Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Insights from a Rapid Phone Survey The World Bank Following remarkable achievements in poverty reduction over two decades, Thailand’s progress slowed considerably from 2010 onwards. During 2016 and 2018, a slowing economy, droughts, and declining farm, business and wage incomes resulted in increases in poverty. Country Poverty decreased again in 2019, but the progress was driven by social assistance and redistribution policies rather than economic growth Context and productivity. In 2020, GDP contracted by 6.1% and the traditional services sector (wholesale & retail trade, accommodation & food, and transport), which employs 31% of the working age population, suffered the most severe hit, receding by about 14.6%. While the economy was projected to start recovering in 2021, subsequent waves of COVID - 19 infections, emergence of new variants, and slow progress on vaccination triggered new strict containment measures, severely disrupting the economy. The growth forecast for 2021 has been revised downward to 2.2% (from 3.4%) and economic activity is not expected to return to its pre-pandemic levels until 2022, with the recovery being projected to be slow and uneven. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 2 The COVID - 19 crisis struck an economy already facing key structural Country problems, including aging population, low education level, large employment in low productivity sectors. Context The Government rapidly mobilized a large and diversified emergency assistance program to support poor and vulnerable population groups, bringing total social assistance to about 3.2% of GDP, compared to just 0.8% in 2019. Relief programs provided vertical transfers or top ups to beneficiaries of pre-COVID programs, but the bulk of the assistance programs was allocated to informal workers and farmers who would have not been considered vulnerable prior the pandemic. Microsimulation models and preliminary estimates from the 2020 Thailand Socio-Economic Survey (SES) indicate that emergency social assistance programs helped to contain an increase in poverty and inequality between 2019 and 2020. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 3 Highlights (1) Employment Income While national employment remained stable Over 70% of households observed a decline in their (at 68%) between March 2020 and June 2021, income, with around 80% of households in rural large variations were observed between regions areas, the Southern region and low-income groups and population groups; being affected by income declines; Employment declined in urban areas and the Both farming activities and nonfarm businesses were capital city, while it increased in rural areas and also severely affected by income declines, as about Northern zones because many of those who 50% of them experienced a decline in their incomes lost their jobs due to the pandemic returned by over a half. Households in the South and those in to agriculture; low-income groups were the most significantly impacted by income losses; Overall, over 50% of respondents were affected by job losses, temporary work stoppage, reduced Nonfarm businesses benefitted from several support number of working hours or reduced pay; mechanisms, including the ‘let’s go halves’ scheme introduced by the Government in 2020 as part the Women and individuals in low-income households emergency assistance program, loans and delayed were the most affected; payments; Care work negatively affected the employment of Nearly 80% of farming households benefitted from married women and those with young children in the ‘No one left behind’ program and over 63% their household, particularly in urban areas. benefitted from the farmers assistance program. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 4 Highlights (2) Food Security & coping mechanisms Social protection Around 60% of households experienced Over 80% of households benefitted from the Government concerns about their food security; emergency assistance programs introduced in 2020, with proportions approximating 90% among low-income Many households reported running out of food, households and those who experienced income shocks; with proportions reaching 60% among low-income households and those with children; The proportion of social assistance beneficiaries almost doubled compared to 2019; Households used several coping mechanisms during the crisis, the most common including The ‘No one left behind’ program targeting informal workers reduction of food and nonfood consumption, and the ‘We win’ program targeting the poor and vulnerable reliance on Government assistance, reliance on had the largest coverage; savings and engagement in additional income generating activities; Nearly 30% of households benefitted from top up transfers above amounts received since 2019; Low-income households also relied on help from family and friends. Around 80% of households received their transfers through the Pao Tung mobile application and 55% used Despite significant social assistance from the bank transfers; Government and the fact that most households were able to buy essential food items in the week Around 30% of recipients faced problems due to app and preceding the survey, around 50% remain worried they internet issues, identity verification problems and would not be able to buy enough food the next week. incomplete/delayed payments. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 5 Highlights (3) Education Health Around 90% of households had their school age Around a third of households that needed medical children enrolled last semester, though proportions assistance could not access the services due to concerns are lower in rural and lower income households, about catching the virus; as well as those in the South; Although nearly 60% of the respondents have testing Concerns about catching the coronavirus, followed centers in their community, only 16% were tested; by lack of financial means and lack of readiness of schools, are among the main reasons for not Most people are aware of the availability of the vaccine enrolling children; and where to get it, mainly through media and social media; Over half of children attended mixed (face-to-face and remote) classes and a fourth attended Only 6% of respondents were vaccinated, with proportions face-to-face only; reaching almost 40% among health and social workers; Over half of children faced learning difficulties, About 30% do not plan to get vaccinated, with rates essentially due to an inability to focus on remote reaching 36% among low-income and low-education learning without adult supervision, and to a lesser groups and the youth; extent problems with accessing learning devices. Concerns about the vaccine side effects are among the main reasons for reluctance. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 6 survey Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 01 7 Design The questionnaire includes the following modules The Thailand rapid phone survey, funded by the Individual’s and household’s characteristics World Bank, was implemented by Gallup Poll Access to food & food security from April 27 to June 15, 2021 Employment The survey interviewed 2,000 adults aged 18 years Income sources and older with access to mobile phones. The survey was conducted by Computer Assisted Access to health services & COVID - 19 vaccine Telephone Interviews (CATI) using random mobile Access to education phone frame-based sample design. The survey is representative at the national, urban/rural and Coping mechanisms and safety nets regional levels. Information from the survey complements evidence from SES surveys, providing a real-time, ground-level picture of the effects on employment and income, food security, coping mechanisms, education and health as the COVID - 19 pandemic unfolds Note: the phone survey and SES 2019 show similar individual’s and household demographic characteristics, but there are some divergences in terms of employment sectors due to sample design (individuals with mobile phone) and changes by the crisis Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 8 Some key characteristics of 2021 Phone survey and 2019 SES 2021 Phone Survey 2019 SES 60 55 54 60 53 56 45 47 50 47 50 44 40 30 40 26 30 27 29 30 17 20 13 13 18 20 13 14 10 10 0 Women Bangkok Men South Urban North 0 Central Northeast Rural Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Area Region Gender Area Region Gender Education Employment sector 100 17 14 100 8 7 80 4 6 18 3 24 80 4 27 60 14 23 10 60 4 40 23 40 15 49 54 20 6 20 34 22 0 0 2021 Phone Survey SES 2019 2021 Phone Survey SES 2019 Primary School Lower secondary Higher secondary University or higher Agriculture Manufacturing Construction Oth. Industry Wholesale and Retail Accom.& food services Oth. trad. services Public Administration Oth. modern services Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 9 Employment Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 02 10 Employment rate did not change at the national level, but this hides large variations across regions Proportion of people working in June 2021 (%) 76 73 74 72 At the national level, the employment rate 72 70 of individuals aged 18 and older remained 68 68 68 stable at 68%. 66 64 65 64 62 60 58 Thailand Rural Urban But employment increased 8 percentage Area points (pp) in rural areas while it declined March 2020 (pre-COVID) June 2021 by the same proportion in urban areas 90 79 80 71 71 71 70 65 63 65 64 66 70 60 50 40 Bangkok experienced the largest decline 30 in employment (9 pp) while the Northeast 20 experienced the largest increase (8 pp). 10 0 North Northeast Central South Bangkok Region March 2020 (pre-COVID) June 2021 Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 11 There are also large variations across population groups 90 74 77 75 80 67 69 70 63 65 61 Employment increased among 60 men (3 pp) while it declined 50 among women (2 pp). 40 30 20 10 0 Men Women Below 35 years 35 yrs & older Employment declined among the youth & Gender Age educated groups, while it increased among March 2020 (pre-COVID) June 2021 individuals in better-off households. 90 76 79 80 72 67 69 70 64 65 62 60 50 The increase of employment in vulnerable 40 regions is a positive change, but the decline 30 among educated, youth, women and 20 low-income groups is worrying. 10 0 Primary & less High school & above Low High Education Income group March 2020 (pre-COVID) June 2021 Note: Low-income group includes individuals in households where monthly income (pre-tax) is 19,000 baht or less. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 12 Many have lost jobs between March 2020 & June 2021 and others gained jobs Proportion of people who lost or gained jobs by June 2021 (%) 40 36 36 35 35 34 34 34 34 35 32 33 32 30 30 28 27 27 27 27 25 25 26 26 24 25 23 20 20 20 19 20 17 17 18 16 15 15 10 5 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Primary & High school Low High Below 35 35 yrs & less & above years older Area Region Gender Education Income group Age Lost job Gained job More urban than rural people lost jobs, The proportion of those whose lost jobs More women than men lost and while more rural people were is similar in northern regions and in Bangkok, gained jobs, but the proportion of able to gain jobs. however a higher proportion in northern those who gained jobs is higher than regions was able to gain jobs. that of those who lost jobs among men, while it is lower among women. Note: Those who lost jobs were working in March 2020 but not in June 2021; those who gained jobs were not working in March 2020 but were working in June 2021. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 13 Business closure due to COVID - 19 restrictions is the main reason for not working in most regions Absence of hiring of daily workers Business closure for reasons other than coronavirus legal was the second most reported restrictions, and infection/quarantine due to COVID - 19 cause of unemployment. were also important reasons in the Northeast and South regions. Main reason cited by people who were not working in June 2021 (%) 100 10 9 6 11 12 14 12 17 15 80 19 21 17 15 24 1 21 14 7 4 3 6 8 11 6 6 8 8 7 2 60 7 9 7 6 5 10 12 3 7 8 9 40 7 10 10 8 6 3 13 49 48 45 20 41 36 31 31 23 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Area Region Business closed due to COVID - 19 restrictions Business closed due to other reasons Ill with/quarantine COVID - 19 Care for ill relative Care for child Laid off/seasonal worker/leave Retired No hire (daily worker) Other Note: Those who lost jobs were working in March 2020 but not in June 2021; those who gained jobs were not working in March 2020 but were working in June 2021. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 14 Women and low -income groups were more severely affected by business closure due to COVID - 19 100 6 5 11 10 9 9 7 7 12 14 12 15 17 18 18 19 15 18 25 21 22 80 19 21 17 15 24 1 8 21 14 14 7 14 Women were more affected than 6 4 3 0 23 4 6 4 7 0 9 8 11 6 7 5 5 men by business closure, but men 6 8 8 7 2 8 7 2 6 3 11 60 5 9 6 9 7 4 9 6 7 6 5 8 5 were more affected by the 5 1 10 12 3 4 4 2 3 7 7 7 8 8 8 1 10 6 8 9 0 7 absence of hiring of daily workers. 40 7 10 10 8 6 7 8 7 8 7 9 7 6 3 7 13 49 48 45 41 43 20 36 38 34 38 37 36 31 31 33 31 23 People with low education were less affected by business closure due to 0 Below 35 years Women High school & above Bangkok Thailand Primary & less 35 yrs & older High Urban South Northeast Men Central North Rural Low the pandemic than those with higher education, but they were more affected by the absence of hiring of daily workers and infection Area Region Gender Education Income group Age by the virus. Business closed due to COVID - 19 restrictions Business closed due to other reasons Ill with/quarantine COVID - 19 Care for ill relative Care for child Laid off/seasonal worker/leave Retired No hire (daily worker) Other Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 15 Care work had an important impact on employment of married women and those with young children With With Married children below Married children below 13% 6 years 4% 6 years Childcare 12% 0.3% Caring for ill relatives as the as the main reason for women main reason for not working With With women not Single/ Single/ children children working No child No child 6-17 years 6-17 years 0% 10% 4% 1% No men indicated childcare or caring The proportion of women who are More married women, and more for ill relatives as the main reason for not working due to childcare exceeded women with no children in their not working compared with 8% of women. 12% for married women and women household, than those who are single who have young children below the or have children are not working to age of six in their household. take care of ill relatives. Note: Low-income group includes individuals in households where monthly income (pre-tax) is 19,000 baht or less. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 16 Childcare negatively affected urban and better-off women’s employment In urban areas, 14% of women with children below 6 years in their household and 18% of women with children aged 6 to 17 indicated childcare as the main reason for not working compared with, respectively, 10% and 2% in rural areas.The proportions reach, respectively, 19% and 22% in the Central region. Around 15% of women in better-off households with children below 18 years indicate childcare as the main reason of not working compared with 9% of women in low-income households. Care for ill relatives strongly affected employment of married women who have no children in the Central region and those in better-off households, where, respectively, 27% and 42% of these women indicate care for ill relatives as the main reason for not working. About 13% of women with children below 18 years were not working because they were ill with COVID - 19 or quarantining compared to 4% for those with no children; proportions reach 22% in rural areas. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 17 During the Pandemic, people experienced several difficulties 42% 49% 53% 59% declared having had temporarily worked received lower pay lost their job stopped working less hours from their job or business /business Proportions are highest among In the South (51%) In the South (57%) In the South (56%) In the South (61%) Women (47%) Women (53%) Men (55%) Women (62%) Low education group (54%) Low education group (58%) Low education group (55%) Low education group (65%) Low-income group (56%) Low-income group (60%) Low-income group (55%) Low-income group (67%) Note: Proportions are of those who indicated having experienced job/business loss, temporary work stop, and/or decline in their working hours or pay between March 2020 and June 2021 due to COVID - 19 crisis. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 18 Sector of work in March 2020 of those who experienced job losses and / or temporary work stops as a result of the pandemic (%) 100 1 4 4 6 2 3 3 3 2 6 6 3 6 1 11 12 6 1 1 2 17 Traditional services 80 33 34 32 34 4 25 35 31 and construction were 42 23 the most affected sectors 60 7 4 9 56 9 4 14 10 0 15 by job losses and 13 40 21 11 3 21 19 33 31 1 temporary work stoppage 0 30 15 1 15 1 15 11 0 20 1 21 19 8 0 7 28 7 0 0 20 15 14 3 13 10 13 5 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Area Region Gender Agriculture Manufacturing Construction Oth. Industry Wholesale and Retail Accom.& food services Oth. trad. services Public Administration Oth. modern services Note: Traditional services include wholesale & retail trade, transportation, accommodation & food, and household services; Modern services include ICT, financial services, real estate and human development. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 19 Traditional services were most affected in urban areas and Central region In urban areas, 72% of those who experienced job losses or temporary work stoppage during the pandemic were working in traditional services; 33% in wholesale & retail trade, 32% in transport and household services and 7% in accommodation & food services. In rural areas, 55% of those working in traditional services experienced job losses or temporary stoppages. Construction and agriculture were more severely affected than in urban areas. Accommodation & food services sector was more affected in the Central region than in the rest of the country. Around 15% of those who were not working in March 2020 and June 2021 did work between these periods but about 77% lost their job due to COVID - 19. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 20 The crisis led to important movement towards agriculture Urban 20% Men 36% Agriculture 31% Rural 36% Women 28% Urban 41% 25% Not working Trade 30% Men Rural 26% 34% in March 2020 Women Urban 27% Men 29% Other services 27% Rural 27% Women 23% Around 15% for those who were working in accommodation Around 56% of those working in June 2021 experienced changes & food services in March 2020 and 13% of those who were working in their jobs since March 2020. Proportions are higher in rural in construction moved to agriculture by June 2021. Around 14% areas (65%) than in urban areas (48%); and among men (63%) of those who were in wholesale & retail trade sector moved to than women (48%). 64% changed job because they lost their agriculture (6%) and to other services (8%). former job due to COVID - 19. Proportions are higher in urban areas (68%) than in rural areas (60%); and among women (75%) than men (50%). Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 21 Employment in agriculture increased, and traditional services seem to be slowly recovering Around 59% of those who experienced job losses or temporary work stop during the pandemic were working by June 2021.Proportions exceeded 65% in rural areas and Northern regions, and reached 69% among men. Around 54% of those who experienced job problems were working in traditional services by June 2021; 23% in wholesale & retail trade, 27% in transport and household services and 4% in accommodation and food services. Around 22% were in agriculture, with proportions exceeding 30% in rural areas and Northern regions. As a result of job changes, employment rate in agriculture increased from 13% to 22% between March 2020 and June 2021; employment in wholesale & retail trade increased from 21% to 23%. Employment in construction declined from 10% to 7% and employment in accommodation & food services remained low at 4% by June 2021 (down from 5% in March 2020). Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 22 Income & household business Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 03 23 Most households experienced a decline in their income due to the pandemic Change in overall household income (%) 100 2 2 2 80 Over 70% of households experienced a decline in their income since March 2020, 60 74 77 72 mainly due to the COVID - 19 crisis. 40 20 19 21 17 0 5 4 6 Thailand Rural Urban More rural households experienced a decline in their Area income than urban ones. At the regional level, proportions Increased Stayed the same Decreased (DK) of income declines are highest in the South (84%) and lowest in Bangkok (67%). 100 2 2 2 0 80 63 60 73 75 82 40 Lower-income households seem to be more severely hit by the crisis than better-off ones. 20 19 19 28 14 6 4 2 9 0 Men Women Low High Gender Income group Increased Stayed the same Decreased (DK) Note: Low-income group includes individuals in households where monthly income (pre-tax) is 19,000 baht or less. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 24 Few farm and nonfarm businesses started operation after March 2020 Proportion of households with members operating farm and nonfarm businesses in June 2021(%) 70 59 60 50 49 50 42 43 38 37 40 31 32 30 29 31 30 30 29 30 24 27 26 22 20 11 10 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Low High Area Region Income group Farm business Nonfarm business Over a third of households include members working Around 30% of households have members operating nonfarm in farming business. Proportions reach 50% in rural businesses. Businesses predominantly operate in trade, areas and nearly 60% in the Northeast. accommodation & food and other non-classified services. 