skills system in Thailand. Such actors have important stake in skills policy discussions but may be under-represented in existing fora.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to strengthen engagement with hard-to-reach stakeholders:
6.1 Diversify engagement methods to make participation accessible to hard-to-reach groups. To effectively incorporate the perspectives of SMEs, minority communities, CSOs, and actors in the informal economy into skills policy, Thailand should diversify engagement methods when developing skills policy. This can include organising workshops, virtual consultations, and information-sharing events. Adopting innovative approaches, including virtual and in-person options, should can help accommodate logistical needs and preferences of diverse stakeholders, particularly those without formal organisational representation. For example, Korea's Civic Participatory Service Design Teams, as well as digital tools such as the “mVoting” app in Seoul can ensure that these stakeholders are active participants in policy design rather than passive consultees. By adopting similar practices, Thailand can ensure more inclusive and responsive policy making, capturing the perspectives of SMEs, minority communities, and informal workers.
6.2 Leverage provincial and local authorities to support localised engagement. Provincial and local authorities are uniquely positioned to engage effectively with local communities, SMEs, religious groups, and actors in the informal economy due to their understanding of local dynamics. To capitalise on this potential, Thailand can establish provincial skills councils or forums similar to those in Norway (see Opportunity 2). These councils would provide structured platforms for local engagement, enabling stakeholders to share information, discuss skills needs, and collaborate on tailored policy initiatives. Provincial skills development co‑ordinators, as proposed in Opportunity 2, could play a vital role by leveraging their relationships with community leaders and small enterprises to communicate local needs to national policymakers. Their trust-building efforts are particularly critical for engaging actors in the informal economy, who may require additional support to access training, transition into the formal economy, and benefit from government services.
6.3 Support and strengthen representative advisory bodies and umbrella organisations. Thailand should establish and strengthen advisory bodies representing hard-to-reach groups, ensuring their voices are integrated into national policies. Additionally, supporting networks and umbrella organisations that bring together representatives from smaller or less visible groups, can amplify their collective voice, ensuring their concerns are adequately represented in policy debates. By providing these organisations with resources and capacity-building support, the government can foster more inclusive and representative policy making. Additionally, including these advisory bodies and umbrella organisations in national engagement bodies and forums would ensure their perspectives are represented in high-level discussions.
Opportunity 4: Improving skills information systems
Enhancing the availability and effective use of skills information is essential for strengthening the governance of Thailand's skills system. High-quality data is crucial for accurately assessing current skills needs, anticipating future needs, formulating evidence-based policies, and assessing the impacts of these policies. For instance, combining data on employer skills needs across regions and industries with graduation statistics from education and training programmes can guide targeted investments in specific high-demand fields. Moreover, accessible, high-quality data empowers individuals and stakeholders to make informed decisions about education and employment. This could include information on potential labour market returns from specific training programmes, current labour and skills shortages, and the workforce implications of technological advancements (see Figure 4.8 for more details).
This Opportunity provides advice for developing a comprehensive data framework by standardising data collection processes across agencies, promoting data sharing, and integrating this information into a centralised platform. Additionally, investments should be made in online systems that guide career and education choices and to improve co‑ordination of in-person guidance services.
Two recommendations are proposed to improve skills information systems in Thailand: (1) Improving the collection and use of skills data to inform skills policy, and (2) Enhancing the co‑ordination and delivery of skills information and guidance services to improve accessibility and meet diverse user needs.
Recommendation 7: Improving the collection and use of skills data to inform skills policy
Reliable and comprehensive skills data is essential for designing effective policies that align education and workforce development with labour market needs. While Thailand collects skills-related data through multiple ministries and institutions, challenges remain in ensuring data coverage, co‑ordination, and usability. Strengthening data governance, improving integration across agencies, and leveraging international best practices can help Thailand develop a more responsive and data-driven skills policy framework.
Enhancing co‑ordination and addressing data gaps
Several ministries and institutions – including the Ministry of Education, the National Statistics Office, and the Thailand Professional Qualification Institute (TPQI) – collect and manage skills-related data. Table 4.4 provides an overview of the ministries and institutions responsible for skills-data collection and management.
Source: Ministry of Education, (2017[3]), Education in Thailand, www.bic.moe.go.th/images/stories/pdf/EDUCATION_IN_THAILAND_2017.pdf; OECD (2022[14]), Open and Connected Government Review of Thailand, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1593a0c-en.
Thailand also participates in several high-quality international tests and surveys, providing valuable information for policymakers (see Table 4.5). Participation in these tests and surveys allows Thailand to lean from international good practice in data collection as well as to assess the skills outcomes of its population with peers internationally.
