tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28832043189162618092024-02-22T19:34:02.828+01:00Changwat, Amphoe, TambonAndyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.comBlogger1227125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-83804922954056623642021-03-21T13:00:00.004+01:002021-03-21T13:00:00.257+01:002020 statistics<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCu1ghQf_pR1o-yB9cfybyIw7ScD3eDivHb0KoV2ZMsr2j7EG1Xry47IiSz41Wsrog9T8IKPZv9Q9AVOiPd4v-rP2y_LfFa-LD5b79Xj7_ouiiG3STqb5el19Fm4WUFXm4tfcIf5lsP70/s2048/Entity+numbers+2020-12-31.jpg" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1448" data-original-width="2048" height="226" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCu1ghQf_pR1o-yB9cfybyIw7ScD3eDivHb0KoV2ZMsr2j7EG1Xry47IiSz41Wsrog9T8IKPZv9Q9AVOiPd4v-rP2y_LfFa-LD5b79Xj7_ouiiG3STqb5el19Fm4WUFXm4tfcIf5lsP70/w320-h226/Entity+numbers+2020-12-31.jpg" width="320" /></a></div> Last week, DOPA published their <a href="https://www.dopa.go.th/news/cate1/view5975">annual statistics</a> with the numbers of the various subdivisions. The only changes are in the numbers of the local governments due to some municipal upgrades and merges. Interestingly, no new administrative villages were created last year.<p></p><p>Also included in the graphic posted to Twitter and Facebook is the population number. The detailed numbers can be found at <a href="https://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/statyear/#/">stat.dopa.go.th</a>, also there already was the annual <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2564/E/053/T_0021.PDF" target="_blank">Royal Gazette announcement with the numbers by provice</a>.</p><ul><li>Changwat: 76</li><li>Amphoe: 878</li><li>Tambon: 7255</li><li>Muban: 75086</li><li>PAO: 76</li><li>Thesaban: 2472 (2450)<ul><li>Thesaban Nakhon: 30</li><li>Thesaban Mueang: 195 (184)</li><li>Thesaban Tambon: 2247 (2236)</li></ul></li><li>TAO: 5300 (5324)</li><li>Special administrative units: 2</li></ul><div>And, as usual, I still don't believe the Tambon number, <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-many-tambon-are-there-in-thailand.html">which should be 7256</a> according to all other sources.</div>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-7204816290617408432021-01-15T13:00:00.001+01:002021-01-15T13:00:04.122+01:002020 review<p> Last year I sadly neglected this blog quite a bit, at first it was a quiet time, and then a serious sickness kept me from working on this project. In the second half of 2020 a bit more happened on the subdivisions, though I have succeeded to keep my XML as well as the Excel sheet updated, its not yet documented here.</p><p>So a short list what I have to write about</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>December 20, the Provincial Administrative Organizations had their first elections since 2014, now all have a new chairman as well as councillors.</li><li>On March 28 2021, the municipality mayor and council elections are planned to take place. [<a href="https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2051051/kingdom-gears-for-municipal-elections" target="_blank">Bangkok Post</a>]. The constituencies of them were announced in the last quarter of 2020. Apparently the TAO elections will be held later this year then.</li><li>There were some more municipal changes after my <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2020/04/municipal-upgrades-in-first-quarter-of.html">last list from April</a>.</li><li>The DOPA population statistics for December 31 2020 is already online, but not yet directly accessible on the <a href="https://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/statyear/#/">website</a>.</li></ul>In short the main numbers for December 31<p></p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>30 city municipalities (Thesaban Nakhon)</li><li>195 town municipalites (Thesaban Mueang)</li><li>2247 subdistrict municipalities (Thesaban Tambon)</li><li>5300 subdistrict administrative organizations (TAO)</li><li>Total population as of December 31 2020 from the registry: 6,6186,727 (3,2375,532 male and 3,3811,195 female)</li></ul><br /><p></p>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-22423150819831343272020-12-04T13:00:00.002+01:002020-12-04T13:00:02.055+01:00GADM subdivisions geocodes<p>A month ago I noticed that a new external identifier was added to some of the Thai provinces, taken from the GADM subdivision maps. From the rudimentary info on the <a href="https://gadm.org/" target="_blank">GADM website</a> - which even does not explain what the acronym is supposed to mean - this seems to be a project to provide maps for the country subdivisions up to the 2nd level. For Thailand it even goes down to the 3rd level, the subdistricts (Tambon). Additionally to the maps, it also defines a unique code for each subdivision. At first look an interesting project.</p><p>However - the website does not state any author of these maps, nor gives any sources. And they are only free to be used for non-commercial use, so not really free. But it got even worse.</p><p>In order to avoid wrong codes assignments in Wikidata, I had a look into the subdivision codes for Thailand - adding them to my XML files so I can easily add them by bot later. Starting to look at the alphabetically first province Amnat Charoen I noticed a big mess.