BLOG POST

by Yon Jung Choi, GIFTED Faculty, Chulalongkorn School of Integrated Innovation

Throughout my academic career, my research has been influenced by the growing involvement of businesses in social and environmental matters. Working and studying in South Korea and the US, I have observed in both countries the move towards of social activism by supposedly “self-interested” businesses. Whether their intentions are genuine or not is still in question, but it is safe to say that more and more companies have participated in social and environmental activities in developed countries. There are several factors known to explain this trend: growing awareness of, and criticism on, business malpractices from civil societies; dissemination of social norms such as human rights, environmentalism, and sustainability; increasing public pressure on increased and improved governance on social matters; and the realization of business opportunities to meet the needs of more socially conscious consumers (e.g., strategic CSR). 

Nonetheless, this growing social activism of businesses is largely regarded as “Western phenomenon” that only countries with more advanced economies and more sophisticated civil society can afford – like a “luxury” for the privileged. In a similar vein, “social entrepreneurship” and “social enterprise” are frequently used buzzwords in Western society today as new ways of making social changes in a form of business. Having recently relocated to Thailand (December 2021), I have been curious if the business environment in Thailand is significantly different compared to more developed nations. Specifically, are Thai businesses impacted by the global trend of growing social activism of businesses; and does social entrepreneurship/social enterprises exist in Thailand? An immediate answer is, yes, the language exists. These terms are used by various types of organizations in Thailand. However, do they mean the same things? Are these claimed-to-being social enterprises/ social entrepreneurs really the ones abiding by the mainstream definitions (Table 1 below)? 

Serving social missions and creating social values are the core of their concepts in both social entrepreneurship and social enterprise. In other words, what differentiates social entrepreneurs and social enterprises from traditional businesses is, while providing products and services in the market – just as other businesses, they focus on achieving both economic (profits) and social goals as core organizational missions. The degree of impact varies among different entities, but various social experiments under these concepts have been vibrantly conducted in the past decade due to regulatory, cultural, and social support in many Western societies. 

So, are the so-called social enterprises in Thailand defined in the same way? Do they have similar missions and operate in similar ways? Can they thrive here? Are they supported by regulations, by systems, by the business community, and by society? In seeking answers to these questions, I have met and casually interviewed several people who have more local knowledge and experiences on the topic. Here I am sharing some of my initial findings learned from conversations I had with them during my short stay so far in Bangkok, Thailand which I would call my first impressions.  

When I introduce myself to people from academia and business in Thailand adding that I am interested in researching on the topic of social enterprises, the question I often get is “why are you in Thailand?”, seemingly implying that I am in the wrong place. Some conclusively mentioned that there is no such a thing, arguing that “a social enterprise here is not what you know. It is just a charity organization which wants to take advantage of governmental subsidies and support.” I discovered that there is great skepticism about social enterprises including their missions, their operations, and their impact while most of the public do not actually know much about it. 

Another impression I have is that it seems that what is “social” is interpreted differently by different groups, and there is a great discrepancy between them. Even in Western societies, doing “social” activities by a business has a broad meaning, which includes donation, charity events, serving local communities, serving employees better and more fairly, saving the environment, and contributing to sustainable development. Over time, however, businesses have identified some common areas of social/environmental practices (so called best practices) businesses can take on. 

However, based on what I heard from people here, there is a lack of understanding of, and consensus on what is social among different groups of businesses. For large Thai businesses, social activities are to achieve their relational validity (like getting a membership in royal clubs) by serving higher missions (focusing on terms like circular economy, sustainable development, creating shared values). Smaller businesses that define themselves as social enterprises seem to have a narrower definition of what is social, focusing on serving specifically defined target groups. It seems to me those social activities of big businesses and those of small businesses are almost mutually exclusive. I believe that there should be common ground in the middle that connects these two worlds. 

One of interviewees criticized that these small businesses do not have broader visions, educational backgrounds, and awareness needed to make meaningful changes. I do not want to think that their efforts are meaningless, but the impact could be limited because they do not grab opportunities coming from better knowledge and awareness. He mentioned that there are money and resources available in social activities mainly from big businesses who want to become part of global business leaders, but no one knows how to make use of it. That means there are plenty of opportunities. It seems to me that education and training to build expertise in these fields is one of the most urgently needed tasks in Thailand to make these opportunities not to be wasteful. In that regard, I truly believe that schools like the Chulalongkorn School of Integrated Innovation (SCII) would play a critical role in nurturing social innovators, social entrepreneurs, and experts in the field. 

Another interviewee who has been an activist in the field for a long time told me some bright sides saying that the “movement” has been slow but happening. She still sees “light” in the tunnel evidenced in several inspiring cases she shared that had happened in Thailand in recent years. She said she is hopeful by looking at the young generations who are different from the previous. I also believe that changes are on the way in Thailand too. More and more people in business and society started to realize that some changes should be made in the ways we do businesses. 

People I met told me that the last several years have been very tough for the Thai majority due to the pandemic and the economic downturn. Many young people who were hopeful for the nation’s future have been losing their hopes in the struggles of everyday survival. The social movement of businesses had to be mostly on hold as well. The country with only three seasons of hot, hotter, and the hottest has suffered from an unexpected severe Winter. However, Spring is coming around the corner. There are signs of the end of the pandemic. Hope always wins despair. I believe there will be a more vibrant movement of social entrepreneurship and social enterprises in Thailand as things get better. And the New Normal are the ones who lead these changes. I will continue my research on the topic in this region. 

In summary of my first impressions, Thailand is at a very initial stage of embracing the global social movement of businesses. There is generally a lack of understanding and awareness on how to go about with this movement. Big businesses started to recognize changing norms in the global business society and started to offer some capital and resources on specific topics to bandwagon this movement, but there is great lack of expertise and know-how. The impact of Thai social enterprises is quite limited at the moment. Public awareness is very low, and there is a significant shortage of systematic support for social enterprises/ social entrepreneurs to thrive. 

My impressions and arguments here are personal, possibly biased, and not scholarly proven. Nonetheless, I have no intention to denounce the efforts Thai social enterprises have made, but to give some constructive criticism based on my genuine affection to the country. I look forward to observing more of what will happen in this field in Thailand in upcoming years. As an educator, I also hope to contribute to training socially conscious business leaders who will make the country better. 

ALSO READ: Our Previous Blogpost: TAAS – The Future of Transportation