Despite these efforts, gaps remain in key areas such as adult learning and labour market skills indicators, as outlined in the Overview of Thailand’s current governance arrangements. These gaps are further evidenced by data coverage rates published by the Open Data Watch (see Figure 4.4).
Data collected by different ministries is not always aligned with user needs. For instance, while the Ministry of Labour and LAOS gather industry-specific skills data, limited co‑ordination with the Ministry of Education results underutilised insights when setting education priorities (Office of the Prime Minister, 2023[7]). These challenges are further compounded by disparities in institutional data capacities, overly protective data management practices, and the fragmented responsibilities and overlapping roles among local, provincial, and central authorities. Together, these challenges highlight the need for stronger alignment between data collection processes and their application (OECD, 2022[14]).
Improving data integration and accessibility
Thailand’s data initiatives are often fragmented, leading to the collection of data in incompatible formats and and difficulties in cross-agency data sharing. Variation in data security practices and standards create further barriers to interoperability, with a lot of data being presented in non-machine-readable formats, limiting its usability for analysis and decision-making (OECD, 2022[14]). Addressing these inefficiencies requires investments in digital infrastructure, harmonised data collection standards, and improved co‑ordination among government entities.
Ensuring that skills data is effectively used for policy making also requires a workforce equipped with advanced data management, analysis, and technology skills. However, Thailand currently faces a shortage of such expertise, limiting the ability to fully harness the potential of an open and data-driven public sector (OECD, 2022[14]).
Leveraging existing initiatives to strengthen data governance
Thailand has already implemented several policies to overcome these challenges. The Digital Government Development Plan (2017-2022), for example, sets objectives aligned with developing integrated information systems, such as creating a more cohesive government, enhancing IT infrastructure, and citizen-centric services (DGA, 2021[18]). Additionally, the Data Governance Framework 1.0, developed in 2018, highlights the importance of effective data governance to support Thailand’s digital economy and society, addressing challenges like data duplication, quality issues, and security concerns. However, these initiatives often focus on data access and sharing after the data has been generated, overlooking the critical need for unified data generation processes (OECD, 2022[14]). Additionally, to enhance human capital for better data practices, Thailand has established the Thailand Digital Government Academy (TDGA), which provides training and promotes data standards across the public and private sectors. Thailand can build on these existing initiatives to strengthen its skills information system and better collect and use skills data to inform policy making.
To ensure comprehensive data coverage and use, it is essential to clearly identify the priorities and gaps within the skills data landscape. To this end, Thailand can conduct surveys, research, and consultations with relevant stakeholders. This assessment would require a comprehensive mapping of existing data sources to identify skills data gaps and overlapping efforts in data collection. Moreover, Thailand could conduct an assessment of user needs across various stakeholders, including policymakers, researchers, employers, workers, education and guidance providers, and others, as each of them have different needs (see Figure 4.8). For instance, individuals need information on job and skills demand as well as potential career and learning pathways, while researchers often require granular data to link variables such as education and skills with outcomes such as income, health, or social mobility. Canada’s Labour Market Information Council (LMIC) provides a strong example of how users and institutions responsible for collecting and generating skills data can successfully identify and address gaps in skills data (see Box 4.8).
Source: OECD, (2024[27]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System: Final Report, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1ecc914-en.
Thailand could use the insights gained from the analysis of data priorities and gaps to guide the development of a conceptual framework for skills data needs. This framework would define the key types of skills data required to support policy decisions, workforce planning, and skills data user needs. It would also establish principles for data integration, accessibility, and usability.
Building on this conceptual framework and the comprehensive mapping of existing skills data collection efforts outlined in the assessment above, Thailand could develop a skills data action plan to address identified gaps, minimise redundancies, and improve the overall coherence of its skills data ecosystem. This action plan should provide specific guidance on data collection methods, ensuring that datasets are compatible, interoperable, and align with common standards across institutions. By establishing clear protocols for data collection and management, the action plan can help integrate information across agencies and facilitate more efficient policy decision-making.
To further support data sharing and integration, Thailand could develop technical systems and platforms to facilitate seamless data exchange across ministries and agencies. Malaysia's Government Central Data Exchange (MyGDX), which integrates data across government agencies and facilitates secure and efficient data sharing, can serve as a model for Thailand in creating a centralised and integrated data infrastructure (see Box 4.8).
To support development of a comprehensive data framework and tools for improved data sharing, Thailand should fully leverage existing initiatives and align skills data collection efforts with the broader governmental data landscape. Ministries and agencies responsible for skills policy should work to integrate existing cross-governmental tools and services, such as data-sharing platforms and unified standards, which are not yet fully implemented across the government (OECD, 2022[14]). This includes applying existing guidelines, such as the Data Governance Framework 1.0, expanding training initiatives through institutions like the Thailand Digital Government Academy (TDGA) or other targeted programmes, and utilising existing data platforms and infrastructure. Active engagement in the development of these cross-governmental data initiatives is also critical to ensure that skills data needs and gaps are communicated to the relevant agencies and ministries responsible for government data.