</p><p></p><ul style="text-align: left;"><li>Chanuman district: all four subdistrict which are listed in GADM are in fact subdistricts of Hua Taphan district, none of the real five subdistricts has any code</li><li>Hua Taphan district: all Tambon correct in GADM</li><li>Lue Amnat district: all five subdistrict listed in GADM are in fact from Mueang Amnat Charoen district, none of the real seven subdistricts has any code</li><li>Mueang Amnat Charoen: only 11 of the 19 subdistricts have a code</li><li>Pathum Ratchawong district: 1 subdistrict correct, 4 non-existing subdistricts in GADM, and 6 real subdistrict missing</li><li>Phana district: 2 subdistrict correct, other two merged into one code</li><li>Senangkanikhom: all Tambon correct in GADM</li></ul><div>Not mentioned in the above - the romanization in GADM does not follow the recommended RTGS transcriptions. Sometimes it the outdated old RTGS like Muang instead of Mueang, sometimes it totally random. All this would have made me ignore these geocodes as they look totally unusable, but in order to avoid wrong data inserted in Wikidata I picked up the task and worked though all provinces and added them into my XMLs. In fact Amnat Charoen was one of the worst provinces, in many other it was just codes missing. Most often the codes for subdistricts created after around 1990, but other recent one are present, so its not just very outdated data. Another hint which indicates outdated data - the minor districts (King Amphoe), which were all <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2007/11/minor-districts.html">upgraded in 2007</a>, are still present as minor districts in GADM. On the other hand, the newly created <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2011/03/welcoming-76th-province-bueng-kan.html">province Bueng Kan</a> is present.</div><div><br /></div><div>In total, out of the 7256 Tambon, 1772 are missing in GADM. Since there are a total of 5927 subdistrict codes in GADM, this means 443 entries are total bogus like the one in Amnat Charoen, or dummy entries indicating a district has no subdistrict codes, or a incomplete list. Only nine of the 77 provinces had no problem.</div><div><br /></div><div>One month later I <a href="https://github.com/Ahoerstemeier/tambon/commit/d07e96324c22603e44286c54dfbfa0aeb6681410" target="_blank">completed them in my XML</a>, and can now start the bot to add all these codes to Wikidata, and probably forget about these codes. My attempt to contact the GADM team wasn't answered yet, and new version announced on the website of April 2020 did not show up yet. And if the maps are the same quality as the codes, I can only assume they are sadly totally unusable.</div><p></p>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-54423241339039129632020-06-18T12:30:00.002+02:002020-06-18T12:30:00.757+02:00PAO elections forthcoming?Shortly after the coup in 2014, all local elections were suspended and all the chairmen and councillors stayed in office way past their elected terms - most of them till today. Even though there was a national election in 2019, the local elections haven't been resumed yet. Just recently there were some news reports on a possible restart of these elections - though according to The Nation now budget problems form the latest reason for a delay ["<a href="https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30389651" target="_blank">PM says local elections 'might' be held this year</a>", The Nation, June 15 2020].<div><br /></div><div>Today another indication popped up that local elections are in the planning - probably starting with the Provincial Administrative Organizations. For 18 provinces the constituencies for a forthcoming election has been announced in the Royal Gazette, e.g. this announcement with the <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/A/043/T_0093.PDF" target="_blank">constituencies for Phuket province</a>. These 18 provinces are mostly from the South, and some in the Central region. As I guess that if the local elections for the PAO will be done for the whole country, I expect there will be further announcements in the publishing queue - these 18 were already signed by the Election Commision in April.</div><div><br /></div><div>Further local elections pending are for all the municipalities - these will also need constituencies defined first, as the current constituencies probably no longer fit with the population numbers. And of course there are many municipalities which were created or upgraded in the last 6 years. And also the TAO (subdistrict administrative organizations) need elections, though for these the constituencies are automatically defined by the boundaries of the administrative villages. And last not least Bangkok and Pattaya as special administrative units, as far as I know these two are the only which have a new governor/chairman assigned by the government.</div>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-85565899432780300112020-05-19T12:30:00.000+02:002020-05-19T12:30:09.557+02:00ccaatt geocode list updatedAbout two years since the last update, the geocode lists at <a href="https://stat.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/statMenu/newStat/ccaa.php">stat.dopa.go.th</a> have been changed again. Both the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/ccaatt.xlsx">central administrative list</a> as well as the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/rcode.xlsx">registration codes</a> have been modified.
<br />
<br />
The changes to the ccaatt list are the biggest, however this is only because the new list only contains the subdistricts now - provinces, districts and all of the subdivisions of Bangkok have been removed. Apart from these, there is only one real change - the subdistrict <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q17155267">Wat Sai</a> in Nakhon Sawan is now spelled วัดไทรย์ instead of วัดไทร. It seems like that old spelling was in fact a mistake in the ccaatt table never spotted till now, as already in 1998 there was a Royal Gazette announcement which uses the name with the silent letter at end, and even the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/01/census-1970-codebook.html">1970 census codebook</a> has it that way. In the <a href="https://photos.app.goo.gl/zfdnP9fLuzYodyxJA">1937 census</a> however, it was spelled with it. I haven't found any Royal Gazette announcement officially changing the spelling, so it's just a guess that the spelling has changed long time ago.<br />
<br />
The registration codes have a few new municipalities with a code.
