some
fan
pages
against
street
vendors,
such
as
https://business.facebook.com/footpaththai/. There are about 16,254 out of the 20,170 vendors in 665 waiver points affected by this measure because they have been trading for a long time and most of their buyers are regular customers (Municipal Office, 2016 cited by Nirathorn, 2017).
The main reason for clearing is that sidewalks should only be for pedestrians, and because most vendors are not poor (Wanlop Suwannee, interviewee cited in Nirathorn, 2017). Street vending is seen as an obstruction to the city’s development but there is wide acceptance that vending activities play a significant role in providing employment of poor in the urban and reduce poverty, disparities, inequalities and social exclusion (Nirathron, 2014). Moreover, in many countries where a focus on social inclusion or inclusive cities has started, there has been an increase in the number of trades that have the right to work in the city. An interesting example is a case in the US, where the University of California Los Angeles fought for poor people’s right to trade on the roadside. In addition, the demand for more careers ‘in the road’ appears in a number of documentary reports for local governments (Carpenter, 2015; Roja, 2015; Devlin, 2015; Former et al., 2011; Liu, Burns, and Flaming, 2015 cited by Nirathorn, 2017). There is therefore a controversy, and vendors, buyers, the general public and authorities both agree and disagree with such measures (www.homenetthailand.org, 2018). This brings the question: Do the street vendors still have any significant role in Thai society? And what role are they playing? Although the aspect of economic prosperity by street vending has been widely studied, there is little research about other aspects. Thus, this dissertation research will examine more about the street vendor’s role in contributing to social cohesion in Thailand.
MSc. Urban Design and City Planning Dissertation l “The value and role of street vendors in the Thai high street, in promoting social cohesion and socio-economic prosperity”
18