10% of businesses started operation after March 2020 (8% in rural areas 9% of households’ farms started operation after and 12% in urban areas) March 2020 (8% in rural areas and 10% in urban areas) Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 25 Farm and nonfarm businesses faced many difficulties during the crisis Around 10% of households in urban areas and 2% Lack of customers and closure of the usual place of the in rural areas indicate that their household members business due to the pandemic resulted in severe income were unable to perform their normal farming activities, losses for nonfarm businesses and led many of them to essentially due to inability to sell output (49%) close their businesses and start new ones between and bad weather conditions (38%). March 2020 and June 2021. . Nearly 80 % of households indicate a decline in their Over 80 % of households indicate a decline in their nonfarm income, farm income, and around 40 % report the decline was by over half and over 50 % report the decline was by over half 100 92 100 91 88 82 82 80 81 83 81 79 79 78 80 79 73 76 76 80 73 80 72 70 62 63 62 57 56 60 60 51 51 46 47 44 45 41 43 40 40 38 40 40 33 40 32 25 20 20 0 0 High High Bangkok Bangkok South South Urban Urban Thailand Thailand North North Central Central Northeast Northeast Low Low Rural Rural Area Region Income group Area Region Income group Income declined Income reduced by more than half Income declined Income reduced by more than half Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 26 Nonfarm businesses benefitted from several support mechanisms Around 43% of nonfarm businesses benefitted from the The highest proportions of beneficiaries are in the North (57%) ‘let’s go halves’ scheme introduced by the Government and in the South (54%), which also had the highest proportions in the second half of 2020. More businesses in rural areas of businesses experiencing income losses. (49%) and in lower-income groups (47%) than in urban areas (37%) and in better-off groups (40%) benefitted from the scheme. Over 50 % of nonfarm businesses tried to access funding or financial services and many successfully accessed the following types of funding or financial services since the start of the COVID - 19 pandemic 70 60 57 58 60 54 54 52 49 48 49 50 46 44 43 43 41 41 41 41 41 42 40 36 29 30 27 26 24 25 24 25 20 10 5 7 6 0 Earlier payments Delayed payments Delayed payment Loans from friends Loans from banks Loans from Loans from non- Loans from digital Loans from Liquidation of from customers from suppliers terms of taxes and debt and family informal lenders bank financial financing platforms government assets institutions institutions Rural Urban Thailand Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 27 Food Security Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 04 28 Many households experienced food insecurity during the past year Over 60% of respondents reported Around 60% of low-income The proportion of those who went worries in their household during households and of women in without eating for a whole day is the past year about not having enough households with children run out over four times higher in low-income food because of lack of resources. of food and nearly 40% of both households than in better-off ones. Proportions exceed 70% among groups were hungry but did not eat. Interestingly, while in households women who have children in their with children, more women than household and among people in men worry or stay hungry, more low-income households. men go without eating a whole day than women. 80 76 73 67 70 63 63 61 61 58 60 56 52 47 48 48 50 46 45 43 42 37 40 35 31 32 32 30 30 28 30 26 20 15 9 9 6 6 7 6 7 10 4 2 0 Thailand Rural Urban Men no children Women no children Men with children Women with children Low High Area Gender Income group Worried about not having enough food Ran out of food Hungry but did not eat Went without eating for a whole day Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 29 Many households were able to acquire essential food, but access was lower among low-income groups Over 60% of households were able to buy essential food Households that reported concerns about their food security items during the week preceding the survey, with proportions seem to have been able to acquire essential food during the being around 10 pp higher among better-off households week preceding the survey. This could be due to recent than low- income ones. improvements in their living conditions or a perception of food insecurity due to the persisting uncertainty. Proportion of households that were able to buy essential food items and experienced food security concerns (%) 100 87 89 84 84 84 85 86 86 90 82 83 83 83 80 81 78 79 79 81 81 78 79 81 75 76 77 80 69 67 70 63 63 65 62 62 62 61 60 60 54 52 46 46 49 50 43 44 40 30 20 10 0 Thailand Low High Unable to eat healthy Ran out of food Hungry but not eating Income group Food insecure Cereal & grains Meat & poultry Fish & seafood Vegetables Fruits & nuts Processed food Staple food Note: Staple food indicates households that were able to buy all essential food items (cereals, meat, fish, vegetables and fruits ) during the past week. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 30 05 Coping strategies & Social protection Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 31 Most households reduced their consumption and relied on government assistance as a coping strategy Around 50% of households also used help from friends and family, with low-income households relying more on family and friends' assistance (56%) than better-off ones (44%) Thailand Reduce nonfood consumption 82% Government assistance 79% Reduce food consumption 69% Rely on savings 64% Engage in income activities 60% Urban Reduce nonfood Government Reduce food Rely on savings Engage in consumption 82% assistance 75% consumption 67% 64% income activities 57% Rural Reduce nonfood consumption 83% Government assistance 82% Reduce food consumption 71% Rely on savings 64% Engage in income activities 63% Low- Reduce nonfood Government Reduce food Rely on savings Engage in income consumption 89% assistance 85% consumption 78% 68% income activities 67% Better-off Reduce nonfood consumption 76% Government assistance 71% Rely on savings 63% Reduce food consumption 56% Engage in income activities 54% Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 32 46% 38% received State received 12% received Disability 14% received 17% received Welfare Card (SWC) Old Age Grant (DG) Child Support Social Security Prior to the crisis, Allowance (OAA) Grant (CSG) Scheme (SSS) households were receiving diversified Proportions are highest among vulnerable households except for SSS social assistance programs 64% in the Northeast 46% in the North 18% in the Northeast 18% in the North & Northeast 23% Better-off 56% Low-income 40% Rural 15% Low-income 15% Low-income 22% Bangkok 55% Rural 37% 15% Rural 15% Rural 19% Urban Low-income Note: Proportions are of those who indicated having experienced job/business loss, temporary work stop, and/or decline in their working hours or pay between March 2020 and June 2021 due to COVID19- crisis. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 33 During the crisis, the Government mobilized a large emergency assistance program covering over 80 % of households Around 47% of those who were not receiving the Households receiving any social assistance since March 2020 (%) SWC and 31% of those who were not receiving any 100 85 86 86 assistance before March 2020 benefitted from the 80 74 81 78 86 84 71 emergency transfer program. 80 65 66 60 The No one left behind targeting informal workers 40 and the We win program targeting the poor and vulnerable had the largest coverage. 20 0 Over 60% of farming households benefitted from Bangkok Thailand Shock South High Central Urban Northeast North No Rural Low the Farmers assistance program. Area Region Income group Income shock Main assistance programs received (%) 100 80 60 40 20 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Low-income Income shock Farming household Area Region Vulnerable households No one left behind Unemployment payments Farmers assistance We win We love each other Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 34 Most transfers were received through mobile applications, and many household faced issues In the second half of 2020, Top up transfers were Around 28% of households the government introduced provided to beneficiaries benefitted from top up transfers; the ‘let’s go halves’ scheme of 2019 assistance programs. 36% in the Northeast and over 30% for general consumption. among low income and Around 60% of households were rural households. able to register for the program. Over 80% of households Vulnerable households used Around 30% of households received transfers through also cash-in person and regular faced problems while collecting the Pao Tung application payment modes, but rates transfers. Most problems are and 55% received bank transfers. remain below 20%. related to app/internet, identity check and delayed payments. Note: Top up are transfers received above those usually perceived from SWC, OAA, DG, CSG or SSS. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 35 Despite the large social assistance, problems persist Proportion of people who lost or gained jobs by June 2021 (%) Around 26% of households (31% Around 46% were unsatisfied with Many households remain in urban areas and 23% in rural areas) the Government response to the concerned about their sought assistance from government COVID - 19 crisis, with proportions food security. programs since March 2020 and reaching 57% among better-off have not been able to register or households and 63% among households were turned down. Around 42% in Bangkok. The proportion of those were considered ineligible and 12% who are unsatisfied is lower among were asked to pay a bribe. those receiving assistance (45%) than those not receiving (50%). Proportion of households worried about having enough to eat in the next week (%) 100 18 19 24 27 27 28 28 26 80 39 39 41 25 22 26 27 24 24 26 60 29 25 29 23 40 43 44 37 37 38 38 40 37 27 20 28 29 10 10 11 8 10 8 14 15 9 10 0 4 Thailand Rural Urban Men Women no Men with Women with Low High No Yes no children children children children Area Gender Income group Receiving emergency assistance Very worried Somewhat worried Not too worried Not worried at all Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 36 Education Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 06 37 Most children were enrolled in school last semester Around 90% of households had all their Proportions are lower in rural children aged 6 to 17 years enrolled areas (89%) than in urban areas in school last semester. (91%) and among lower income households (86%) than better-off ones (96%). Reason school age children were not enrolled (%) 100 29 80 40 37 46 Concerns among parents and children 46 9 about catching the Coronavirus, followed 60 10 by lack of financial resources and lack of 11 11 0 schools' readiness, are among the main 40 17 6 37 20 19 reasons why children were not enrolled. 