Thailand joined the international community in marking World Environment Day Sunday with not-so-good news. The country's 2022 environment performance index (EPI), prepared by a Yale University research team, slipped 30 notches from last year's 78th ranking to 108th.
The research team uses 40 performance indicators across 11 issue categories in ranking 180 countries on climate change performance, environmental health and ecosystem vitality, which when combined indicate the level of sustainability.
Denmark leads the top five countries with an outstanding EPI, followed by the UK, Finland, Malta and Sweden. All are in Europe. In Asia, only Japan (25th) and Singapore (44th) rank among the top first 50 countries in sustainability performance. Bhutan, at 85th, earned a well-deserved recognition.
Among Asean bloc members, Vietnam and Myanmar placed 178th and 179th respectively, almost last on the table.
Looking at the index by category reveals Thailand at a lowly 106th in terms of action on climate change, after Singapore (63rd), Brunei (79th) and Taiwan (97th).
It must noted the country likewise performs poorly in the environmental health category which comprises air quality, waste management, water sanitation and heavy metals. Nor was there significant improvement in efforts to combat PM2.5 ultra-fine dust, which hits the country hard from November to April or May every year.
Plastic waste also remains a tough issue, with Thailand among countries with the most of such material. While the Natural Resources and the Environment Ministry favours banning one-time-use plastic bags, little progress has been made.
On June 5, the Prayut Chan-o-cha government pledged commitment to the "Only One Earth" theme of the so-called Stockholm+50 meeting, organised by the United Nations Environment Programme (Unep). But the 2022 EPI figures suggest a chasm between stated goals and verified results.
More importantly, if the authorities are serious about improving the environment, they must go beyond knee-jerk reactions and piecemeal policies. Instead, the situation requires drastic changes in policy as well as stronger laws and enforcement to bring about real change.
For instance, in order to combat toxic dust, the government must lend support to efforts in implementing the long-awaited Clean Air Act, which is now nowhere to be seen.
In addition, it would be helpful if health authorities do more to convince the government about the seriousness of toxic dust, which is blamed for long-term health hazards requiring hospitalisation and can lead to death. Unless problems associated with toxic dust are solved, it will add huge costs to the country's health budget.
A good way for the government to start would be to elevate PM2.5 safety standards from a 24-hour average of 50 microgrammes per cubic metre (µg/m³) currently -- twice the World Health Organization's 25 µg/m³ threshold -- to 37.5 µg/m³.
More investment also is needed in educating the public on environmental matters to help ensure common goals now and for future generations.
All told, the government must know that what's needed is action, not talk, to clean up the environment.
