Phitsanulok’s Readiness for Development along the Luang Prabang–Indochina–Mawlamyine Economic Corridor (LIMEC)
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background and Objectives: The Luang Prabang–Indochina–Mawlamyine Economic Corridor (LIMEC) seeks to enhance regional integration across Laos, Thailand, and Myanmar through multidimensional collaboration in economic, political, and sociocultural domains. Established in 2015, LIMEC has prioritized trade, investment, tourism, education, healthcare, and logistics, supported by cooperation between governments, private enterprises, and cross-border networks. Phitsanulok Province, located in lower northern Thailand, is increasingly recognized as a pivotal hub within LIMEC and the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS). Its location at the intersection of key regional corridors provides strategic advantages for connectivity, logistics, and trade. However, unlike other cooperative frameworks such as Ayeyawady-Chao Phraya-Mekong Economic Cooperation Strategy (ACMECS) or Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC), LIMEC lacks an institutionalized governance structure or systematic mechanisms for coordination. This absence of institutional frameworks hinders policy alignment between national and local levels, constrains investment flows, and restricts long-term collaboration. Accordingly, this study evaluates Phitsanulok’s readiness to align with LIMEC’s strategies by employing border studies theory, focusing on governance practices, interdependence mechanisms, and cross-border initiatives to foster sustainable regional development.
Methodology: A qualitative design was adopted, combining documentary analysis with in-depth, semi-structured interviews involving provincial administrators, policy planners, and development officials in Phitsanulok. Content analysis was used to interpret data, examining three critical areas: governance and institutional capacity, regional interdependence, and the province’s strategic fit within LIMEC’s developmental framework.
Main Results: The findings highlight three dimensions of readiness. In the political dimension, although governance structures exist, interviewees unanimously identified persistent challenges: policy fragmentation, inconsistency, and discontinuity. Economically, Phitsanulok’s location and infrastructure offer robust advantages for logistics, trade, and tourism. Nevertheless, the modernization of logistics systems, fiscal continuity, and investment coordination remain incomplete. Socio-culturally, the province possesses rich cultural assets and entrepreneurial potential that could support tourism and creative industries; however, these resources are not yet systematically integrated into sustainable development plans. Collectively, these dimensions reveal both substantial opportunities and enduring constraints that must be addressed through targeted reforms and institutional innovation.
Discussions: Phitsanulok’s role within LIMEC rests on three interconnected pillars. First, cross-border collaboration and infrastructure development are crucial for enhancing trade flows and achieving integration. Second, consistent policies and long-term strategic leadership are essential for sustaining growth, especially in addressing implementation gaps across political transitions. Third, mobilizing local cultural heritage through tourism promotion and product innovation can significantly expand economic opportunities for communities. Yet, challenges persist due to limited funding, institutional fragmentation, and policy discontinuity. These highlight the necessity of coordinated action among central government, provincial authorities, private enterprises, and local communities to ensure synergy in development.
Conclusions: The study determines that Phitsanulok is strategically positioned to emerge as a regional hub within LIMEC. Realizing this promise necessitates enhanced governance, more precise budget allocation, and sustained policy coherence. The enhancement of political, economic, and cultural capabilities relies on multi-tiered governance that integrates the state, market, and community. Through entrenched autonomy, robust institutions, and transnational collaboration, Phitsanulok may advance towards more inclusive, sustainable, and resilient regional development.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
References
Baumüller, H. (2010, June). Aligning climate and development agendas in the Mekong region: Options for regional collaboration between Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos (Energy, Environment and Development Programme Paper No. 2010/03). Chatham House.
Berzi, M. (2017). The cross-border reterritorialization concept revisited: The territorialist approach applied to the case of Cerdanya on the French-Spanish border. European Planning Studies, 25(9), 1575–1596. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1321622 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2017.1321622
Buadaeng, K. (2012). Monks and Buddhist Communities across Thai-Burma Border: Religious Space and Sovereignty. (In Thai). Journal of Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University, 24(1-2), 287–314.
Capannelli, G., Lee, J.-W., & Petri, P. A. (2009). Developing indicators for regional economic integration and cooperation. Singapore Economic Review. Forthcoming. Asian Development Bank Regional Economic Integration Working Paper, no. 33.
Chalayonnavin, A. (2017). The role of popular wisdom for community development after disaster in order to ASEAN Community Preparedness: Mae Sai, Chiang Rai Province. National Defence Studies Institute Journal, 8(3), 30–45.
García-Álvarez, J., & Trillo-Santamaría, J. M. (2013). Between regional spaces and spaces of regionalism: Cross-border region building in the Spanish ‘state of the autonomies.’ Regional Studies, 47(1), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.552495 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2011.552495
Hongsuwan, P. (2016). Thainess in contemporary traditions of Northeastern Thailand: State, capital, power, and ethnic groups. (In Thai). Journal of Man and Society, 1(2), 8–41.