<br />
<ul>
<li>1379 for Lat Sawai town (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q28790202">เทศบาลเมืองลาดสวาย</a>), Pathum Thani province</li>
<li>2059 for Prok Fa town (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q13025374">เทศบาลเมืองปรกฟ้า</a>), Chonburi province</li>
<li>3464 for Kham Nam Saep subdistrict municipality (เทศบาลตำบลคำน้ำแซบ), Ubon Ratchathani province</li>
<li>3463 for Kut Chomphu subdistrict municipality (เทศบาลตำบลกุดชมภู), Ubon Ratchathani province</li>
<li>7265 for Pak Nam subdistrict municipality (เทศบาลตำบลปากน้ำ), Suphanburi province</li>
</ul>
Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-4687962998975796182020-04-07T12:30:00.000+02:002020-04-07T12:30:07.023+02:00Municipal upgrades in first quarter of 2020The number of municipal upgrades is increasing this year, after it was very quiet for several years. There were none at all in 2016 till 2018, and nine in 2019. The following changes have been announced in the first three months of 2020 - and there are still many more forthcoming.<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q87404885&lang=en">Ban Krot</a> (เทศบาลเมืองบ้านกรด), Bang Pa-In district, Ayutthaya province, upgraded from subdistrict municipality to town [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/E/054/T_0003.PDF">Gazette</a>], effective March 3</li>
<li>Pak Phraek (เทศบาลเมืองปากแพรก), Mueang Kanchanaburi district, Kanchanaburi province, upgraded from subdistrict municipality to town [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/E/063/T_0005.PDF">Gazette</a>], effective March 18</li>
<li>Bang Mae Nang (เทศบาลเมืองบางแม่นาง), Bang Yai district, Nonthaburi province, upgraded from subdistrict administrative organization to town [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/E/066/T_0008.PDF">Gazette</a>], effective March 20</li>
<li>Huai Nam Khao (เทศบาลตำบลห้วยน้ำขาว), Khlong Thom district, Krabiprovince, upgraded from subdistrict administrative organization to subdistrict municipality [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/E/066/T_0009.PDF">Gazette</a>], effective March 20</li>
</ul>
Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-9856869462973796142020-03-26T13:00:00.000+01:002020-03-26T13:00:11.711+01:00Bueng Kan town to be createdWhen the <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2011/03/welcoming-76th-province-bueng-kan.html">new province of Bueng Kan</a> was created in 2011, there was one thing which was strikingly different to the previous batch of province creation - the capital of the province wasn't made a town (Thesaban Mueang). When the <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2011/08/geocodes-for-bueng-kan.html">TIS1099 geocodes were assigned </a>to the districts as well as the municipalities, the usual 99 for the provincial capital was left out, Bueng Kan subdistrict municipality was assigned the code 3898 instead.<br />
<br />
At that time the actual location of the provincial administrative offices wasn't decided yet, but by now its construction is long completed in the southern part of Bueng Kan subdistrict, in area administrated by the Bueng Kan subdistrict administrative organization. Apparently now the time has come to create the first town in Bueng Kan province.<br />
<br />
In the 5th meeting of the 1st board to consider draft laws on February 19 2020, a municipal change in Bueng Kan was discussed [<a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/1-2563-02-19-5.pdf">transcript</a>] . But since I c<a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/11/whats-wrong-with-lawmoigoth.html">annot access that website for 5 years already</a>, only thanks to the Google cache I can read the meeting agenda, which includes "รวมองค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลบึงกาฬ เทศบาลตำบลวิศิษฐ์ และเทศบาลตำบลบึงกาฬ อำเภอบึงกาฬ จังหวัดบึงกาฬ และเปลี่ยนแปลงเขตและฐานะเป็นเทศบาลเมืองบึงกาฬ" which means that three local governments are to be merged into the new Bueng Kan town.<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q88475294&lang=en">Bueng Kan subdistrict administrative organization</a> (องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลบึงกาฬ)</li>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q88472045&lang=en">Wisit subdistrict municipality</a> (เทศบาลตำบลวิศิษฐ์)</li>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q4985499&lang=en">Bueng Kan subdistrict municipality</a> (เทศบาลตำบลบึงกาฬ)</li>
</ul>
<div>
Bueng Kan subdistrict municipality covers parts of both Wisit and Bueng Kan subdistrict, and the other two local governments the remaining areas, thus the new Bueng Kan town will fully cover two subdistricts. It was only in 1988 that Bueng Kan subdistrict was split into these two subdistricts [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2531/D/171/1.PDF">Gazette</a>], until then the main settlement was right in the center of the subdistrict.</div>
<br />
<br />
Though I just learned about this pending change few weeks before it will become effective by publication in the Royal Gazette, it was in the making for much longer time already. In June 2019, the people in the three affected local governments <a href="https://www.bungkan.net/?p=21276">could vote on whether they approve</a> it.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-18053680469602482972020-03-23T17:17:00.002+01:002020-03-23T17:17:42.862+01:00Numbers of local government units 2019A reader notified me that the Department of Local Administration (DLA) also updated their <a href="http://www.dla.go.th/work/abt/">statistics page</a> with December 20th as its reference date. What was confusing is that the numbers of local government units <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2020/03/number-of-administrative-units-2019.html">as of December 31st from DOPA</a> differed from those in the <a href="http://www.dla.go.th/work/abt/province.jsp">provincial breakdown</a> - but once looking into the <a href="http://www.dla.go.th/work/abt/download/province_25621220.xls">XLS file</a> itself it showed that it was only this one HTML page not updated.