Establishing a cross-ministerial forum for skills data governance
To support these efforts, Thailand should establish a cross-ministerial forum or working group dedicated to strengthening the governance of skills data. This body would co‑ordinate data collection initiatives, address fragmentation, and improve interoperability across agencies. It could also oversee the development of the conceptual framework for skills data needs, ensuring that key indicators align with the needs of various users and guiding the implementation of an action plan for data collection and integration. Moreover, the forum could engage broader user groups, including policymakers, local administrative organisations, researchers, and others, to identify and address diverse skills data needs.
The forum should include experts from all relevant ministries and agencies involved in skills data collection and use. These could include representatives from the Office of the Education Council (Ministry of Education), the Office of the Permanent Secretary (Ministry of Education), OVEC (Ministry of Education), the Thailand Professional Qualification Institute (Office of the Prime Minister), the Department of Skill Development (the Ministry of Labour), the Ministry of Social Development and Human Security, the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research, and Innovation, and the Ministry of Industry. Additionally, it should involve representatives from Local Administrative Organisations (LAOs) and other data-related agencies such as the National Statistics Office and the Digital Government Development Agency.
Establishing this group as part of a broader inter-ministerial collaboration body, as recommended in Opportunity 2, would ensure alignment with overarching skills policy objectives. Sweden’s Data Infrastructure Working Group, which operates under its Inter-agency Cooperation Structure for Skills and Lifelong Learning, provides a strong example of how collaboration among ministries can improve data governance and enhance policy responsiveness. Thailand could adapt this model to strengthen its own skills data infrastructure (see (Box 4.8).
By improving co‑ordination, addressing data gaps, and leveraging existing initiatives, Thailand can build a more integrated and effective skills information system. This will enable policymakers to make data-driven decisions that support workforce development, enhance labour market resilience, and ensure that Thailand’s skills policies are responsive to evolving economic needs.
Canada
Canada’s Labour Market Information Council (LMIC), a non-profit organisation established in 2017, plays a crucial role in enhancing the quality and accessibility of skills data across the country. Acting as a bridge between diverse stakeholders, the LMIC facilitates collaboration among federal, provincial, and territorial governments. Its Board of Directors includes senior officials from across Canada, and its activities are guided by input from a National Stakeholder Advisory Panel and a Labour Market Information Expert Panel.
The LMIC conducts ongoing consultations with a wide range of stakeholders, including research centres, educational institutions, and businesses, to identify data gaps and address challenges in the labour market information (LMI) system. These challenges include the need for more localised data, improved methodologies, and better alignment of data with user needs. Insights from these consultations inform the LMIC’s strategic goals, as detailed in its Strategic Plan 2021-2025.
Malaysia
Malaysia's Government Central Data Exchange (MyGDX) is a secure data-sharing platform designed to integrate information across government agencies and facilitate the delivery of end-to-end online services. By aggregating data from various sources, MyGDX streamlines access, reduces processing times, and minimises redundancies. Since its launch in 2018, the platform has enabled government agencies to share and merge frequently used data sets efficiently, thereby enhancing the performance of government service delivery.
To address privacy and data security concerns, MyGDX establishes clear data-sharing protocols, restricting access to authorised agencies. It aligns data collection standards across agencies to ensure compatibility, reduce inconsistencies, and improve data quality. Robust security frameworks further protect data during transmission and storage, safeguarding against unauthorised access and potential breaches. These measures support efficient and secure data sharing, enhancing the effectiveness of government service delivery.
Sweden
As part of the Inter-Agency Cooperation for Skills and Lifelong Learning (MSV), which brings together agencies with responsibilities for skills to co‑ordinate and collaborate on skills policy, Sweden has established several technical-level working groups (WG). One of these groups is the skills data infrastructure WG, which brings together various agencies to discuss ongoing skills data initiatives, identifying gaps, overlaps, and potential collaborative projects. It also works to engage in dialogue with other key governmental agencies who engage in data and digital government more broadly, as well as with non-governmental stakeholders to stay informed on needs and ongoing initiatives.