Jansombat, S. (2020). Research report: A study to elevate the Luang Prabang–Indochina–Mawlamyine Economic Corridor (LIMEC) to align with the Ayeyawady–Chao Phraya–Mekong Economic Cooperation Strategy (ACMECS) framework. Naresuan University.
Kochanun, R. (2024). Document for consideration of the motion: Proposal for the house of representatives to establish a special commission to study the development of the northern economic corridor. The Secretariat of the House of Representatives.
Leake, E., & Haines, D. (2017). Lines of (in)convenience: Sovereignty and border-making in postcolonial South Asia, 1947–1965. The Journal of Asian Studies, 76(4), 963–985. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911817000808 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021911817000808
Motana, K. (2016). Thailand’s transport infrastructure development strategy 2015-2022. (In Thai). Ratthapirak Journal, 58(1), 91–104.
Paasi, A. (2022). Examining the persistence of bounded spaces: Remarks on regions, territories, and the practices of bordering. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 104(1), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.2021.2023320 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/04353684.2021.2023320
Panihakarn, B., Pongcharoen, P., & Tungtakanpoung, D. (2015). A policy synthesis of land transportation logistics development on Lower Northern Thailand through Laos - Vietnam – Guangxi, China (Research Report). (In Thai). Thailand Science Research and Innovation.
Phitsanulok Provincial Cultural Office. (2022). The city of three dharmas. Phitsanulok Provincial Cultural Office.
Phitsanulok Provincial Industry Office. (2021). Five-Year provincial industrial development action plan (2023–2027). Phitsanulok Provincial Industry Office.
Phitsanulok Provincial Office. (2023). Phitsanulok provincial development plan (2023–2027). Phitsanulok Provincial Office.
Phitsanulok Provincial Statistics Committee. (2023). Phitsanulok provincial statistical development plan 2023–2027. Phitsanulok Provincial Statistics Committee.
Pounpunwong, W. (2025). External and internal driving factors in development of phitsanulok province along the LIMEC: The role of the government and the dynamics of globalization. Political Science and Public Administration Journal, 16(Suppl. 1), 25–56.
Renliang, L., Chouykerd, P., Yu, C., Tingting, G., & Sriruang, J. (2024). Cross-border economy in LMC region: Poverty alleviation and common prosperity. Journal of Social Development and Management Strategy, 26(1), 97–115.
Riain, S. Ó. (2000). States and markets in an era of globalization. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 187–213. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.187 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.187
Sangkhamanee, J. (2012). Trading at Crossroad and the De/Re-territorialization of Borders: An anthropological review. (In Thai). Journal of Social Sciences, Chiang Mai University, 24(1-2), 17–61.
Santhasombat, Y. (2008). Power, space, and ethnic identity: The political culture of nation-states in Thai society. (In Thai). Sirindhorn Anthropology Center (Public Organization).
Sohaimi, N. S., Ishak, N. S., & Abdullah, F. (2024). Special border economic zones between Malaysia and Thailand. Malaysian Management Journal, 28, 119–144.https://doi.org/10.32890/mmj2024.28.5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.32890/mmj2024.28.5
Sparke, M., Sidaway, J. D., Bunnell, T., & Grundy‐Warr, C. (2004). Triangulating the borderless world: Geographies of power in the Indonesia–Malaysia–Singapore growth triangle. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 29(4), 485-498. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00143.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00143.x
Sukhotho, W. (2018). Dissemination and expansion of sustainable logistics research to target groups along the Luang Prabang-Indochina-Mawlamyine Economic Corridor: Research project: Final report. (In Thai). Office of the National Science, Research and Innovation Promotion Board.
Thippimol, O., & Saijampa, T. (2011). Boundaries of Siam/Thailand-Malaysia-Burma-Laos-Cambodia. (In Thai). Foundation for the Social Sciences and Humanities Textbook Project.
Wachirawongsakorn, P. (2016). Health risk assessment via consumption of Pb and Cd contaminated vegetables collected from fresh markets in the lower north of Thailand. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal, 22(3), 611–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2015.1095631 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10807039.2015.1095631
Wade, R. H. (2018). The developmental state: Dead or alive? Development and Change, 49(2), 518–546. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12381 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12381
Walker, A. (1999). The legend of the golden boat: Regulation, trade, and traders in the borderlands of Laos, Thailand, China, and Burma. University of Hawaii Press.
Yeung, H. W.-C. (2004). Capital, state, and space: Contesting the borderless world. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 23(3), 291–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1998.00291.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1998.00291.x