<br />
<br />
The interesting things about this update however are more subtile.<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>It was the third time DLA updated that page in 2019 - in June, September and now December. Normally it was only updated once a year with the end of the fiscal year in September.</li>
<li>The <a href="http://www.dla.go.th/work/abt/download/tesaban_25621220.xls">XLS file</a> listing all municipalities and TAO now has a new sheet which lists the TAO with less than 2,000 citizens. I suspect this means that these 30 TAO are about to get merged into neighboring units.</li>
</ul>
<div>
I also used the opportunity to update the municipality sheet in my <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/vjvmkmdyzaohvn6/TH%20Province.ods?dl=0">Thai province XLS</a>, and to my shame even noticed that I had four municipalities created in 2013 missing in that.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
BTW: The numbers of the local goverments will change this year for sure, the first status change was already announced in the Royal Gazette (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q87404885&lang=en">Ban Krot</a> in Ayutthaya [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2563/E/054/T_0003.PDF">Gazette</a>]), and some more can be found in the board meeting transcripts from <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/11/whats-wrong-with-lawmoigoth.html">law.moi.go.th</a> which I can hardly access at all.</div>
Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-26723828693268282372020-03-04T13:00:00.000+01:002020-03-04T13:00:09.563+01:00Number of administrative units 2019The Department of Provincial Administration has <a href="https://dopa.go.th/news/download/6138">published the latest statistics of the numbers of administrative units</a> in Thailand, as of December 31st 2019.
The numbers are as follows, with the <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2019/02/number-of-administrative-units-2018.html">2018 numbers</a> in brackets if there were changes.
<br />
<ul>
<li>Changwat: 76</li>
<li>Amphoe: 878</li>
<li>Tambon: 7255</li>
<li>Muban: 75086 (75032)</li>
<li>PAO: 76</li>
<li>Thesaban: 2450 (2442) <ul>
<li>Thesaban Nakhon: 30</li>
<li>Thesaban Mueang: 184 (179)</li>
<li>Thesaban Tambon: 2236 (2233)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>TAO: 5324 (5332)</li>
<li>Special administrative units: 2</li>
</ul>
After some years of almost no changes, now there are some new administrative villages, and also the number municipality upgrades have increased - and several more are in the pipeline, as I have noticed them in the meeting transcripts at <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/11/whats-wrong-with-lawmoigoth.html">law.moi.go.th</a>. And as usual, there is still the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-many-tambon-are-there-in-thailand.html">odd discrepancy of one subdistrict</a> which is not counted in this statistics, but still included in the population data.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-35168808973131819352019-07-11T17:36:00.000+02:002019-07-11T17:36:27.830+02:00New Muban, new municipalityI have neglected the blog for the past half year - kept myself busy with some other projects on <a href="https://www.wikidata.org/">Wikidata</a>, but also not much happened with the subdivisions lately as politics was apparently preoccupied with the general election and coronation. Another reason which made it more difficult to keep up with the news is the fact that my automatic search within the Royal Gazette for interesting new announcements strangely fails most of the time, so i fact I did miss one change to report. And as before, the municipal changes from <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/11/whats-wrong-with-lawmoigoth.html">law.moi.go.th</a> are still hardly accessible, the strange routing problem persists for several years already.
<br><br>
The following municipal changes were in discussion, and are now probably awaiting to be officially announced in the Royal Gazette.
<ul>
<li>Ban Klang TAO (<a href="http://www.banglang.org/">องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลบ้านกลาง</a>), <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q476622">San Pa Tong district</a>, Chiang Mai province, to be renamed to Wiang Tha Kham (องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลเวียงท่ากาน). [<a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/2_2562_05_08_24c.pdf">Meeting 24/2562</a>]
<li>Kut Wa TAO (องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลกุดหว้า), <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q475841">Kuchinarai district</a>, Kalasin province, to be renamed to Na Khrai TAO (องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลนาไคร้) [<a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/2_2562_06_05_27c.pdf">Meeting 27/2562</a>]
<li>Bua Khao town (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q13025357">เทศบาลเมืองบัวขาว</a>), Kuchinarai district, Kalasin province, to be renamed to Kuchinarai town (เทศบาลเมืองกุฉินารายณ์) [<a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/2_2562_06_05_27c.pdf">Meeting 27/2562</a>]
<li>Sam Khwai Phueak TAO (<a href="http://www.samkwaipuak.go.th/">องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลสามควายเผือก</a>), <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q476034">Mueang Nakhon Pathom</a> district, Nakhon Pathom province, to be upgraded to a town (เทศบาลเมืองสามควายเผือก) [<a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/2_2562_06_05_27c.pdf">Meeting 27/2562</a>]
<li>Rua Yai TAO (<a href="http://ruayai.go.th/">องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลรั้วใหญ่</a>), <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q1935409">Mueang Suphanburi</a> district, Suphanburi province, to be upgraded to a subdistrict municipality (เทศบาลตำบลรั้วใหญ่) [Meeting 29/2562]
<li>Khae Rai TAO (<a href="http://khaerai.go.th/">องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลแคราย</a>), <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q475833">Krathum Baen</a> district, Samut Sakhon province, to be upgraded to a subdistrict municipality (เทศบาลตำบลแคราย) [Meeting 29/2562]
</ul>
Additionally, the creation of one new administrative village (Muban) was announced - Mu 20 of <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q16970230">Chiang Yuen subdistrict</a>, Mueang Udon Thani district, Udon Thani province was created by splitting of area from Mu 1. The new village also got the same name as Mu 1 - Ban Chiang Yuen (บ้านเชียงยืน) [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2562/D/031/T_0042.PDF">Gazette</a>]. In a second announcement, the boundaries of Mu 1 and 14 were also adjusted [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2562/D/013/T_0087.PDF">Gazette</a>]. What is a bit odd at this new village is the fact that Mu 21 was already created in 2016, but the number 20 was not used at that time. I can only suspect that this new village was already planned at that time, but it took another 3 years to settle the boundary details and make the new village official.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-52732797717693518172019-02-20T15:29:00.001+01:002019-02-20T15:29:12.065+01:00Number of administrative units 2018The Department of Provincial Administration has <a href="https://dopa.go.th/assets/modules/news/uploads/852d2fc0f232a8fee0ec153a5c5a01975c6d2b8a9acaf5210351654616977997.pdf">published the latest statistics of the numbers of administrative units</a> in Thailand, as of December 31st 2018.