Source: LMIC (2023[38]) Perceptions of LMI: Feedback from the Canadian ecosystem, https://lmic-cimt.ca/perceptions-of-lmi-feedback-from-the-canadian-ecosystem/#toc2; LMIC (2024[39]) Navigating labour market information: Challenges faced by career development professionals, https://lmic-cimt.ca/navigating-labour-market-information-challenges-faced-by-career-development-professionals/; OECD, (2024[27]), Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish Skills System: Final Report, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1ecc914-en; MyDGX (2025[40]), About MyGDX, www.mygdx.gov.my/en/landing-page/about?theme=second-theme; MyGovernment, (2025[41]), Malaysian Governmental Central Data Exchange, www.malaysia.gov.my/portal/content/30083?utm_source=chatgpt.com; GovInsider, (2018[42]), Malaysia launches government-wide data sharing platform, https://govinsider.asia/intl-en/article/malaysia-launches-government-wide-data-sharing-platform?utm_source=chatgpt.com.
Improving the collection and use of skills data to inform skills policy should be a priority for Thailand. Developing a comprehensive skills data framework that meets the needs of policymakers from across the government as well as non-governmental actors is key to designing effective, evidence-based skills policies as well as to informing education, training and career choices. Achieving this will require collaborative efforts to identify skills data needs and implement technologies that facilitate data sharing and utilisation.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to improve the collection and use of skills data to inform skills policy:
7.1 Develop a comprehensive skills data framework, based on a robust assessment of user needs. To ensure that skills data effectively supports policy development and decision-making, Thailand should create a comprehensive skills data framework that fully encompasses all relevant indicators. This framework should be informed by a thorough assessment of the needs of various stakeholders, including policymakers, researchers, employers, and education providers. It should also build on a robust mapping of existing data sources across the skills system. Through this process, Thailand can identify key data gaps and priorities, ensuring that the framework captures all relevant indicators necessary for informed skills policy.
7.2 Align data collection standards and improve technical infrastructure, building on existing governmental data initiatives. Align data collection standards and strengthen engagement with existing governmental data initiatives. Improving the interoperability of data across different government ministries and agencies is crucial for effective skills policy. Thailand needs to address the current fragmentation in data initiatives by standardising data collection processes and ensuring that different datasets are compatible with each other. Ministries and agencies should actively engage with broader governmental data initiatives – such as training opportunities, and efforts to unify standards – to leverage existing expertise and align skills policy with the government’s broader data-driven focus. This includes for example, incorporating guidance from the Data Governance Framework 1.0, expanding training initiatives through Thailand Digital Government Academy (TDGA). Additionally, strengthening technical infrastructure is essential for seamless data sharing and utilisation. Thailand should develop secure integration platforms, enhance interoperability tools for cross-agency data exchange, and ensure stakeholders have the technical capacity to effectively use the data.
7.3 Strengthen co‑ordination in skills data collection by establishing a cross-ministerial forum. Establishing a dedicated cross-ministerial forum on skills data infrastructure is essential for enhancing co‑ordination and collaboration among various institutions. This forum would bring together experts from relevant ministries, local authorities, and data agencies to share information, identify gaps, and develop co‑ordinated strategies for improving skills data collection, sharing, and utilisation. Such a forum could be established as a working group under a broader inter-ministerial co‑ordination body on skills, such as the one recommended in Opportunity 2, and as exemplified by Sweden’s Data Working Group under the Inter-agency Cooperation Structure for Skills and Lifelong Learning. By fostering ongoing dialogue and collaboration, this forum can ensure that Thailand’s skills data infrastructure is robust, responsive, and aligned with the needs of all stakeholders.
Recommendation 8: Enhancing the co‑ordination and delivery of skills information and guidance services to improve accessibility and meet diverse user needs
While the collection of high-quality comprehensive data to inform policy making is essential, ensuring skills data is open and accessible to all relevant actors is equally important. These actors include workers, unemployed, learners, parents, employers, education and training providers, community organisations, and researchers. Informing these key actors about labour market needs, occupational prospects, and related education and training pathways can empower them to make choices that align with their personal needs and preferences as well as with the needs and prospects of the labour market.
Thailand has made significant progress in improving the availability and accessibility of government information through key legislative measures like the Official Information Act (1997) and the Royal Decree on Criteria and Procedures for Good Governance (2003), which mandate proactive online publication of government information and empower citizens to request information. Central platforms such as govchannel.go.th, the Open Government Data Centre, and the Government Information Centre have been developed to provide citizens with access to a broad range of data, open statistics, and government services. These efforts are further supported by initiatives like the Digital Government Development Plan (2017–2020) and the introduction of APIs for accessing data from key agencies (OECD, 2022[14]).
However, challenges persist in disseminating skills information to individuals and stakeholders. Many agencies maintain separate open data initiatives that are not integrated into central platforms. As a result, platforms like GovChannel act as search engines rather than unified repositories. Additionally, the implementation of open government laws is inconsistent across ministries and agencies, and the process for citizens to request information remains unclear and unevenly enforced. These gaps hinder transparency and limit the potential benefits of open government initiatives for citizens and stakeholders.
