Thailand is sleepwalking into an AI crisis, a leading academic warns. As fierce battles rage over the TH-AI Passport scheme, rivals are training millions in AI while Thailand argues. With ASEAN’s weakest growth, it risks losing jobs, productivity and competitiveness.
Thailand risks falling further behind in the global AI race as a fierce dispute over the TH-AI Passport programme dominates public debate. Dr Noppadol Kannika warns that while regional competitors are rapidly building AI skills and productivity, Thailand remains focused on arguments over budgets, procurement and project design. The warning comes as the IMF identifies Thailand as ASEAN’s slowest-growing economy. At stake, he argues, is not merely an AI project but the country’s ability to train millions of workers, protect digital sovereignty and compete in an economy increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence.
Thailand risks falling behind in the artificial intelligence race if public debate remains focused on conflict rather than capability. That warning came from Assistant Professor Dr Noppadol Kannika, who says the country faces a narrowing window to prepare its workforce for a rapidly changing economy.
On June 7, Dr Noppadol published an article titled “The World Won’t Wait for Thailand, AI Won’t Wait for the People. If We Keep Arguing, Beware of Thais Falling Behind in the AI Era.”
The piece appeared as controversy intensified over the government’s TH-AI Passport programme, a project designed to expand AI skills among millions of citizens.
Academic warns Thailand risks missing AI opportunities as debate over TH-AI Passport intensifies nationwide
At the centre of the dispute is not the destination but the route. Supporters view the programme as an investment in national competitiveness. Critics have questioned procurement methods, spending levels and project design.
Yet Dr Noppadol argues that the wider debate has become disconnected from a more pressing concern. Thailand’s competitors are moving quickly while Thailand remains locked in an argument.
The academic framed the issue in stark terms. Imagine the region five years from now. Neighbouring countries have millions using AI daily.
Students rely on AI tools for learning. Businesses use AI to cut costs. Workers use it to improve productivity. Farmers apply it to operations and marketing. Online traders use it to expand sales. Thailand, meanwhile, struggles with adoption. If that happens, he asked, what opportunities will already have been lost?
Notably, the warning arrives as concerns mount over Thailand’s economic performance. Dr Noppadol pointed to recent International Monetary Fund findings showing Thailand recorded the weakest growth rate in ASEAN. Economic expansion is slowing while technological competition is accelerating. In his view, those trends cannot be separated.
Weakest ASEAN growth and rising AI competition raise fears over Thailand’s future competitiveness
Rather than treating AI as a technology issue alone, he argues it should be viewed as an economic issue. It is also a workforce issue. Beyond that, it is a competitiveness issue. Countries that prepare their populations first may secure lasting advantages. Countries that hesitate may find catching up increasingly difficult.
Despite fierce disagreements surrounding TH-AI Passport, Dr Noppadol believes there remains broad consensus on one point. Few people want Thailand left behind. Government ministers do not want that outcome.
Opposition politicians do not want that outcome. Academics, businesses and the wider public share the same concern. The dispute centres on execution, transparency and value rather than objectives.
In response to criticism, he said government agencies must answer public questions clearly. Large technology projects require scrutiny. Public spending requires scrutiny. Equally, citizens have the right to demand accountability. However, he warned that endless disputes over individual details may obscure the larger challenge facing the country.
Public scrutiny welcomed, but endless arguments risk obscuring Thailand’s larger AI challenge
Over recent days, debate has spread across social media, public forums and political circles. Supporters have defended the initiative vigorously. Opponents have challenged its assumptions.
Others have questioned its cost-effectiveness. According to Dr Noppadol, such disagreements are normal when governments pursue large-scale change. What concerns him is where the discussion is heading.
Instead of focusing on how Thailand can build AI capability, much attention has shifted elsewhere. Arguments increasingly centre on technical specifications, contractors and procurement procedures. Those questions matter. Yet he believes they are only part of the story. The larger issue is whether Thailand is preparing enough people for the next phase of economic competition.