6 In urban areas, lack of financial resources 20 16 16 15 19 seems to be most prevalent reason for 14 17 13 23 9 not enrolling children. 0 Thailand Rural Urban Low High Area Income group Parents are worried children will catch COVID - 19 Children are worried child will catch COVID - 19 No devices available for online learning Remote learning is unavailable/ineffective Not enough money to pay for school-related expenses School does not seem to be ready to resume classes Some other reason Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 38 There are important variations in children’s school enrollment between regions While 95% of households in the Central region had all their children enrolled in school last semester, only 79% in the South did so. 100 17 30 80 46 55 24 58 0 60 0 18 37 In the South, lack of financial resources, 40 4 0 0 27 followed by concerns among children 0 19 0 about catching COVID - 19, seem to be 20 45 0 5 6 0 among the most frequent reasons for 29 not enrolling children, though over half of 0 7 2 13 respondents did not give a specific reason. North Northeast Central South Bangkok Region Parents are worried children will catch COVID - 19 Children are worried child will catch COVID - 19 No devices available for online learning Remote learning is unavailable/ineffective Not enough money to pay for school-related expenses School does not seem to be ready to resume classes Some other reason Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 39 Most enrolled children attended both face-to-face and remote classes School attendance mode of enrolled children (%) 100 1 5 8 2 8 90 80 70 58 57 56 56 63 Remote attendance is slightly higher 60 among children in urban and better off households than those in rural and 50 40 12 14 lower income households. 30 10 10 13 20 26 26 27 26 24 10 100 1 3 5 6 0 10 90 Thailand Rural Urban Low High Area Income group 80 46 70 50 Face-to-face Remote Both (DK) 66 54 65 60 50 The North region has the highest remote 40 26 2 12 attendance rate, while Bangkok has the 30 10 highest mixed (face-to-face and remote) 20 34 32 14 attendance rate. 10 25 22 15 0 North Northeast Central South Bangkok Region Face-to-face Remote Both (DK) Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 40 Many children faced learning difficulties due to their incapacity to focus on remote learning School attendance mode of enrolled children (%) Around 57% of respondents indicated Proportions are similar in rural However, proportions are highest that enrolled children in their households and urban areas as well as in the Central region (66%) and faced learning issues. among lower income and better Bangkok (62%) and lowest in the off households. Northeast (43%). Main difficulties experienced by school enrolled children (%) 100 21 18 25 23 28 80 11 10 9 9 The inability of children to focus on remote 60 6 7 7 6 7 6 learning without adult supervision is one of the biggest difficulties children faced. 38 34 40 40 42 55 Children in rural and low-income households seem also to have faced problems in accessing 20 28 learning devices. 20 22 17 9 0 Thailand Rural Urban Low High Area Income group Lack of access to devices Child unable to focus Family memb. unable to support Inadequate space for studying Inefficient internet Other Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 41 Access to learning devices was a serious issue in the South 100 6 2 17 25 34 35 80 12 17 12 60 10 6 71 2 17 Inability of children to focus on remote learning seems to be a serious issue in 40 44 32 42 the North, while children in the South seem to be mainly affected by the lack 12 of access to learning devices. 20 29 21 18 16 14 0 North Northeast Central South Bangkok Region Lack of access to devices Child unable to focus Family memb. unable to support Inadequate space for studying Inefficient internet Other Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 42 Most households will send their children to in-person classes if hygiene protocols are in place Less urban households (85%) than rural Nearly 90% of households indicate that they ones (91%) will send their children to will send their school-aged children to face-to-face classes. face-to-face classes next semester if schools offer adequate hygiene protocols. Proportions are lowest in Bangkok at 73%. Over 40% of reluctant households indicate that they would be convinced to send their school-aged children to in-person classes when the majority Around 22% indicate that nothing will convince of the population is vaccinated. them to send their children to in-person classes, and that they prefer to wait for next school year, Proportions reach 47% in urban areas with the proportion reaching 47% in the North. and 43% in Bangkok. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 43 Health Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 07 44 Fear of catching COVID - 19 prevented many households from accessing medical services Around 57% of households needed medical assistance since March 2020. Proportions reach over 60% in Bangkok and in the South. Arounds 32% of those who needed medical assistance were not able to access medical services. Proportions are highest in the North and among low-income households at over 40%, and lowest in the Central region (26%) and among better-off households (23%). Fear from catching Coronavirus (50%), followed by lack of financial resources (23%), is the most common reason for inability to access medical services. Lack of financial resources is more frequent among households in the Northeast (40%) and lower income groups (32%) than those in the Central region (8%) and better-off groups (7%). Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 45 Access to and use of COVID - 19 tests is quite limited Around 52% of households have COVID-19 testing centers available in their community. Proportions are highest in the Central region at 58% and lowest in Bangkok at 32%. Only 16% of respondents have been tested for Coronavirus. Proportions are lowest in the Northeast (9%) and highest in Bangkok (26%). More men (18%) than women (14%) were tested. Around 62% of those who were tested took a swab test and 19% took the rapid test. Only a third of those who were tested in the North and Northeast took the swab test compared with nearly 80% in the Central region and in Bangkok. More women (65%) than men (59%) took the swab test. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 46 Most people are aware of the availability of the vaccine, mainly through media and social media First heard about the availability of the vaccine through (%) 100 4 4 3 5 3 4 5 4 6 3 5 7 14 18 17 80 40 60 28 25 32 19 39 Over 90% of respondents indicate that the vaccine is available in the country and 40 about 66% know where they can get it. 57 50 50 50 47 46 20 0 100 3 3 3 4 4 5 Thailand Rural Urban Bangkok Low High 6 2 4 4 7 7 Area Income group 26 20 80 20 Media/phone Social media Local auth./health care worker Family/Neighbors Other 27 32 40 20 60 28 35 Most people heard about the vaccine for the 40 first time through TV and to a lesser extent 53 60 50 Facebook & Twitter. 20 41 35 47 People in more vulnerable regions and groups 0 also heard about the vaccine from healthcare Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok workers and local authorities. Region Media/phone Social media Local auth./health care worker Family/Neighbors Other Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 47 Vaccine hesitancy is high among low education and low-income groups, and to a lesser extent the youth Around 6% of respondents indicate The highest proportions of those Around a third of respondents they have been vaccinated. At the who were vaccinated are among do not plan to get vaccinated, and regional level, proportions vary from health & social workers (38%), rates exceed 36% among low income, the low of 4% in the North to the high those in public administration low education and younger groups. of 14% in the South. (19%) and those in accommodation & food services (12%). Around 3% or less of trade, manufacturing and construction workers were vaccinated. Proportion of people who plan to get the vaccine (%) 100 3 3 4 5 4 1 6 4 4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3 19 23 27 31 30 30 80 33 35 30 36 36 34 36 36 39 39 60 40 76 74 65 67 65 66 66 62 60 59 60 61 59 55 59 53 20 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Primary & High school Low High Below 35 35 yrs & less & above years older Area Region Gender Education Income group Age Yes No (DK) (Refused) Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 48 Vaccine hesitancy is driven by concerns about the side effects of the vaccine Nearly 80% of those who do not Around 10% believe they are not plan to get the vaccine are worried enough at risk, and proportions about its side effects. Concerns are are higher among those outside highest among women, low education Bangkok and the Central region, and older groups. men and the youth. Main reason why people do not plan to get the vaccine (%) 100 1 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 1 4 2 9 13 14 3 7 11 8 10 10 7 16 12 16 5 15 0 1 12 80 3 6 2 3 1 6 0 2 6 8 5 7 5 60 85 83 82 40 77 78 78 77 80 75 72 76 70 70 68 70 71 20 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Primary & High school Low High Below 35 35 yrs & less & above years older Area Region Gender Education Income group Age Worried about the side effects of the vaccine Do not think vaccine is effective Against vaccines Worried of getting infected Not enough at risk Some other reason (DK/refused) Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 49 People would be more convinced to get the vaccine if doctors and family members get vaccinated Would be more likely to receive the vaccine if the following receive it… Doctors Thailand 41% Low-income 44% Low-education 44% Youth 34% Family Thailand Low-income Low-education Youth members 40% 42% 40% 34% Community Thailand Low-income Low-education Youth leaders 35% 38% 40% 28% Celebrities Thailand 32% Low-income 34% Low-education 39% Youth 22% Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 50 100 Ineligibility in the current 39 38 phase, followed by shortage 80 41 41 42 42 44 47 46 44 44 49 50 49 of vaccines, is among the main difficulties people 60 19 19 encounter for getting 17 17 15 13 12 14 11 15 10 15 10 2 12 6 3 vaccinated 40 5 3 7 6 4 8 9 6 9 5 9 6 5 8 9 5 11 8 7 13 4 5 9 8 12 Access to vaccine centers seem also problematic in the North and 20 32 32 the South, as well as for men. 28 29 27 23 29 29 28 29 29 27 26 21 However, many espondents could not list specific difficulties. 0 Thailand Rural Urban North Northeast Central South Bangkok Men Women Low High Below 35 35 yrs & years older Area Region Gender Income group Age Ineligible in current phase Acces to vaccine centers Registration problems Not enough vaccines Other Note: Traditional services include wholesale & retail trade, transportation, accommodation & food, and household services; Modern services include ICT, financial services, real estate and human development. Impact of COVID - 19 On Thailand’s Households Round 1 51