Skills information is made publicly accessible through various channels, including the Department of Employment’s open data portal. The portal offers detailed labour market information from survey and administrative sources. Additionally, the Department of Employment’s Smart Job Centre offers employment forecasts and wage information at the occupation level. The DSD’s online training portal provides information on available public training provided by the DSD. The STEMPlus Platform, overseen by the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, enhances the alignment of skills supply and demand by integrating data from educational institutions and industries, with a particular focus on STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields to address workforce needs (see Box 4.9).
However, Thailand could further strengthen its information systems to make them more comprehensive, relevant, and tailored to individual needs. Currently, only a limited number of online portals provide information on skills needs, labour market trends, and learning opportunities. Moreover, these efforts remain fragmented across sectors and industries, as well as across different types of services, such as education, training and employment. They also rely on diverse data sources, collected by different ministries, agencies, private sector actors. This fragmentation makes it difficult to create a cohesive overview or develop tools that effectively guide individuals toward personalised information and services. Moreover, Thailand should aim to provide more real-time labour market information that can help job matching, guide career and training choice, as well as policy-related decision making (The World Bank Group, 2021[43]).
Enhancing digital platforms for skills information
To strengthen the dissemination of skills information, Thailand could establish a dedicated online platform This platform would serve as a comprehensive resource, informing citizens, employers, education and training providers, and researchers about labour market needs, occupational prospects, and related education and training pathways. The platform should include results from Skills Assessment and Anticipation (SAA) exercises, as described in Chapter 3, as well as updated labour market indicators, prospects in various fields and occupations, and more.
While the new platform could build on existing models, like the STEMPlus Platform, it should adopt a broader, cross-sectoral approach, offering personalised features such as career quizzes, AI-driven chatbots, links to relevant services, and tailored recommendations to guide users through career options, training programmes, and labour market trends. Such an approach can help support individual, in making informed choices that align both with their personal circumstances and preferences and with labour market trends. The My Career Website in Flanders (see Box 4.9) provides a good practice example for such an initiative.
Improving co‑ordination of career guidance services
In addition to online resources, Thailand provides a variety of in-person career guidance services to support students and job seekers in accessing tailored information on career pathways, educational opportunities, and the skills required in the labour market. primarily delivered through educational institutions for students engaged in learning and training, as well as Provincial Labour Offices that cater to job seekers. Civil society organisations (CSOs) also play a critical role in guidance provision, particularly in remote areas where public services may be less accessible.
Despite these efforts, guidance systems in Thailand faces several challenges (UNICEF, 2022[20]). The reach and quality of these services vary significantly across regions and populations, creating disparities in access. Additionally, weak co‑ordination between government ministries and service providers, coupled with insufficient guidelines and support for guidance counsellors, hinders their ability to deliver accurate, up-to-date advice on available opportunities and current labour market needs. These issues are compounded by inadequate funding, which limits the capacity of guidance providers to deliver high-quality services equitably. While workshops and seminars have been organised to bring stakeholders together from across the skills and career guidance system (Ministry of Labour, 2022[44]), greater efforts are needed to align standards, enhance service quality, and ensure equitable access to relevant guidance services nationwide.
To address the disparities in access and quality of guidance services across regions and populations, Thailand should prioritise strengthening co‑ordination among key actors in the guidance system, including government ministries, Provincial Labour Offices, educational institutions, and civil society organisations. Establishing formal mechanisms for collaboration, such as a national task force or regular inter-agency forums, can help align efforts and ensure that all stakeholders work toward shared goals. Additionally, co‑ordination efforts at the subnational level, under the oversight of the provincial skills development co‑ordinators (see Opportunity 2), are essential to aligning goals, needs, and standards on the ground.
Expanding access to guidance services for hard-to-reach groups
Many guidance providers require additional support to effectively serve hard-to-reach groups, such as minority and rural communities and informal sector workers. Strengthening guidance services for these groups requires targeted investment in resources, training, and outreach strategies. Providing guidance providers with the necessary tools and up-to-date advice on career pathways, training opportunities, and labour market needs is essential. This includes increasing funding to ensure access to relevant materials and expanding training programmes to build the capacity of counsellors, particularly in underserved regions.
Ensuring equitable access to guidance services also requires focused attention on minority communities, rural areas, and informal sector workers. While decentralising guidance services can help ensure that they are tailored to local needs, central government oversight and resources are necessary to maintain service quality and consistency. Developing culturally sensitive guidelines and outreach strategies can further enhance engagement minority and rural communities. Additionally, expanding digital platforms can help bridge accessibility gaps, particularly in areas where in-person services are limited.
