‘They Need Help from the Private Sector’: Filling Gaps Through a Rights-based Approach to Information and Technology

A Conversation with Chanyaporn Aroonnetthong and Chihiro Toya

Author: Raymond Andaya

Chanyaporn (Chou) Aroonnetthong and Chihiro Toya, researchers for the Thai subgroup of the Toyota Foundation International Grant Program project on Research, Mutual Learning and Network Formation on Human Rights Best Practices by Non-State Actors in COVID Responses,  reported on the importance of technological innovations facilitated by technology startup companies in Thailand, specifically as regards efforts to fill gaps in Thai government responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. As the Project draws to a close, I spoke to Chou and Chihiro to reflect on their subgroup’s findings and their experience of conducting research from a human rights perspective. Our conversation on 12 March 2025 covered the following points: (1) the significance of tech startups and their use of technology and public data to help address issues brought about by COVID-19; (2) coordination between tech startups and the Thai government; (3) potential sustainability of startup contributions to health and social services; and (4) lessons that can be shared between Project partners; and (5) the private sector’s imperative to contribute to the protection of human rights; and, (6) State actors’ openness to working with the private sector in filling human rights gaps.

Photo: Ai Kihara–Hunt

Tech startups and their contributions to health and social services

One of my main takeaways from Chou and Chihiro’s Report is the crucial role played by technological innovation, crowdsourced information, and publicly available data for addressing gaps in the provision of health and social services in Thailand. As Chou notes, access to such services is a longstanding issue in the country, and the use of technology has been crucial in tackling such  issues:

Chou:

The use of technology became especially crucial during the pandemic, but its relevance continued even after pandemic restrictions subsided. Even without the emergency situation, Thailand continues to face a shortage of medical personnel especially in rural areas in Thailand. I read an article the other day talking about the border between Thailand and Myanmar. It stated that one doctor is responsible for 7,000 or so patients, which is far from being an ideal number, if you think about it. We don’t have many doctors. After the pandemic, people continued to use the telemedicine system, which became popular during COVID-19, to bridge this shortage.

Tech startups became particularly relevant actors in efforts to address problems due to COVID-19. While the platforms they introduced to the market were not necessarily new, they have been adapted to the specific needs of a pandemic-stricken society. Chou and Chihiro recall that their Thai partners offered:

Chou:

Before the pandemic, there were already healthcare tech startups in Thailand. For example, because mental health was becoming a critical issue in Thailand, there were platforms for online consultation. For our partners, they weren’t working with government health services prior to COVID-19. The QueQ platform was used in restaurants, for example, so it was initially not intended for healthcare purposes, but it was later utilized in hospitals and vaccinations. The Mask Map example was created during the time of pandemic restrictions, but out of individual motivation, and not because of any government request. I was aware of these tech platforms and products  even before the pandemic, but not necessarily of the startup companies and individuals that created them. These platforms certainly gained even more recognition during the pandemic, especially for people not living in Bangkok.

Chihiro:

Right. I saw how widely used the QueQ app was when we went to Bangkok. Looking back, it was great that, through this research project, we actually met the CEO of the startup that made this widely-used app.

State and non-State cooperation

My impression is that the ‘startup’ structure and way of working was helpful for quickly adopting strategies to address pandemic-related problems. However, I realize that these efforts must be properly coordinated with government agencies. It is, after all, the government’s obligation to deliver health services, and uphold human rights, even during times of crisis. I ask them about the dynamics between these two actors:

Chou:

For the Project, we went to DEPA (Digital Economy Promotion Agency). This is the ministry that promotes these types of startups in Thailand. Startups and other types of companies can receive government support through the Agency. I have joined other meetings with government agencies in the past, and I find that the relationship between DEPA and one of our project partners is quite different. They appear to be very cordial, have genuine connection, and are able to talk with each other easily. We believe that these person-to-person dynamics are an important factor in collaborative efforts.

Photo: Chihiro Toya

Chihiro:

During the research, we did not talk directly to DEPA, but we were introduced to them by the QueQ CEO during our meeting at the company’s headquarters in Bangkok. This relationship between startups and DEPA has been fostered even before the pandemic. That said, it seems these cordial ties take time to establish, but are very important in situations like the pandemic.

In some ways, tech startups operate differently from other entities in the private sector, such as bigger, traditional businesses. In the case of the Thai partners in this Project, their rapid response was a result of their ability to take advantage of public data and to transform it into information relevant to the pandemic context. Chou acknowledges this observation, but also notes a potential gap in such strategy by private sector actors. These gaps further reinforce the need for collaboration between State and non-State actors:

Chou:

They certainly worked much faster than government agencies and big businesses. At the same time, there can also be drawbacks from such great reliance on technology. First, data used by these apps democratizes information, but this does not necessarily mean that the data is accurate. If you are a user of an app that tells you which nearby shops are selling masks, you would rely on it and go to that shop to purchase. But there may be times that the information on the app is not up to date, so you may find out that masks are out of stock. This is one concern for these apps that depend on crowdsourced data, as opposed to data coming directly from government sources. These gaps may be addressed by collaboration on ensuring the quality of information being made public.

Thai society’s openness to technology and the sustainability tech startup contributions

Indeed, many private actors have adapted strategies to contribute to gaps in access to health and social services during the pandemic. This calls into question the extent to which Thai society and government agencies are open to the use of technology for government-related processes. During our conversation, Chihiro reflected on the difference between Thai and Japanese approaches. She states that “Japan’s approach to this has been very gradual, which contrasts with how tech startups normally prefer to operate.” On the Thai side, Chou explains:

Chou:

In Thailand, there has been a rapidly growing number of people using smartphones and social media. So, I believe Thai society is generally open to technology entrepreneurs. At the same time, people can be susceptible to the negative effects of reliance on such innovations. Fake news is an example. There was a lot of fake news going around especially during the time of the pandemic. This is an additional layer of concern that the government will need to address when the next emergency situation comes up.