The numbers are as follows, with the <a href="https://tambon.blogspot.com/2018/03/entity-numbers-as-of-december-31st-2017.html">2017 numbers</a> in brackets if there were changes.
<br />
<ul>
<li>Changwat: 76</li>
<li>Amphoe: 878</li>
<li>Tambon: 7255</li>
<li>Muban: 75032</li>
<li>PAO: 76</li>
<li>Thesaban: 2442 (2441) <ul>
<li>Thesaban Nakhon: 30</li>
<li>Thesaban Mueang: 179 (178)</li>
<li>Thesaban Tambon: 2233</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>TAO: 5332 (5333)</li>
<li>Special administrative units: 2</li>
</ul>
There is only one change recorded, an upgrade of a TAO to a town municipality - which is the upgrade of Bang Khu Rat in Nonthaburi province. I haven't yet reported it on here, and in fact it was effective January 2nd 2019, so claiming the numbers are as of December 31st is not fully correct. As all other numbers stayed identical, it only shows that currently there's almost no activity concerning the administrative units. And as usual, there is still the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-many-tambon-are-there-in-thailand.html">odd discrepancy of one subdistrict</a> which is not counted in this statistics, but still included in the population data.
<br><br>
One interested side-note - this year the document includes an English version, which I haven't seen before.
Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-13845377019894650742018-09-20T13:00:00.000+02:002018-09-20T13:00:01.825+02:00Constituency for the 2019 general election - Part 1Yesterday, the Royal Gazette contained the <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2561/A/073/T20.PDF">announcement on the number of constituencies</a> for each province for the long-delayed first election after the coup, to be held early next year (unless delayed again). While this might look like another big step towards getting ready for the election, in real it is nothing but publishing the result of a <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2010/07/how-to-calculate-constituencies-per.html">simple algorithm</a> on how to spread 350 MPs over 76 provinces depending on their population, to make sure that each constituency has a similar number of eligible votes. As the number of constituency-based MPs changed from 375 to 350 as well as the population numbers changed since the last election, there are many provinces which will have a different number of MPs.<br />
<br />
But in real this is just the minor part of the preparing the constituencies, running the algorithm is something done in few seconds. The real work is the definition of the constituencies themselves, splitting the area of each province into different parts having a similar population number. Even in those cases where a province has now the same number of constituencies as in 2013, the <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2556/A/121/10.PDF">2013 definition</a> might have to get modified if the population within the different parts of the province has changed and would make the electoral weight of each vote too much differing. I only hope the commission has already started with that bigger task way directly after it was set up, and not waiting till the last laws for the election were officially signed - as knowing the constituency boundaries is important to start campaigning, or simply for the parties to select the candidates fitting for each constituency.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-39162056132531553432018-09-12T13:03:00.001+02:002018-09-12T13:03:19.662+02:00Finding a MubanI was recently contacted by an adoptee who was trying to find out more about her origin in Thailand. Her translated birth certificate gives the following location<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Village 10, Don Cheetuan, Dok Khamtai, Chiang Rai</blockquote>
Obviously, <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q475468">Dok Khamtai district</a> in Phayao province is meant, which already gives the first confusion as that is not in Chiang Rai. That's simply because Phayao province was created in 1977, two years after her birth, so at that time the district was still part of Chiang Rai province.<br />
<br />
When looking through the list of subdistrict in Dok Khamtai, there is no Don Cheetuan, the only one which is somewhat similar in name in <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q17118622">Don Si Chum</a>. Its name is similar enough to explain Cheetuan as a very badly translation/transcription of Si Chum, and its the only subdistrict starting with Don in all of Phayao province. It also fits as the subdistrict was created in 1972 by splitting off 12 administrative villages from Dok Khamthai subdistrict [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2517/D/061/841.PDF">Gazette</a>]. Thus the place she should look for is Ban Bun Charoen (บ้านบุญเจริญ), Mu 10 of Don Si Chum - isn't it?<br />
<br />
Sadly, it isn't that easy, because the village numbers are not stable identifiers for a location. Not only are administrative villages split when they grow to much populous, what makes it even moire difficult to identify a village is the fact that whenever a new subdistrict was created, the villages in the original subdistrict got renumbered to keep them as a list without holes.<br />
<br />