Thailand could draw lessons from Skills Development Scotland’s (SDS) all-ages guidance approach (see Box 4.9), which demonstrates how a well-coordinated, lifelong system of guidance can integrate digital and in-person services to meet diverse user needs, even in a decentralised context.
Flanders, Belgium
The Vlaamse Dienst voor Arbeidsbemiddeling en Beroepsopleiding (VDAB), Flanders’ public employment service, acts as a career planner for all adults in the region. Through its “My Career” (Mijn Loopbaan) website, VDAB offers resources such as job search tips, skills assessments, information on occupations with strong labour market prospects, and training opportunities via VDAB programmes and partners. The site features several interactive tools, including a job preference test, a tool that matches skills from users’ CVs to suitable jobs, and a career pathway test that suggests next steps in one's career. Additionally, the website guides users toward in-person support, such as applying for career guidance vouchers (loopbaancheques). These vouchers provide seven hours of subsidised career coaching every six years at designated career coaching centres, resulting in a personalised development plan.
STEMPlus in Thailand
STEMPlus is a platform designed for the development and planning of STEM human resources. It bridges the gap between workforce supply and demand by integrating and analysing data from both the education and industry sectors. This includes statistics on workforce production from educational institutions, skill requirements identified by key industries, and benefits and incentives related to STEM workforce development and employment. The platform serves three main target groups: enterprises (for talent recruitment and employee development), students and the general public (through skill assessment tools), and training centres (by providing accreditation for STEM training courses).
Scotland (United Kingdom)
Skills Development Scotland (SDS) serves as Scotland’s national skills body, offering career services for all ages, guiding individuals from school through to further education and employment. SDS provides careers information, advice, and guidance, connecting people with professionally qualified careers advisors. It operates local career centres across Scotland and manages the “My World of Work” website, a key resource for career information and advice. SDS also supports the continuous professional development of career practitioners, collects national data to monitor service quality, and collaborates with various agencies and stakeholders. Additionally, SDS uses a strong evidence base to enhance its guidance services and actively promotes employer involvement in education through national programmes and regional employer groups.
Source: OECD Skills Strategy Questionnaire Thailand; VDAB (2025[45]), Website VDAB, www.vdab.be/; Skills Development Scotland, (2025[46]), Website Skills Development Scotland, www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/.
Enhancing the co‑ordination and delivery of skills information and guidance services is important to improve accessibility and meet diverse user needs. Effectively using data to guide decisions about education, training, and careers is crucial for a thriving skills system. Providing accessible and actionable skills information empowers individuals to make informed choices that align with their goals and abilities, while also enabling policymakers and stakeholders to design evidence-based policies that respond to current and future labour market needs. This information can be delivered through in-person guidance, as well as online portals and digital services that connect users to relevant opportunities.
Thailand can undertake the following specific actions to provide guidance and accessible skills information to individuals and stakeholders:
8.1 Establish a comprehensive and integrated online platform for skills information. Thailand should develop a dedicated online platform to serve as a centralised resource for skills information, labour market trends, and educational and training pathways. Building on existing initiatives such as the STEMPlus Platform, the new platform should adopt a broader, cross-sectoral approach, incorporating personalised features like career quizzes, AI-driven chatbots, and tailored recommendations. It should also integrate real-time labour market data, results from Skills Assessment and Anticipation (SAA) exercises, and updated occupational forecasts. This platform can empower individuals and stakeholders to make informed decisions that align with personal preferences and labour market needs while addressing the current fragmentation in information systems.
8.2 Strengthen co‑ordination and collaboration across the guidance system. To improve the delivery of skills information and career guidance, Thailand must enhance co‑ordination among key actors, including government ministries, Provincial Labour Offices, educational institutions, and civil society organisations (CSOs). Establishing formal mechanisms, such as a national task force or inter-agency forums, can align efforts and create a unified framework for guidance services. At the subnational level, local skills managers should oversee co‑ordination to ensure alignment between local needs and national priorities. Greater collaboration will ensure that guidance services are consistent, comprehensive, and effectively linked to broader labour market strategies.
8.3 Enhance the capacity and inclusivity of in-person guidance services. Improving in-person guidance requires targeted investments in training and resources for guidance providers. Expanding professional development opportunities for counsellors and equipping them with up-to-date tools and materials will enhance their ability to provide accurate and relevant advice on career and training pathways. Ensuring equitable access to guidance services should be a priority, with tailored strategies to reach rural areas, disadvantaged populations, and minorities. Decentralisation can help adapt services to local needs, but central oversight is essential to maintain quality and standards. Digital platforms should complement in-person guidance by expanding access where physical services are limited.