Regarding Chihiro’s point, I believe that the Thai government has really opened up to the use of technology in the delivery of health and social services. I have an app called Pao Tang, which was created during the time of the pandemic. It functioned as an e-wallet during the pandemic. The economy was not doing well at that time. As a country that relies on international tourism, the border closures greatly affected the Thai economy. The government sought to help boost consumption by providing subsidies to people through the app. The subsidy program has already ended, but the application was expanded and repurposed to provide information on government health and social services.  For example, women can get information on HPV screening through the app.

Chou believes that these contributions can be sustainable, such as in terms of ensuring transparency and accountability:

Chou:

Now that pandemic restrictions are not a factor, Thailand continues to face challenges which the government is unable to completely address on its own. Tech startups can be helpful in some of these contexts. During the pandemic, the Thai government faced delays in the purchase of COVID-19 vaccines. The delays were mainly caused by complicated bureaucratic processes. Tech startups helped improve transparency and accountability for those processes by, for example, making vaccine contracts publicly available. It may not seem explicitly relevant, but this can be seen as startups’ contribution to avoiding corruption in the government. Transparency guarantees provided by these collaborations, therefore, also benefit the public.

Transferable Rights-based Approaches between Project Partners

As part of a broad group with various advocacies, strategies, and motivations, I asked them what potential lessons their Thai partners can take away from other subgroups of non-State actors, and what ideas from other Project partners can be useful for tech startups in Thailand. They explain:

Chou:

Other subgroups have different challenges, but adopting technology for addressing these problems is one thing they can do. The accessibility and scalability of services, such as through online platforms, can be one approach to maximizing non-State actors’ contributions to addressing emergency situations and human rights gaps.

Meanwhile, I believe our Thai partners can learn from the education subgroup. There were teachers that initiated individual efforts to sustain learning activities despite pandemic restrictions. Certain problems can be solved physically through individual efforts. Some problems can also be identified and addressed by looking at individual level experiences of people who require assistance. The way Indonesian teachers adapted strategies based on individual needs can be a lesson for Thai partners. Similarly, the Singapore subgroup addressing migrant worker issues adapted strategies that can help marginalized populations. The Thai partners mainly filled gaps in services for the general population, but a perspective on the vulnerability and marginalization of certain groups could be useful in the work of tech startups.

Photo: Ai Kihara-Hunt

Chihiro:

I agree. If you give access to the internet, you connect people to essential services, such as those used during the time of the pandemic. At the same time, this also demonstrates that providing internet access to the majority, and making online platforms user friendly, remains a challenge. How to provide such access to elderly people, for example, remains an issue. Some of our partners have stated that they are trying to address this gap, but we still don’t know exactly how they do this. We need to make sure that these companies are really working on this because this goes back to the question of sustainability.

Doing Good or Protecting Human Rights?

Do their Thai partners consciously view themselves as actors supporting the protection of human rights? As Chihiro and Chou explain, private sector actors did not necessarily think of the human rights implications of their contributions during the pandemic. Rather, their responses were driven by the motivation to help and the imperative to do good during a time of crisis:

Chihiro:

In my own research, I usually work with organizations with a deep understanding of the necessity of human rights protection. They already know why they are doing their support and advocacy work, and why their work is important from a human rights perspective. The startup companies which we partnered with for this research project may have some idea on the importance of human rights, but their notable practices which we highlighted in our reports, were initiated simply because they wanted to help improve the situation in Thailand, particularly during the pandemic. 

Chou:

I don’t think the partners were necessarily thinking of the work they are doing as ‘contributions to human rights protection’. They just wanted to help save lives. The unprecedented nature of the pandemic compelled many to act and do what they can to help. In Thailand, many of us are Buddhists. It is our fundamental belief that if you do something good for other people, good things will come back to you. This is something that we were taught since we were kids. I don’t think they look at themselves as ‘non-State actors in human rights protection’, but they certainly acted based on underlying beliefs and principles which may also be related to the fundamental ideas of human rights.

Receptiveness to Inputs from the Private Sector

Finally, I asked Chou and Chihiro about their personal takeaways from working on the Project. While Chihiro has some background in human rights-based approaches through their training on Human Security, Chou’s other research projects mainly focus on the specific intersections between business and law. How has this Project changed their perspective on human rights and the role that the private sector plays in helping protect them? They reflect on the experience of conducting research for the Project:

Chihiro:

It was surprising how a rights-based approach from the non-State actor lens can take place in an emergency setting, because individuals simply wanted to do something to help improve the situation. In Thailand, we found evidence of collaboration between the government and private actors which you don’t always see on the practical level even if you often do human rights-related research.

Chou:

My biggest takeaway from working on this research is that addressing societal issues require more than government response and intervention. While governments have ample resources to address emergency situations and protection gaps, they are not always able to respond quickly and appropriately. They need help from the private sector. A government that is open to contributions from the private sector, is more transparent and accountable, is better able to fill gaps in protection. Collaborative practices with non-State actors is very important. After working on this research project, I have gained more appreciation for the contributions of non-State actors in ensuring human rights principles are protected. I realize that this is not a legal obligation, but acknowledge that if States have partners and supporters in upholding their obligations, human rights can be better protected.