Unpacking Pro-coal Narratives in Thailand: The Case of Mae Moh Mine Museum

Main Article Content

Yeji Yoo

Abstract

Coal is still the king of energy sources in Southeast Asia. However, there are only a limited number of studies concerning the discursive aspect of strategic efforts by the region’s coal sector to maintain its status quo amid the climate crisis. This article aims to unpack exhibition narratives (texts, images, videos, and spatial arrangements) and examine which discourses are highlighted while others are seen to be irrelevant, and are thus hidden or excluded. The study uses the case of the Mae Moh Mine Museum, which is located in the Mae Moh Lignite Mine and Power Plant in Lampang province, northern Thailand. By employing spatial discourse analysis, this article demonstrates that there are three main pro-coal narratives that have been produced in order to craft a positive image of coal, and thus gaining legitimacy for controversial coal business practices in Thailand. The first main narrative is coal being part of the King’s legacy, the second concerns environmental management and clean coal technology, while the last is related to community development and prosperity. Following this, the article argues that the discursive power of the coal sector, which has been employed in making pro-coal discourses and narratives that are later displayed in the museum, has a significant impact not only on the carbon lock-in, but also on a patronage lock-in that results in the obstruction of the more fundamental social, political, and economic changes in Thai society.

Article Details

How to Cite
Yoo, Y. (2023). Unpacking Pro-coal Narratives in Thailand: The Case of Mae Moh Mine Museum. Journal of Mekong Societies, 19(2), 153–178. Retrieved from https://so03.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/mekongjournal/article/view/258980
Section
Articles

References

Andrews, C., Carpenter, M., DellaVilla, P., and Olver, L. (2007). The evaluation of the King Rama VII Mining Museum in Mae Moh, Thailand. Thammasat School of Public Health in conjunction with EGAT.

Bachrach, P. and Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two faces of power. The American Political Science Review, 56(4), 947-952. JSTOR. https://doi.org/10.2307/1952796

Bodenhamer, A. (2016). King Coal: A study of mountaintop removal, public discourse, and power in Appalachia. Society & Natural Resources, 29(10), 1139-1153. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1138561

Boonlong, R., Farbotko, C., Parfondry, C., Graham, C., and Macer, D. (2011). Representation and decision-making in environmental planning with emphasis on energy technologies (Working Group 4 Report; Ethics and climate change in Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP) Project). UNESCO.

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4th edition). Oxford University Press.

Buschmann, P. and Oels, A. (2019). The overlooked role of discourse in breaking carbon lock-in: The case of the German energy transition. WIREs Climate Change, 10(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.574

Clark, R., Zucker, N., and Urpelainen, J. (2020). The future of coal-fired power generation in Southeast Asia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109650

Curran, G. (2021). Coal, climate and change: The narrative drivers of Australia’s coal economy. Energy Research & Social Science, 74, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101955

Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201-215. https://doi.org/10.1002/bs.3830020303

Dahl, R. A. (1961). Who governs?: Democracy and power in an American city (2nd Edition). New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

De Freitas Netto, S. V., Sobral, M. F. F., Ribeiro, A. R. B., and Soares, G. R. Da L. (2020). Concepts and forms of greenwashing: A systematic review. Environmental Sciences Europe, 32(1), 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-020-0300-3

Dryzek, J. S. (2012). The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses (Third Edition). Oxford University Press.

EGAT. (2019). 50th Anniversary of EGAT. Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT).

EGAT Learning Center. (2020). Let’s get to know EGAT learning centers across the country (in Thai). EGAT Learning Center Newsletter No.1/2563 (January). EGAT Learning Center.

Ferrara, F. (2015). The political development of modern Thailand. Cambridge University Press.

Fuchs, D. and Lederer, M. M. (2007). The power of business. Business and Politics, 9(3), 1-17. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.2202/1469-3569.1214

Gallagher, K. S., Bhandary, R., Narassimhan, E., and Nguyen, Q. T. (2021). Banking on coal? Drivers of demand for Chinese overseas investments in coal in Bangladesh, India, Indonesia and Vietnam. Energy Research & Social Science, 71, 1-10, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101827

Glesne, C. (2016). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (5th edition). Pearson.

Greenpeace Southeast Asia. (2006). Mae Moh: Coal kills. Greenpeace Southeast Asia.

Hajer, M. A. (2006). 4. Doing discourse analysis: Coalitions, practices, meaning. In M. van den Brink and T. Metze (Eds.), Words matter in policy and planning: Discourse theory and method in the social sciences (pp. 65-74). Utrecht: Koninklijk Nederlands Aardrijkskundig Genootschap

Isoaho, K. and Karhunmaa, K. (2019). A critical review of discursive approaches in energy transitions. Energy Policy, 128, 930-942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.01.043

Lukes, S. (1974). Power: A radical view (2nd edition). Palgrave.