References
[8] ASEAN (2021), “Human Resources Development Readiness in ASEAN: Thailand Country Report”, https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Thailand-HRD-Country-Report-Final-V9.pdf (accessed on 4 July 2024).
[16] Bertelsmann Stiftung (2022), BTI Transformation Index, https://bti-project.org/en/index/governance (accessed on 10 January 2024).
[9] Bertelsmann Stiftung (2022), Sustainable Governance Indicators (SGI), https://www.sgi-network.org/2022/Good_Governance/Executive_Capacity/Interministerial_Coordination (accessed on 10 January 2024).
[28] Civil Service College Singapore (2024), “Annual Report 2023-2024”, https://www.csc.gov.sg/files/CSC_Annual_Report_FY2023.pdf (accessed on 29 January 2025).
[29] Civil Service College, S. (2025), Civil Service College, Singapore, https://www.csc.gov.sg/ (accessed on 29 January 2025).
[30] Department of Local Administration (2024), Department of Local Administration: History, https://www.dla.go.th/en/index.jsp (accessed on 31 July 2024).
[5] Department of Local Administration (2024), Local Administration, https://www.dla.go.th/en/p1.jsp#:~:text=Local%20administrative%20organizations%20shall%20enhance%20people%27s%20life%20to,product%20and%20develop%20local-identity%20products%20to%20increase%20competitiveness. (accessed on 31 July 2024).
[18] DGA (2021), “The Digital Government Of Thailand B.E. 2563 – 2565 (revides)”, https://www.dga.or.th/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Presentation-DGA-TRANSLATED-INTO-ENG-Vfinal.pdf (accessed on 17 January 2024).
[13] Government of Thailand (2019), “The Act on Legislative Drafting and the Outcome of Law, B.E. 2562 (2019)”, https://www.lawreform.go.th/uploads/files/1679990577-pxqwu-qsydx.pdf (accessed on 27 February 2024).
[42] GovInsider (2018), “Malaysia launches government-wide data sharing platform”, https://govinsider.asia/intl-en/article/malaysia-launches-government-wide-data-sharing-platform?utm_source=chatgpt.com (accessed on 26 January 2025).
[34] Jobs and Skills Australia (2023), “Engagement and Outreach Strategy”, https://www.jobsandskills.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-08/jsa_engagement_and_outreach_strategy.pdf (accessed on 18 December 2024).
[39] LMIC (2024), Navigating labour market information: Challenges faced by career development professionals, https://lmic-cimt.ca/navigating-labour-market-information-challenges-faced-by-career-development-professionals/.
[38] LMIC (2023), Perceptions of LMI: Feedback from the Canadian ecosystem, https://lmic-cimt.ca/perceptions-of-lmi-feedback-from-the-canadian-ecosystem/#toc2.
[44] Ministry of Labour (2022), Labour Minister Assigns Advisor to Commence Workshop on Building a Career Guidance Network, https://www.mol.go.th/en/news/labour-minister-assigns-advisor-to-commence-workshop-on-building-a-career-guidance-network (accessed on 2 September 2024).
[26] Ministry of Labour (2014), “Skills Development Promotion Act”, https://www.mol.go.th/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/02/311en.pdf (accessed on 16 January 2024).
[3] MOE (2017), Education in Thailand, https://www.bic.moe.go.th/images/stories/pdf/EDUCATION_IN_THAILAND_2017.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2024).
[40] MyDGX (2025), About MyGDX, https://www.mygdx.gov.my/en/landing-page/about?theme=second-theme (accessed on 26 January 2025).
[41] MyGovernment (2025), Malaysian Government Central Data Exchange (MyGDX), https://www.malaysia.gov.my/portal/content/30083?utm_source=chatgpt.com (accessed on 26 January 2025).
[37] NCVO (n.d.), About NCVO, https://www.ncvo.org.uk/about-us/ (accessed on 18 December 2024).
[22] OECD (2024), Insights from Skills Strategies in the European Union: Lessons Learnt for Developing and Implementing Effective Skills Policies, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0bf9e78e-en.
[27] OECD (2024), “Strengthening the Governance of the Swedish SkillsReport on relevant international practices in the field of skills governance System:”, https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/about/programmes/dg-reform/sweden/Strengthening-the-governance-of-the-Swedish-skills-system-report-on-relevant-international-practices-in-the-field-of-skills-governance.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2024).
[14] OECD (2022), Open and Connected Government Review of Thailand, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e1593a0c-en.
[10] OECD (2021), OECD Skills Strategy Implementation Guidance for Korea: Strengthening the Governance of Adult Learning, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f19a4560-en.