As part of this argument, Dr Noppadol raised concerns about strategic opportunity. Countries across the region are investing heavily in digital skills. New training programmes are emerging. AI adoption continues expanding. Businesses are adapting their operations. Educational institutions are adjusting curricula. While those developments unfold, Thailand risks spending valuable time on political confrontation.
Regional rivals invest heavily in AI skills while Thailand remains consumed by political disputes
He was particularly critical of discussions dominated by social media conflict. If opinion leaders focus on attacking opponents, distorting facts or generating hostility, the country gains little. Meanwhile, competitors continue advancing. The result, he suggested, could be a widening capability gap.
Dr Noppadol approaches the subject from a strategic perspective. He studied Data Science and Methodology at the University of Michigan. Later, he studied strategy, security, strategic environment assessment and cybersecurity at Georgetown University in Washington. Those experiences shaped his view of technological competition.
One lesson stood out. Long-term advantages do not necessarily belong to countries with the most advanced technology. Instead, they often belong to countries that develop people capable of using technology effectively. Human capability remains the decisive factor.
Against that backdrop, the question of scale becomes crucial. Critics have repeatedly challenged the programme’s target of five million participants. Why, they ask, should five million people be involved?
Five million participants seen as essential to create nationwide change and critical mass effects
Dr Noppadol argues that the question itself may be too narrow. Public policy, he says, is ultimately about changing outcomes at scale. Thailand has roughly 55 to 60 million citizens aged 15 and above. Reaching only 50,000 people would affect a tiny share of society. Even 100,000 participants would represent less than 0.2% of the adult population.
Under those circumstances, he believes the nationwide impact would remain limited. Structural change requires larger numbers. Behavioural change requires larger numbers. Economic change requires larger numbers. Consequently, he sees five million participants as an attempt to reach the threshold where change begins spreading through society.
In support of that position, he cited the concept of critical mass. Social scientists use the term to describe the point where adoption accelerates and becomes self-sustaining. The idea is closely linked to the work of Everett M. Rogers, the American sociologist known for the Diffusion of Innovations Theory.
That theory examines how technologies move through populations. Early users play an important role. However, widespread adoption determines whether innovation reshapes society. According to Dr Noppadol, the same principle applies to artificial intelligence.
Mass adoption of technology transformed Thailand before and AI may follow the same path
To illustrate the point, he looked at previous technological shifts. Thailand was not transformed by the first internet users. Smartphones did not change society because a few thousand people bought them. Mobile banking did not become mainstream through limited adoption. PromptPay followed a similar path. QR code payments did as well. Change occurred when millions participated.
The same logic, he argues, applies to AI. Tens of thousands of users may generate isolated benefits. Millions of users can produce economy-wide effects. Productivity can increase. Costs can decline. Knowledge can spread more quickly. Businesses can adapt faster.
Importantly, the proposed participant pool spans multiple sectors. Farmers are included. Teachers are included. Students are included. Online merchants are included. Small business operators are included. Labourers, elderly citizens and people with disabilities are also included. That diversity matters because economic transformation rarely occurs within a single sector.
Separately, procurement has emerged as another flashpoint. Some critics have questioned why the government does not simply negotiate directly with leading international AI providers. Dr Noppadol addressed that issue through the framework of Thai law.
Procurement laws limit direct deals with foreign AI firms despite criticism from opponents
Government agencies operate under the Government Procurement and Supplies Management Act 2017. The legislation emphasises transparency, value for money, fair competition and accountability. As a result, agencies cannot simply choose preferred suppliers. Procurement processes must follow prescribed legal procedures.
Exceptions do exist. Those exceptions may involve a sole provider, urgent necessity or unique technical requirements. Outside those circumstances, however, procurement rules remain binding. Therefore, Dr Noppadol said statements from the Minister of Digital Economy and Society have a legal basis.
At the same time, he acknowledged that public questions remain legitimate. Citizens have every right to ask whether the selected model is appropriate. They also have the right to question costs and expected outcomes. Those concerns, he said, deserve detailed answers.
