‘Local Chef’s to Peace Project’ make peace between Thai-Buddhist, Muslim and Thai-Chinese in the South though local food.
In the midst of South Thailand insurgency, many departments are finding solutions to end the conflict including this group of youth from the South ; Phadlee Tohday, Arafa Buerangae, Iskanda Kuno, Tarmeesee Anansai, the winner from Youth Co:Lab Thailand 2019 competition. They are determined to change disagreements into peace among the turmoil in the South between Thai-buddhist, Muslim and Thai-Chinese using local food.
We want everyone to understand diversity and live peacefully
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : We see the problems of local people in the South. We know that they don’t understand each others in the deeper dimension of life such as cultures, society, food and living. Therefore, we came up with solution to bond their living together through our project called ‘Local Chef’s to Peace Project’
A food which creates peace
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : We picked out an issue about eating culture in the South. Because we found out that the differences of eating culture can make people in the area feel distant and might lead to bigger trouble like discrimination. So, if we can make one dish out of several religions, everyone can have a meal together worries-free.
Bond relationship and embrace diversity with “Ashure”
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : We chose “Ashure” because it’s a dessert that is mixed from several dishes and stirred thoroughly until the mixture is homogenous just like “Piakpoon” (black coconut sweet pudding). Traditionally, we set a day to make the dessert together in the village. On the day, everyone has to bring ingredients they have at home and help each other stir the pudding. So, we can say that the process harmonises everyone no matter what religion they are.
Food alone can’t stop all the conflicts, but at least, it can be a practice.
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : Food alone can’t stop all the conflicts, but at least, the food that we presented can be a bond that connects people from different areas, a practice to live together, to exchange experiences and most importantly to understand each other more.
People trusting each other is the dream we expect to become true.
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : We hope to see society that trusts one another,,, society that doesn’t have any kinds of discrimination. At last but not least we wish that everyone could live peacefully without suspicions and hatred.
The feeling to be part of the programme.
Local Chef’s to Peace Project : When the announcement came out that we are gonna be part of the programme, we felt super excited. Because we’re sure there’s something to look forward to. And after we attended the programme, we enjoyed it so much. We’ve met friends with the same interests and exchanged so many good experiences to each other.
And to accept the first price, it’s more than words to explain our feelings. We were never this happy in our life. First thing we know is that, we’ve broken the wall of expectations from people back at home, from our close one , and also from ourselves. Every team claps for us… it was the feeling of ultimate joy.
Lessons from “National Dialogue”: Live with Understandings and Stop Hate Speech
Youth Co:Lab has opened up new experiences for youths from across the country, who attended the event on 1-3 November 2019. The 10 teams had an opportunity to discuss initiatives on how youths can contribute to conflict prevention and how to live with understandings and diversity. They also had an opportunity to be part of a “National Dialogue,” to discuss the findings from the report on the situation of “Inter-faith Relationships in Thai Society” under the theme “Embracing Diversity.” In the past few years, we have witnessed a rise in tensions between people with diverse identities, cultures, and religions, particularly in an online world. Social media has played a significant part in amplifying these tensions and hatred, which sometimes spilled over into an offline space.
In 2019, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has collaborated with Princess Maha Chakri Sirindhorn Anthropology Centre (SAC) to assess the extent of online hate speeches by investigating the use of languages, communications, and the expression of opinions on social media. The goal is to foster a better understanding about the situation in order to come up with appropriate measures that can prevent the spread of hatred and violence in Thai society through embracing the culture of acceptance and respect for diversity.
The dialogue centered around a paradigm of hatred in Thai society. Representatives from several sectors participating in the dialogue, including government, private sector, civil society, academia, media, and youths.
During the dialogue, the findings from the study were presented to participants. Four key takeaways were drawn from the study of “Hate Speech in Social Media.”
01 Four levels of hate speech
This report used the methodology of text mining in online platforms, such as Facebook, in order to collect information that was then used to classify 4 types of hate speech, including:
Expressing intense dislike: Create stereotypes and allies against opposite beliefs
e.g., we’re not like them, they’re heretics! they’re deadwood!
Instigating hatred: Provoking statements that dehumanize others
e.g., You scumbag, Selfish, I’ll have your mouth stuffed with pork! You’re not human!
Provoking segregation: Express the need of eviction
e.g., Leave the country! We can’t live together! Just go ahead with the secession!