[2] OECD (2020), Strengthening the Governance of Skills Systems: Lessons from Six OECD Countries, OECD Skills Studies, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/3a4bb6ea-en.
[19] OECD (2020), Thailand’s Education System and Skills Imbalances: Assessment and Policy Recommendations.
[1] OECD (2019), OECD Skills Strategy 2019: Skills to Shape a Better Future, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264313835-en.
[12] Office of the Council of State (2017), “Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand”, https://cdc.parliament.go.th/draftconstitution2/ewt_dl_link.php?nid=1460&filename=index (accessed on 27 February 2024).
[7] Office of the Prime Minister (2023), The Thirteenth National Economic and Socail Development Plan (2023-2027), Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council, Bangkok, https://www.nesdc.go.th/nesdb_en/ewt_dl_link.php?nid=4500 (accessed on 10 January 2024).
[33] Office of the Prime Minister (2020), “Public Participation Guide in Government Work”, https://www.gov.il/he/pages/public_sharing_guide (accessed on 1 September 2024).
[6] Office of the Prime Minister (2017), National Strategy 2018-2037 (Summary), National Strategy Secretariat Office Office of the National Economic and Social Development Board.
[11] Office of the Prime Minister (2005), “Regulations of the Office of the Prime Minister on Public Consultation, B.E. 2548 (2005)”, http://greenaccess.law.osaka-u.ac.jp/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Rule-of-the-Office-of-the-Prime-Minister-on-Public-Consultation.pdf (accessed on 26 February 2024).
[23] Office of the Prime Minister (1999), “National Education Act of B.E. 2542 (1999)”, https://asean.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/Thailand184.pdf (accessed on 23 January 2024).
[17] Open Data Watch (2022), Open Data Inventory, https://odin.opendatawatch.com/?aspxerrorpath=/Report/glanceReport (accessed on 17 January 2024).
[25] Sa TESDA, L. (2023), National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan (NTESDP) 2023-2028, https://www.tesdacalabarzon.com.ph/node/147#:~:text=The%20National%20Technical%20Education%20and%20Skills%20Development%20Plan,to%20provide%20Filipinos%20with%20smart%20and%20innovative%20skills. (accessed on 27 January 2025).
[36] Seoul Government (2020), “mVoting: Online Participation at the Municipal Level in Seoul”, https://participedia.net/case/5554 (accessed on 18 December 2024).
[46] Skills Development Scotland (2025), Website Skills Development Scotland, https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/ (accessed on 26 February 2023).
[24] TESDA (2025), National Technical Education and Skills Development Plan (NTESDP), https://www.tesda.gov.ph/About/TESDA/47 (accessed on 27 January 2025).
[15] Thailand Board of Investment (n.d.), Thailand 4.0 – a new value-based economy, https://www.boi.go.th/upload/content/Thailand,%20Taking%20off%20to%20new%20heights%20@%20belgium_5ab4e8042850e.pdf (accessed on 23 January 2024).
[4] Thailand Embassy (2024), Administrative Devisions, https://www.thailandembassy.org/administrative (accessed on 31 July 2024).
[31] The Governemnt of Thailand (2013), “Administrative Regulations of the Ministry of Education, 2003”, https://web.archive.org/web/20111120084427/http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/00126560.PDF (accessed on 29 January 2025).
[21] The Ministry of Higher Education, S. (2022), “Higher Education Plan for Thailand’s Manpower Production and Development (2021-2027)”, https://www.ops.go.th/th/aboutus/strategic-policy/item/8417-2566-2570 (accessed on 23 August 2024).
[32] The National Village and Urban Community Fund Office (2024), “The National Village and Urban Community Fund”, http://www.villagefund.or.th/ (accessed on 2 September 2024).
[35] The Thai Chamber of Commerce (2024), “Connect the Dots - Core Policies”, https://www.thaichamber.org/view/187/%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%82%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%9A%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%81- (accessed on 28 August 2024).
[43] The World Bank Group (2021), “Towards Social Protection 4.0: An Assessment of Thailand’s Socaila Protection and Labor Market Systems”, https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/637711622718440573/pdf/Towards-Social-Protection-4-0-An-Assessment-of-Thailand-s-Social-Protection-and-Labor-Market-Systems.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2024).
[20] UNICEF (2022), “Mapping of Career Guidance Serviced and Inteventions for Adolecants and Youth in Thailand”, https://www.unicef.org/thailand/media/9171/file/Mapping%20of%20career%20guidance%20services%20EN.pdf (accessed on 8 July 2024).
[45] VDAB (2025), Website VDAB, https://www.vdab.be/ (accessed on 26 February 2023).