Don Si Chum was split two times, in 1976 <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q17118627">San Khong</a> was formed out of three villages from Don Si Chum and another three from Ban Tham [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2519/D/110/2450.PDF">Gazette</a>], and in 1992 eight villages were split off to form <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q17118632">Sawang Arom subdistrict</a> [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2535/D/151/71.PDF">Gazette</a>]. While in many of the Royal Gazette announcements on subdistrict creation the number changes are listed, only since 1993 this is included usually - and for both announcements relevant here it was omitted. Also, usually the village are only referenced by their number, the name is only very rarely added, so the present-day names of the villages are of no help.<br />
<br />
When renumbering the villages, there are two possible schemes - either keep the original order and shift all the villages starting with the first hole in the list. Or fill the holes by renumbering only the villages with highest numbers, which has the advantage that less villages get a new number.<br />
<br />
If the first renumbering scheme was used, then it would be easy to tell the new number of the village - the original village 10 would now be number 5, Ban Don Lek (บ้านดอนเหล็ก). But I guess the second scheme is the one more likely here. In 1976, the villages 4, 6 and 11 were split off, and assuming that there were still 12 villages in the subdistrict then, the most likely renumbering would have been<br />
<ul>
<li>Mu 9 becomes Mu 4</li>
<li>Mu 10 keeps its number</li>
<li>Mu 11 becomes Mu 6</li>
</ul>
In 1992, the villages 1,2,3,9,12,14,15 and 16 were split off, but without knowing how many Muban there were in the subdistrict at that time its impossible to guess to which number the old 10 was changed. The oldest Muban list with names of this subdistrict I have is from 1998 [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2541/E/093/305.PDF">Gazette</a>], and that already lists the 10 Muban it has today. Two Muban must have been created between 1972 and 1998, but I have no idea when if they were created before 1992, then Mu 10 might have kept its number again, otherwise the old 10 might now be Mu 1 or 2.<br />
<br />
All of the guesswork can only be solved when checking with the full government records, which hopefully the Kamnan or the district office can provide. Or maybe some older people living in the area all their life can remember how the Muban numbers changed. Only other source I could think of are old issues of the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2009/05/local-directory-2546.html">Local Directory</a> from the years between 1974 and 1992, which might be found in university libraries in Bangkok. How much easier it would have been if the Muban always kept their numbers...Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0Don Si Chum, Dok Khamtai District, Phayao 56120, Thailand19.1566487 100.0303722999999519.096647700000002 99.949691299999955 19.2166497 100.11105329999995tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-86189247347477990062018-09-07T13:09:00.000+02:002018-09-07T13:09:49.753+02:00ccaatt geocode list updatedThe Department of Provincial Administration has uploaded a new version of their <a href="http://user.khonthai.com/stat/statnew/statMenu/newStat/ccaa/">ID lists</a>, dated from August 30. Comparing them with the previous version from December last year only shows two differences
<br />
<ul>
<li>In the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/ccaatt.xlsx">ccaatt</a> list, the old ID 102204 of <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q15735818">Bang Khae Nuea subdistrict</a> (แขวงบางแคเหนือ) is now marked as obsolete.
</li>
<li>In the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/rcode.xlsx">rcode</a> list, <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q56509067">Huai Yang subdistrict municipality</a> (<a href="http://huai-yang.go.th/">เทศบาลตำบลห้วยยาง</a>) in Chaiyaphum province now received the code 3676.
</li>
</ul>
As no new administrative units were created, its not surprising there were almost no changes. And apparently those <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/03/two-new-districts-for-yala-province.html">new districts in planning</a> did not receive a code yet - unlike in past when many of <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2007/10/planned-new-districts.html">planned minor districts</a> already had IDs but then weren't created.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-34318386322573229762018-08-28T13:00:00.000+02:002018-08-28T13:00:04.825+02:00Na Duang TAO to be renamedIn the meeting number 35 on July 25th, the board to consider draft laws discussed the renaming of TAO Na Duang (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q56273593">องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลนาด้วง</a>), Na Duang district, Loei province to Kaeo Methi (องค์การบริหารส่วนตำบลแก้วเมธี). Its the first direct change to an administrative entity discussed in these board for a year when the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/10/wang-nuea-tao-to-be-merged-with-wang.html">merge of Wang Nuea</a> was approved. Due to bad timing, I cannot read the <a href="http://www.law.moi.go.th/pdf/2_2561_07_11_34s.pdf">transcript</a> - <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/11/whats-wrong-with-lawmoigoth.html">law.moi.go.th is still inaccessible</a> for me from Germany, and during my visit in Thailand recently I downloaded all the PDFs of the past year but this wasn't online then yet. Thus the announcement in the Royal Gazette will show whether the board approved the change or not.