Fueling violence: Incite the physical violence to eliminate opposite sides
e.g., Kill them all! Shoot them! Why keep the scum of earth?
02 The situation of Hate Speech in the current online world is in the 2nd Stage.
The report found that the current online world in our country mostly uses the 2nd type of hate speech which stirs up hatred and encourages provoking statement that dehumanizes others. Now is the time for concerted efforts to move Thai society pass the worrying stage we are in.
It’s better… that we had time to talk before the situation gets worse and harder to solve.
It’s better …that we were aware of the problems in front of us before we won’t have a chance to discuss this.
It’s better that we knew that this wasn’t a small issue before people start to pick up guns and kill each other
It’s better that we started to fix this together.
03 Understanding Counter Speech
By participating in this event, we learned a new term called “Counter Speech” which means the informative argument against hate speech, that are used to contradict to the detrimental opinions. This counter speech persuades online listeners or readers to stop and reconsider the conventional belief they always have.
04 We need to collaborate to reduce “Hate Speech”
The most significant message in “the National Dialogue” was that we need collaboration from all sectors to reduce keyboard abuse and extreme concepts by exchanging ideas in a constructive manner and together creating a better society in the future.
The findings from the study of “Hate speech in Social Media” or “the Decline of Tolerance that Causes Hate Speech in Social Media” reminded us to stop and think before typing anything negative on social media.
What we learn from the process of creating sustainable human development through social innovation platform in the Deep South
When we talk about the topic of innovation, people usually think about some amazing things that only happen in a place like Silicon Valley. ‘Innovation,’ or ‘Social Innovation,’ in particular is often perceived as and associated only with cutting-edge technology, public services, and social entrepreneurship. However, there is much more to it. What does it actually mean? That depends. Innovation can be anything from the new ideas, solutions, tools, methods, approaches or the processes of doing things differently, which can eventually lead to a positive systemic change in our society. This, of course, includes the work in the conflict areas where peace is absent and violence is prevalent.
In the conflict areas, ‘innovation’ or ‘socio-economic development’ and ‘peace building’ are often seen as two separated topics. However, the study of the Basque Transformation by Agirre Lehendakaria Center for Social and Political Studies (ALC) led by Gorka Espiau, social innovation specialist, indicates that
• Conflict, violence, peace-building, human rights, health, education, and sustainable human developments are all interconnected in a complex way;
• Social innovation can improve the social and economic conditions in the conflict areas;
• Building social innovation platforms in conflict areas could help create a ‘sustainable peace’ – a definition that doesn’t mean just a situation without physical violence, but also includes human security in social, economic, and cultural dimensions.
Last week, UNDP had a chance to work with Gorka and his colleague, Iziar Moreno to introduce social innovation process and explore the possibility of creating social innovation platform for socio-economic transformation with groups of local authorities, civil societies, academia, and startups from the southern border provinces of Thailand – Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat. Our journey to the South begins with curiosity to see how social innovation platform can be created as a space to generate ideas/initiatives from the local communities where people face with complexities and extreme difficulties; and how this platform can help us to interconnect multiple development issues in the area.
What happened in the workshop?
1.Sharing of lessons learned from the Basque Country Transformation under extremely challenging situations
Gorka shared his experiences and lessons learned from the Basque case, where people suffered from a profound economic collapse, the highest unemployment rate in Southern Europe, and an image associated to violent conflict. Despite these challenges, today the Basque Country holds advanced positions in healthcare, education, and income per capita. Instead of violence, it becomes known as the city of development and this renowned success is what we called ‘the Basque Transformation.’ This sharing of the Basque case helps participants learn and contextualize.
To summarize the Basque case at a glance,
• The transformation in the Basque Country happened as a result of the people’s hopeful attitudes despite worst scenarios. The sense of urgency and the feeling that no one would help them made it possible for people to start creating something better for themselves. They believed that ‘Change is Possible.’ Their decisions were connected with common values and narratives, that is, instead of being remembered as a symbol of violence and conflict, they wanted the city to be remembered as a symbol of positive change.