Manych, N. and Jakob, M. (2021). Why coal? The political economy of the electricity sector in the Philippines. Energy for Sustainable Development, 62, 113-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2021.03.012

Overland, I., Sagbakken, H. F., Chan, H. Y., Merdekawati, M., Suryadi, B., Utama, N. A., and Vakulchuk, R. (2021). The ASEAN climate and energy paradox. Energy and Climate Change, 2, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2020.100019

Prurapark, R. and Asavaritikrai, P. (2020). Assessing coal use in Thailand: Current and future trends. Springer.

Rosenbloom, D. (2018). Framing low-carbon pathways: A discursive analysis of contending storylines surrounding the phase-out of coal fired power in Ontario. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 27, 129-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2017.11.003

Scrase, J. I. and Ockwell, D. G. (2010). The role of discourse and linguistic framing effects in sustaining high carbon energy policy—An accessible introduction. Energy Policy, 38(5), 2225-2233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2009.12.010

Shi, X. (2016). The future of ASEAN energy mix: A SWOT analysis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 53, 672-680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.09.010

Smith, S. A. (2018). Space, place, and story: Museum geographies and narratives of the American West. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Geography, University of Colorado.

Smith, S. A. and Foote, K. E. (2017). Museum/space/discourse: Analyzing discourse in three dimensions in Denver’s History Colorado Center. Cultural Geographies, 24(1), 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474016663930

Sukkumnoed, D. (2007). Better power for health: Healthy public policy and sustainable energy in the Thai power sector. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Development and Planning, Aalborg University.

Svarstad, H., Benjaminsen, T. A., and Overa, R. (2018). Power theories in political ecology. Journal of Political Ecology, 25(1), 350-363. https://doi.org/10.2458/v25i1.23044

Trencher, G., Healy, N., Hasegawa, K., and Asuka, J. (2019). Discursive resistance to phasing out coal-fired electricity: Narratives in Japan’s coal regime. Energy Policy, 132, 782-796. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2019.06.020

Wright, C., Nyberg, D., and Bowden, V. (2021). Beyond the discourse of denial: The reproduction of fossil fuel hegemony in Australia. Energy Research & Social Science, 77, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102094

Websites

EGAT Mae Moh. (2020a). History of Mae Moh Power Plant (in Thai). EGAT Mae Moh. Retrieved February 18, 2021, from https://mpp.egat.co.th/hellomaemoh/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=143&Itemid=193

EGAT Mae Moh. (2020b). Mae Moh community development plan for the year 2021 (in Thai). Sawadee Mae Moh, 3rd Quarter. Retrieved June 2, 2021, from https://mpp.egat.co.th/hellomaemoh/ index.php?option =com_content&view=article&id=508:3rd-quarter&catid=36&Itemid=218

EPPO. (2021). Table 9.1-3: CO2 emission in power generation by energy type. EPPO. Retrieved June 1, 2021, from http://www.eppo.go.th/index.php/en/en-energystatistics/co2-statistic

EPPO. (2022). Production and consumption of lignite (historical statistics 1986-2021, yearly). EPPO. Retrieved October 27, 2022, from http://www.eppo.go.th/index.php/en/en-energystatistics/coal-and-lignite

IEA. (2019). Southeast Asia energy outlook 2019. IEA (International Energy Agency). Retrieved April 28, 2021, from https://www.iea.org/reports/southeast-asia-energy-outlook-2019

The Mekong Eye. (2016, February 15). Coal power on the rise: Mekong region digs in. Earth Journalism Network. Retrieved March 2, 2022, from https://earthjournalism.net/stories/coal-power-on-the-rise-mekong-region-digs-in

UNFCCC. (2016). What is the Paris agreement? Retrieved May 8, 2019, from https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/what-is-theparis-agreement

Wood Mackenzie. (2019, September 25). Coal is still king in Southeast Asia’s power market. Retrieved May 6, 2021, from https://www.woodmac.com/press-releases/coal-is-still-king-in-southeast-asias-power-market/

World Coal Association, & ASEAN Centre for Energy. (2017). ASEAN’s energy equation. ASEAN Centre for Energy. Retrieved April 28, 2021, from https://aseanenergy.org/aseans-energy-equation/

Zein, Z. M. (2020, October 15). COVID-19: The turning point for coal in Southeast Asia? Southeast Asia Globe. Retrieved April 28, 2021, from https://globalchinacenter.shss.ust.hk/media_reports/covid-19-turningpoint-coal-southeast-asia

Interviews

Villager #1. (Pseudonym). (2021, March 10). Interview. Mae Moh villager.

Villager #2. (Pseudonym). (2021, March 7). Interview. Mae Moh villager.