Comparative Study on OVOP of Japan and OTOP of Thailand: Lesson Learned for Myanmar Narratives

Abstract

This study examines the one village – one product public policy process by comparing Thailand’s OTOP scheme and Japan’s OVOP scheme. The specific objectives of this study are 1) to examine the policy process on the OVOP of Japan and OTOP of Thailand and 2) to explore lessons learn for OVOP practices in Myanmar by comparing the OVOP scheme and OTOP scheme. This study conducted the comparative analysis with a backbone of the public process: problem identification, policy formulation, and policy implementation for one village, one product (OVOP), and one tampon, one product (OTOP). The three diagnosis models analyzed these three phases of the public policy process for each respective stage. Multiple streams such as the iron triangle, and top-down, bottom-up approach models exist. This study adopted documentary analysis techniques such as comparative contextual, and thematic analysis as major research methods. The system extracts the required data and information form relevant textbooks, academic articles periodical journals, and websites. The first findings of this comparative analysis indicate that the 1997 financial crisis was a significant problem for OTOP, while the economic stagnation of Oita Prefecture was a major factor in the agenda-setting of OVOP. In the policy formulation process, Thailand established OTOP by the iron triangle because Thaksin and the TRT party won the election and took the major role in coordinating the iron triangle mechanism. On one side, OVOP is advocated solely by Hiramatsu and is not aligned with an iron triangle. OTOP used the Top-down policy implementation approach, and OVOP used bottom-up approach for policy implementation. According to the result of the comparative analysis, Myanmar can learn lessons from its  One village, one product scheme initiatives for forthcomings.