• There were many actions that may seem unrelated, for examples, the decision to engage with Gugenheim Foundation and to invite Frank Gehry to build a museum in Bilbao and make it a symbol of transformation (resulted in what we later called the Bilbao Effect), the establishment of Mondragon, a corporation and federation of worker cooperatives, a movement of local chefs who brought in modern and French culinary skills to mix with their local ingredients and traditional cooking technique. Many restaurants are now awarded Michelin Star, and many other activities. However, looking closer, these actions all became the interconnected mechanism that helped accelerate the social and economic development, which eventually made Euskadi ta Askatasuna (ETA) decide to lay down their weapons, eventually leading to ‘sustainable peace.’
For more details of the Basque Transformation, stay tuned and check out our next article very soon!
2. Connecting the dot – what have we done?
A group exercise allowed participants to think about ‘new things’ that they have done or has already happened in their communities, from which resulted in positive changes. Participants were tasked to comprehensively define them in 5 categories.
1. Community actions e.g., a small-group forums in mosque, to discuss support for for orphans, led to a new idea on fund-raising. They agreed to raise funds through garbage selling instead of donations. The garbage were later sold for use as fertilizer and to raise money to help the orphans.
2. Small-medium scale entrepreneurship e.g., the establishment of Fiin Delivery, a food and document delivery service
3. Large scale public-private partnership e.g., public-private partnership on water management system
4. Public service e.g., an ambulance/emergency service in a remote village to take patient to a nearby hospital.
5. New regulation e.g., Community cremation rules which is an agreement that all community members are to help with the funeral arrangement when someone dies.
Allowing participants to think in these 5 levels helped them see a clearer picture of connections as well as slowly began to have a common vision on social innovation that it isn’t something out of reach but is something that may have already be done in the area.
“It is about how we interconnect things that are happening in the area, and that could be hidden due to violence and conflict, and how we create alternatives.”
3. Learn to ‘Listen’
To create systemic change, the first and foremost important process is ‘listening’.
We must ‘listen’ to the untold stories, to things that sometimes may not be said out loud in order to find the reasons behind people’s actions, attitudes and behaviors, as well as their beliefs and values in life to see the narratives and how the stories are making sense collectively (collective sensemaking)
Most importantly, we must find out if people believe that ‘change is possible or not’ as the belief can directly affect the development. For instance, in some communities, despite a lot of projects, budget or government support, young people still want to leave their hometown to find jobs somewhere else because they are taught by their parents that to be successful is to be able to work in the capital city. In contrast, in the place where people think that change is possible, they might open small businesses in their community to tackle unemployment challenge.
This process allowed participants to learn the importance of deep listening to identify the challenges and opportunities and see the connection between stories.
Social innovation builds co-creation on human-centred design processes which help us overcome the traditional top-down approach. Participants together envisioned the future of the provinces they want to see as well as co-created and co-designed social innovation ideas and solution to prototype further.
Some interesting ideas and stories from the locals:
• Participants shared common perspective that agriculture, food and sustainable tourism are opportunities. They take pride in their unique cultural richness and natural resources. But, due to the negative representation of conflict and violence in the media, less people come to visit this area and tourism cannot be promoted. They also feel that they cannot fully utilize their resources efficiently. At the same time, the provinces also have many talented people and interesting events but these are not represented in the media as often as the negative ones.
• People see the opportunities to export both fresh and processed fruits, especially longkong and durian, to other provinces or neighbouring countries. In Narathiwat, local people mainly depend on rubber tapping. The authorities try to encourage people to grow other kinds of vegetable and fruits for additional sources of income. However, rubber tapping is seen as a way of life inherited from their ancestor. They still want to preserve the knowledge and local wisdom amidst unstable rubber price. The questions may lie in how to achieve the balance between maintaining identity and creating new economic opportunities – and that the solutions shall truly meet the needs of people in the community.
• Participants see the possibility of partnership and connection to other communities. They present tourist destinations in their provinces, which can easily be developed into a sustainable community-based tourism. The travel routes can also be interconnected between various districts and provinces.
• In some areas, extreme difficulties discouraged and make people lose hope in life. It is difficult to organize creative activities and many activists also stop their action on development issues. To solve the issue, participant suggested the idea of ‘PeaceLab,’ to use technology and media to support local people’s learning about human rights and sustainable peace.
What we learned from the process?
1.Listening and reflecting to create systemic change
The most important thing that happened this process is that we listened to people from ‘every sector.’
This workshop convened participants from different groups, including local authorities, community leaders, entrepreneurs, startups, academia and civil society organizations.
