Cabinet Orders Review of Thai Innovation List for Fair Procurement
The Thai Cabinet has ordered a 60-day review of the "Thai Innovation List" used for government procurement, citing concerns over transparency, fair competition, and overlapping regulations. The Budget Bureau will lead a multi-agency panel to reassess qualification criteria, pricing mechanisms, and the list's overall effectiveness since its 2016 launch. The review aims to ensure the system supports genuine innovation while preventing favoritism and aligning with international procurement standards.
The Cabinet has assigned the Budget Bureau and relevant agencies to review the criteria for the "Thai Innovation List" within 60 days after identifying limitations, aiming to make the state procurement system more transparent, cost-effective, and fair. Government House sources revealed the Cabinet recently approved a review of the list's preparation process, directing the Budget Bureau, the National Innovation Agency, and the National Science and Technology Development Agency to suspend new listings. The review will cover qualification verification, price assessment, and the impact on entrepreneurs. The Cabinet assigned the Budget Bureau as lead agency, working with the Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation (including the National Science and Technology Development Agency and National Innovation Agency), the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Commerce, and other relevant bodies. They must submit findings to the Cabinet Secretariat within 60 days before the next Cabinet meeting. The Budget Bureau reported that the first list was announced in January 2016 and continued through September 2026, with 115 lists covering 940 innovations published. Of these, 396 products and services have expired registration rights, 26 underwent rights renewal review, and 3 were delisted, leaving 567 currently registered. Analysis of procurement data from fiscal years 2017-2024 revealed six key issues: declining procurement effectiveness despite rising value; overlap with existing systems like the drug price list and medical equipment registry; difficulty verifying prices due to complex cost structures; competition and transparency risks including potential favoritism; misalignment with international procurement standards; and insufficient monitoring and evaluation.