On another front, comparisons with Singapore have become common. Some critics argue Thailand should follow Singapore’s approach and negotiate directly with AI companies. Dr Noppadol said such comparisons require caution.
Singapore comparisons overlook legal differences and Thailand’s procurement framework and rules
Singapore operates within a different legal environment. Its procurement framework differs. Its administrative structure differs. Therefore, direct comparisons may oversimplify the issue.
The objective, he argued, is not imitation. The objective is to obtain maximum value within Thailand’s own legal framework. Citizens ultimately want transparency, accountability and measurable results from public spending.
Questions have also emerged regarding the role of the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society. Some critics have asked whether a project like TH-AI Passport falls within its mandate. Dr Noppadol’s answer was straightforward.
The ministry is responsible for developing the digital economy. It promotes digital technology adoption. It develops digital skills. It strengthens competitiveness. It oversees digital infrastructure and cybersecurity. Consequently, a programme designed to expand AI capability sits squarely within those responsibilities.
Still, he acknowledged that scrutiny should continue. Budgets deserve examination. Contractors deserve examination. Technical systems deserve examination. Yet he believes society should not stop there.
Beyond budgets and contractors lies a bigger question about Thailand’s AI readiness and future
More importantly, he says Thailand must address a broader strategic question. Is the country preparing its people for the AI era? That issue, in his assessment, deserves far greater attention.
Alongside workforce development, he highlighted another concern: digital sovereignty. Data is increasingly becoming a strategic asset. Knowledge is undoubtedly becoming a strategic asset. User behaviour and decision-making patterns are becoming strategic assets as well. As digital technologies expand, those assets gain importance.
Accordingly, the debate extends beyond access to AI tools. It also concerns control, regulation and national interests. Thailand must consider how citizens’ data will be protected. It must consider how technology will be governed. It must consider how national interests will be protected in a world increasingly shaped by artificial intelligence.
Dr Noppadol noted that digital services rarely come without exchange. Data often forms part of the transaction. Usage patterns can carry value. User interests can carry value. For that reason, cybersecurity and data protection deserve a prominent place in the discussion.
Data protection, digital sovereignty and cybersecurity emerge as key concerns in AI expansion
Looking ahead, he argued that government communication must improve if the programme proceeds. Authorities should explain expected economic gains. They should explain productivity improvements.
They should also explain how citizens’ data will be protected. Likewise, they should explain how cybersecurity risks will be managed and how national interests will be safeguarded.
Abhisit Vejjajiva calls for scrutiny of flagship AI project being pursued by Digital Economy ministry
Top media expert warns government that Thailand is losing its sovereignty in the digital world of news
Stronger ties, AI investment and access to Europe for Thai travellers pushed as Anutin lands in France
Ultimately, the controversy surrounding TH-AI Passport now reaches far beyond one government project. It touches economic growth, workforce readiness, digital competitiveness and national strategy.
Meanwhile, AI adoption continues accelerating across the globe. Governments are investing. Companies are investing. Educational systems are adapting. Labour markets are evolving.
Against that backdrop, Dr Noppadol’s warning is clear. The issue is not whether Thais can access AI. In short, he sees the issue as whether enough Thais can use it effectively. The issue is whether skills can be built at scale. Most importantly, the issue is whether Thailand can keep pace while the world moves ahead.
Join the Thai News forum, follow Thai Examiner on Facebook here
Receive all our stories as they come out on Telegram here
Follow Thai Examiner here
Further reading:
Ministry fails to halt ฿25.4 billion payment order to Hong Kong based firm linked to 1990 contract
Microsoft accepts charges of corrupt payments in Thailand as it makes a deal with US investigators
Provincial agency boss arrested in Mukdahan after trying to extort ฿2 million from a businessman
Parliamentary vote on constitutional reform is questioned, court says referendum may be needed
Bangkok MP on Phuket mission to investigate controversial local condo project before the courts
Drinks giant Thai Beverage to resume expansion with Singapore IPO for Asean regional beer operation