By staring with a simple question, “How would you describe Pattani/Yala/Narathiwat to people who have never heard of your provinces before?” We were able to listen to different stories and different narratives from people, though living in the same province, who have different backgrounds, experiences, interests, and professions. And in these differences we found an interesting connection; people actually feel that they are connected by taking pride in the diverse cultures and identities of the area, including Muslim, Buddhist, and Chinese. They felt that the charm of the Deep South is that, despite the diversity, they can share the rich resources and co-exist with each other as reflected during the dialogue “Religious affairs, we do separately – Social affairs, we act together”
After that, more intense questions were asked. “What do you think are the challenges in the area that people know exist but have never spoken out loud?” The discussion made us see a much broader and deeper narrative and helped us visualize the connections in social, economic, and cultural dimensions from upstream to downstream.
From the observation of the atmosphere during the dialogue, we found that by having a listening space for people to tell their stories, people are more engaged and truly feel they are part of process. Moreover, it helps them to see the connections of different narratives and to not rush to the conclusion on ‘what is the right thing to do.’ The two keys to this listening process, especially for facilitators, are 1) to be a glass half empty and 2) to not make any pre-judgement and conclusion before knowing the whole stories.
Another important process is the reflecting after listening, and the collective sensemaking by which people give meaning to their collective experiences, visualized through diagram mapping. The purpose of this step is not to find solution to the problem but allowing participants to reflect on the connection of their own stories. As facilitators, we didn’t really have to worry if our linked arrows between each post-its are going to be right or wrong because, even they are wrong it will be a tool to encourage participants to think deeper and correct them. This mapping is a joint process which all participants are responsible together and which makes sure that everyone’s stories are in the picture.
2. The transformation is stemmed from the common belief that “Change is Possible”
The listening process should not occur only once, but repeatedly, every time and in every stage of development process so that we could gain a deeper understanding of the narrative. We have to dig deep to find hidden messages in each story – whether people think that ‘change is possible or not.’
The question may sound simple, but to make sure that the answers we get come really from their hearts is not an easy task at all. Especially in the areas plagued by daily conflict and violence, people tend to undermine their belief in change, development, and living a positive life. Participants might answer ‘Yes, I think it is possible, but…’ followed by many other conditions. This shows that they do not really believe in the possibility of change
So, the further question is that if people don’t believe that change is possible, what can we do? Maybe shifting the vision to focus on a much smaller action for a tangible outcome (or even show that what they have already done is actually the change itself) could be a better starting point to show that it is possible to create change. So, the question ‘is change possible?’ is important in a way that it helps with designing and shaping process of development in a sustainable way.
To summarize, ‘Transformative Change’ can only happen when people believe that change is possible. This belief will eventually be the driving force for individuals, organizations, communities, and society.
3. A sustainable and systemic change must come from the local people themselves.
The intense workshop on listening, sensemaking, co-creation, and prototype allows us to see a new light of interconnected opportunities such as food and culture as previously mentioned. However, for the next step as facilitator, even though it is surely easier for us to lead the process as we know a lot about tools and familiar with the approach of social innovation, we may need to step back to open up a space for the local to come up with their own conclusions and interpretation, and find solutions that are most suitable for them. That way the interpretation and solution will represent the local needs and ways of life, and not being misrepresented by the outsiders.
The process of creating transformative change that is driven not by experts but by local people is much more challenging and complex. Of course, participants might not be able to connect the dots and grasp the essentials all together at once, but it is definitely a good beginning of creating a learning process for local people to get to know new tools and methods that can be used in a sustainable peace building process. We believe that this process will eventually lead us to sustainable developments in the southern border provinces of Thailand. At the heart of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it isn’t merely working to achieve the 17 Goals, but it is working with ‘Leaving No One Behind’ lens.
Making sure that everyone from every sector, including the most vulnerable persons, is engaged in the process may take more time and is more complex, nevertheless, it enables the paths towards sustainable development and peace building.
““Social innovation should bring people together to have common missions. As a local community, we need to understand problems that we are facing and connect them with new ideas.” ”
Most importantly, this workshop of building social innovation platforms in Pattani, Yala, Narathiwat would not be possible without the passionate participation from all participants.
