A Study of Thai‘Karen Livelihoods Restoration Policy’ : Focused on the Comparison with Canadian Multiculturalism Policy

This paper was intended to reveal the characteristics and direction of the ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' for the Karen of Thailand. For this, I tried to compare and analyze similarities and differences with Canadian Multiculturalism Policy utilizing adopted backgrounds, contents of policy, the ways to promote policy, and achievements of the promotion as an analysis framework.
For this analysis, I utilized Multicultural Policy Theory and ‘9 Multiculturalism Policy Index for Indigenous Peoples’ by Will Kymlicka. Through these, I analyzed the characteristics of policy targeted Indigenous Peoples in Canada and Thailand, and scored the Multiculturalism Policy Index in order to evaluate the degree of the Multiculturalism Policy of each country.
For the evaluation, I made an in-depth interviews with policy-makers and experts and conducted a survey to find out the awareness and achievements about ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy''. Survey targets were the Karen people who lived in town where designated as Special Cultural Zone by the policy.
I categorized the Karen policy periods of Thailand into three. First is prior to 1976, and second is from 1976 to 2010. Third is the period of ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' after 2010. In doing so, this paper was regarded as significant to foresee the future direction of Thai ethnic minority policies.
In chapter two, I summarized the concept of multiculturalism policies and classified the types of them because they were important backgrounds for the overall discussion of this paper. In particular, I focused on the Multicultural Policy Theory and ‘9 Multiculturalism Policy Index for Indigenous Peoples’ by Will Kymlicka.
In chapter three, I explained the Karen policy of the Thai government in chronological order and analyzed the process of policy change. First, the characteristics of the policy prior to 1976 pay attention to the security, opium, deforestation problems and tended to solve these problems by force. It marginalized Karen people after all. Characteristics of policy after 1976 was the assimilation policy that illuminated Karen as instilling the spirit of Thai and made them people who benefit the country. It made Karen lose ethnic identity eventually. After 2010, the contents of the ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' were classified into ①Cultural Identity, ②Resource Management, ③Nationality Right, ④Cultural Heritage Succession, and ⑤Education.
In chapter four, I analyzed the similarities and differences between the ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' and Canadian Multiculturalism Policy utilizing adopted backgrounds, contents of policy, the ways to promote policy, and achievements of the promotion as analysis framework. Especially, I found achievements of the promotion of policies through interviews and surveys. As a result, the similarity of policy adoption was that both countries had indigenous people based on multi-ethnic society. The difference was that Canada promoted the policy by the internal power of indigenous people, while Thailand propelled the policy by the pressure of the outside.
The similarity of policy contents was that both policy had multi-language policy and preserved the culture of indigenous people. The difference was that Canada promoted the policy focused on using non-English, but Thailand focused on preserving traditional culture. In promoting, common method was that it specified the articles about protection minorities in the Constitution. Difference was that whereas Thailand followed through a bottom-up decision-making approach, Canada followed an up-bottom decision-making approach.
And common policy achievements were that policy subjects had a substantially positive response to the policy, whereas the difference was that Multiculturalism Policies in Canada had settled, but multicultural policy in Thailand was in the process.
Survey analysis of ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' was that the awareness of policy showed the hybrid of multicultural policies and assimilation policy. The achievement ended up with dissatisfying promotion.
In chapter five, I analyzed based on the Multicultural Policy Theory and ‘9 Multiculturalism Policy Index for Indigenous Peoples’ by Will Kymlicka. As a result, Thai ''Karen Livelihood Restoration Policy'' can be seen during the process of‘StrongMulticulturalismPolicy’. Therefore, the result generally insisted that minority policy of Thailand from assimilation or integration policy to multiculturalism policy.