<br><br>
The subdistrict Na Duang (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q17334677">ตำบลนาด้วง</a>) is covered by two local governments, Na Duang TAO and Na Duang subdistrict municipality (<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q56273614">เทศบาลตำบลนาด้วง</a>). Thus this name change can either mean that the TAO will get upgraded to a municipality soon, or it simply to clean up the name ambiguities of the former sanitary districts in preparation of the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2016/08/all-tao-to-become-municipalities.html">proposed upgrade of all TAO to municipalities</a>.
<br><br>
The name "Kaeo Methi" is the name of village number 5 of Na Duang subdistrict, which is also the location of the TAO office.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0185 บ้านแก้วเมธี หมู่ 5 ต.นาด้วง อ Na Duang District, Loei 42210, Thailand17.475985 102.0031392999999317.4608445 101.98296929999994 17.491125500000003 102.02330929999992tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-36700740142636287642018-05-08T13:00:00.000+02:002018-05-08T13:00:09.787+02:00Elected province governorsThe issue why the province governors are all appointed officials sent by the Ministry of Interior and not elected directly by the citizens of the respective province - like it is the case in Bangkok since 1972 - has come back into discussion as it is one of the campaign topics by the newly founded "<a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q50549434&lang=en">Future Forward Party</a>" for the forthcoming long-delayed election, as it is mentioned in <a href="https://isaanrecord.com/2018/04/27/thanathorn-juangroongruangkit-chiang-mai-khon-kaen-and-phuket-ready-to-elect-their-own-governors/">this interview with the party founder</a>.<br />
<br />
The website <a href="https://isaanrecord.com/">isaanrecords</a> has already followed up this interview with two articles on this topic. First, the <a href="https://isaanrecord.com/2018/05/01/why-cant-thailands-provinces-elect-their-own-governors/">summary of a talk</a> by Tanet Charoenmuang given in Maha Sarakham in April, describes the history of the local governments in Thailand compared to the centrally controlled administration. Tanet was a strong proposer of elected governors for many years, and I really should get back to read more of his book "<a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2015/06/thailand-late-decentralizing-country.html">Thailand - A late decentralizing country</a>" which contains his old publications on such topics.<br />
<br />
In "<a href="https://isaanrecord.com/2018/05/08/core-arguments-for-and-against-elected-governors-thainess-and-the-evolution-of-devolution/">Core arguments for and against elected governors</a>", an anonymous author again states the administrative history of the provinces vs. the local governments by municipalities. Sadly, there is no comment possible at that posting, so I have to place my nitpicking here. The article states that from 1972 till 1994 there one one municipality in Thailand - which is wrong as there were already 119 municipalities in 1972. However, what is true is that Chiang Mai was the only municipality of "Thesaban Nakhon" level after Thonburi and Phra Nakhon were merged, and until Nakhon Si Thammarat was upgraded to this highest municipal level. The other odd statement in the article is that BMA is responsible for four provinces, but in real it is only responsible for the special administrative area of Bangkok, which is something like a province.<br />
<br />
Whereas in Tanets talk the Provincial Administrative Organizations are mentioned, both articles don't mention that these local administrations were changed into fully elected bodies after the 1997 constitution. The the issue of elected vs. appointed province governors was in the political debate in the 1990s, yet the powerful Ministry of Interior at that time was able to block these proposals, and to get the topic from the agenda it gave the electorate these rather powerless local governments in parallel to the centrally controlled province administration.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-52634849042691176142018-04-26T13:00:00.000+02:002018-04-26T15:59:33.787+02:00New Roman Catholic diocese<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkHncj8nvEkpVhZzEZUB9QJtQXvNDl9JFSwcBKhxRr-8p706KwC8_iIE2lQ18W7mDxcfQQHIcmgHb7FtvCbCRYkCpcJmV11UT_4uE24Qno0KpLTCZED0pN7AtLoEwNDIHLYe3_lM44NXI/s1600/Diocese+Chiang+Rai.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="910" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkHncj8nvEkpVhZzEZUB9QJtQXvNDl9JFSwcBKhxRr-8p706KwC8_iIE2lQ18W7mDxcfQQHIcmgHb7FtvCbCRYkCpcJmV11UT_4uE24Qno0KpLTCZED0pN7AtLoEwNDIHLYe3_lM44NXI/s200/Diocese+Chiang+Rai.png" width="113" /></a></div>
It is totally quiet with any changes of the civil administrative subdivisions, so to fill the void here its a good distraction that just yesterday the Vatican has erected a new ecclesial subdivision in Thailand. The <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q867854&lang=en">diocese of Chiang Mai</a> was split, and a new diocese with the seat in Chiang Rai was erected [<a href="http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2018/04/25/0299/00649.html">Vatican news release</a>].<br />
<br />
The new <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q52160908&lang=en">diocese of Chiang Rai</a> (<i>Dioecesis Chiangraiensis</i>, สังฆมณฑลเชียงราย) covers the province Chiang Rai, Phayao, Nan and Phrae, and the district Ngao of Lampang province. As only 0.7% of the population are catholic, it is only responsible for 18062 people which in other countries would be just one parish. <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q52160556&lang=en">Joseph Vuthilert Haelom</a> has been appointed as the first bishop, and will take the post officially when he is ordained and consecrated later this year. The <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?&q=52161550">Nativity of Our Lady church</a> in mid-town Chiang Rai has become the cathedral of the new diocese.<br />