I would like to take this opportunity to praise the representatives from all three provinces
• CHABA Startup Group
• Sri Yala MyHome
• Saiburi Looker
• HiGoat Company
• MAC Pattani
• MAC Yala
• MAC Narathiwat
• Hilal Ahmed Foundation
• CSO Council of Yala
• Nusantara Foundation
• Thanksin University
• Institute of Peace Studies, PSU
Nas Daily, an influencer who campaigns against social segregation
Many of us have known today’s famous vlogger and influencer Nas Daily from his short one-minute videos and the signature send-off tagline, “That’s one minute, see you tomorrow!” Nas Daily is Nuseir Yassi, a 26-year-old Palestinian-Israeli who decided to travel the world and make one video every day not only to document his journey, but also expose his viewers to new experiences around the world. In one of Yassi’s more outstanding videos, he opens with,
“I hope this video make you angry, because it makes me angry”
This episode of Nas Daily is titled “Segregation”. When we hear the word segregation, we would think about the separation of people on the basis of race, skin color, sex, religion, and other differences, leading to inequality, discrimination and intolerance. Even as societies have advanced and connected without borders, and people’s views are more open; racial discrimination still often manifests itself in schools, societies, and communities, on and offline. What follows is nevertheless conflict.
At the beginning of his video, Nuseir Yassin talks about his childhood as an Arab who didn’t have any Jewish friends. It wasn’t because he hated Jews, but because Jews and Arabs didn’t want to live around each other. In Israel where Yassin lived, segregation exists much like in many more countries around the world. There, Jews and Arabs would live in different neighborhoods. They wouldn’t go to the same school or associate with each other in any way.
He adds that this racial segregation is no one’s fault. It’s only natural for humans to gravitate towards those with the same culture. But self-segregation from the rest of society on the basis of faith or race, he notes, is dangerous. For instance, although London has rich racial diversity; Muslims, black people and white people live separately. The Muslims have their own neighborhood and they’re surrounded by their own culture. Society is, then, broken up into parts that don’t mix with one another. And when they don’t see or understand the others, it becomes easier to hate. This is why segregation is frightening.
However, there’s a solution. Yassin shares about Singapore, a country with a diverse population of Malays, Chinese and Indians. 81% of the people live in public housing which is required by the government to fulfill a racial quota: in every 100 apartments, there are 74 Chinese families, 13 Indian households and 13 Malaysian ones. No one race occupies 100% of public housing, and this creates a good model for racial integration. Jun Xiang, a representative from Singapore’s Housing and Development Board (HDB) who is featured in the video also added,
“We have encouraged social mixing so that people of different racial groups stay together and understand the lifestyle of each other,”
This kind of social mixing enables people of different races to meet and mingle: children play together in the playground and become friends as their parents say hello to each other in the elevator. If this integration policy worked in Singapore, it can be adopted by any country in the world. Because no matter where they are, governments should find a way to encourage people of different races to live together. Not only in the policy level that should be changed, but we should also teach our children and the next generations to understand cultural diversity, and accept and respect others’ differences so that we can live harmoniously as one big society and there can be no place left for segregation.
Undeniably, today’s world is covered with images of poverty, discrimination, inequality and injustice. They are the factors behind violent extremism whether at a community, national or global level. The timely important question is what does it take to prevent violent extremism? What tools or measures can stop violence-induced tragedies before they happen time and time again?
Preventing violent extremism is not averting violence with more violence. It’s about how to identify the problem as well as its root cause to collectively find a peaceful solution. The approach requires cooperation between the government, local authorities and citizens.
Although there hasn’t been a clear example of violent extremism in Thailand, the risks that can lead to it are in view. Here, the space for all people to share their opinion, dialogue and problems is quite limited. This includes various issues that still go unaddressed such as women’s limited social and political voice, the apparent gender inequality in Thai society, and inequitable access to opportunities for the excluded and underprivileged.
Getting informed or a better understanding of the issues is a good and essential first step. We had a chance to meet Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira Sombatpoonsiri, a lecturer of international relations at the Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat University, and talked to her about preventing violent extremism in Thailand.
(photo credit : GM Magazine, January 2017 issue)
What is PVE?
Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira: PVE or Preventing Violent Extremism is to avert violence that is the result of extreme ideologies. The violence is justified by a certain extreme ideology or thought, and targeted at someone or some group who the extremist sees as their “opposition”, or who they think “taints” their society. To prevent such violence, we need to look at the social structure and culture that shape the extremists. These people often live in social conflict, and when people face conflict on a daily basis, being in this loop of animosity, they would harbour grievance. It can be grievance over economic injustice, glaring class disparity, or religious and racial discrimination.
Some may feel that a certain policy doesn’t give them equal access to education. Others may feel similarly about other policies. There are varying reasons for the grievance. So, to create protection against extreme ideologies, we need to study and understand people’s grievances, seeing what drives them to the point of violent conflict.
PVE in the context of Thailand
Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira: The meaning of violent extremism we understand now derives from the experience of our neighboring countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, as well as many countries in the Middle East and the West, which may not represent the same experiences that Thai people have. From the dialogue in Thailand, the definition of violent extremism here is not quite set. Each group or sector has its own understanding of the term, depending on their experience and stance in different situations of conflict. For example, when we talk to the civil society, we’ll learn that the state is at the center of it, they’re the one inflicting violence on the people and therefore is the root cause of violence. Meanwhile, from the state’s point of view, violent extremism comes from a certain group of people who commit violence against another group of people who have a different identity from them. So for us, I think the definition of violent extremism should be based on the context of Thai society. That is, we understand the conditions of violent extremism by looking at the relevant dimensions – social, political, economic, etc – rather than look at who commits violence.
Work to prevent violent extremism
Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira: The UNDP’s work to prevent violent extremism in Thailand is divided into many units, but they can be grouped into two main areas, namely:
1. PVE in the conflict zones of Thailand’s three deep southern provinces: Various programs are set up to research the social and cultural conditions that enable or assist violent conflict. For example, a program that focuses on Thai-Muslim tolerance or a program that promotes dialogue between Buddhists and Muslims to develop good understanding between people of different faiths.
2. PVE in other areas in Thailand: research on the root causes of grievance in all regions – north, northeast, central and south – and what motivates violent extremist actions and how
UNDP also has a team of people that monitors hate speech in the country, identifying and analyzing open conversations and statements on social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook that discriminate against minority groups. Additionally, we collaborate with government agencies to support various violent extremism prevention initiatives.
Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira: There still isn’t that much awareness about preventing violent extremism among the general public. Because its concept originated elsewhere, that is, violence-stricken countries or societies. So now we’re working to raise more awareness and create a better public understanding of the issue.
That being said, there are a lot more to be done and challenges to tackle. We’re going to focus on building cooperation between different sectors – from the private sector, organizations to civil society – through a strategic management approach, research, or consultation with experts in various areas in order to come up with Thailand’s approach to preventing violent extremism.
– Asst. Prof. Dr. Janjira Sombatpoonsiri, Lecturer of International Relations, Faculty of Political Science, Thammasat University
– The United Nations and The World Bank, 2018, “Pathways for Peace: Inclusive Approach to Preventing Violent Conflict”. Executive Summary, Washington D.C. Bank. Licensed under CC BY 3.0.
There are many innovation platforms all over the world. What makes Thailand Social Innovation Platform unique is that we have created a Thai platform fully dedicated to the SDGs, where social innovators in Thailand can access a unique eco system of entrepreneurs, corporations, start-ups, universities, foundations, non-profits, investors, etc. This platform thus seeks to strengthen the social innovation ecosystem in Thailand in order to better be able to achieve the SDGs. Even though a lot of great work within the ﬁeld of social innovation in Thailand is already happening, the area lacks a central organizing entity that can successfully engage and unify the disparate social innovation initiatives taking place in the country.
This innovation platform guides you through innovative projects in Thailand, which address the SDGs. It furthermore presents how these projects are addressing the SDGs.
Aside from mapping cutting-edge innovation in Thailand, this platform aims to help businesses, entrepreneurs, governments, students, universities, investors and others to connect with new partners, projects and markets to foster more partnerships for the SDGs and a greener and fairer world by 2030.
The ultimate goal of the platform is to create a space for people and businesses in Thailand with an interest in social innovation to visit on a regular basis whether they are looking for inspiration, new partnerships, ideas for school projects, or something else.
We are constantly on the lookout for more outstanding social innovation projects in Thailand. Please help us out and submit your own or your favorite solutions here
What are The Sustainable Development Goals?
UNDP and TSIP’s Principles Of Innovation
What are The Sustainable Development Goals?
United Nations Development Programme
12th Floor, United Nations Building
Rajdamnern Nok Avenue, Bangkok 10200, Thailand