<br />
It was interesting to observe how fast after the news release the English Wikipedia got a first article about it, and quickly thereafter a German and Polish version popped up as well - there seem to be many more active editors working on Catholicism topics than the country subdivisions. The bishop so far only has a German biography, and for the cathedral there's so far only the Wikidata entry I created. I now have to create new maps for the dioceses in Wikipedia as well, those created in 2005 have a very limited resolution, as at that time SVG maps were not yet supported. The only difficulty will be to correctly add the boundary between the dioceses of Bangkok and Chanthaburi, which don't follow the administrative boundaries in Chachoengsao province. But at least of the new diocese I am already done, as you can see by the map embedded in this posting.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-43412085644600594052018-03-16T13:00:00.000+01:002018-03-16T13:00:15.499+01:00InfographicsThe fact that a good graphical display of data is usually more important (and more difficult) than the collection of the bare data was one thing I learned from the talks in the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/11/wikidatacon-my-resume.html">Wikidata Con</a> last year. Sadly drawing things myself is something I have no talent at all, but lately two of the Facebook feeds I read started to post nice infographics almost daily, of which I will present two here.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvXlx49h8J32rPTWVh28S9o08PqpnyKzYjBgqiq6X38dE46OVBUtVM3sz2HLKRZd-zU34_OZ_ET3Mcffj4d9s2xk5F8HCgK7BcS2jqkeS_MTHnstLPhdStTsFjP-Mq40tSt7HcqPd1J6U/s1600/Entity+numbers+2017-12-31.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="680" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvXlx49h8J32rPTWVh28S9o08PqpnyKzYjBgqiq6X38dE46OVBUtVM3sz2HLKRZd-zU34_OZ_ET3Mcffj4d9s2xk5F8HCgK7BcS2jqkeS_MTHnstLPhdStTsFjP-Mq40tSt7HcqPd1J6U/s320/Entity+numbers+2017-12-31.jpg" width="226" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Entity number as of 2017-12-31<br />
Source: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dopafanpage/photos/a.557953224278491.1073741825.146978675375950/1921363804604086/?type=3&theater">DOPA fanpage</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The <a href="https://www.facebook.com/dopafanpage/">DOPA fanpage</a> posted the graphical display of the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2018/03/entity-numbers-as-of-december-31st-2017.html">2017 entity numbers</a> I presented here earlier this month. Of course the numbers are the same, it being displayed this way of course looks more catchy than the plain table I posted. I don't get why they chose to display mountains for the central administrative units, and their height totally not matches the numbers. For the local administrative units, it was of course very difficult to find any icon to symbolize the Provincial Administrative Organizations (PAO) - it's already difficult to explain the function of those to someone not familiar with the Thai administrative system, and guess many Thai don't know about them either.<br />
<br style="clear: both;" />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1yg7GsW5VefVVfRjmtJqZr9YAmsu7ojGLruPLszgS_z2J8Pkpy7o_OPlh4DhDJ_JnaBU64eOHGsoi6tYZbpvHU1EvZgEw212V4JC-NiRx_cLBhxy0oMCmH9gk0LrG8dV87yDDtiefMFU/s1600/NSO+Labor+Force+Survey+2018-02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="960" data-original-width="678" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg1yg7GsW5VefVVfRjmtJqZr9YAmsu7ojGLruPLszgS_z2J8Pkpy7o_OPlh4DhDJ_JnaBU64eOHGsoi6tYZbpvHU1EvZgEw212V4JC-NiRx_cLBhxy0oMCmH9gk0LrG8dV87yDDtiefMFU/s320/NSO+Labor+Force+Survey+2018-02.jpg" width="226" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Labor force survey 2018-02<br />
Source: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NSOOFTHAILAND/photos/a.391099800941186.99359.147104232007412/1727036724014147/?type=3">NSO</a></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The second graphic is from the facebook feed of the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/NSOOFTHAILAND">National Statistics Office</a> (NSO). Most of the infographics there are of course in Thai only, but at least one they also posted in an English translation - the Labor Force Survey of February 2018. It shows interesting factoids like the numbers of employees by sector (agriculture still dominants) or the unemployment rate by education - interestingly Bachelor degree holders have the highest unemployment. Would of course be nice if they'd post translated graphics more often.<br />
<br />
While these graphics are great to catch the eye and give information to the reader, they have one big drawback - they are inaccessible to search engines. Textual data can be easily indexed and then found again later, PDF files are already more difficult especially if the raw text isn't embedded and must the retrieved by OCR, but these pure graphics won't ever be found by Google unless they implement much more artificial intelligence into their crawler.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-81622541763048368512018-03-02T13:00:00.000+01:002019-02-20T15:28:38.800+01:00Entity numbers as of December 31st 2017To round up the annual statistics announcements, today the Department of Provincial Administration did publish the <a href="https://dopa.go.th/news/download/3516">numbers of administrative units</a>. The numbers are as follows, with the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/04/number-of-administrative-units-2016.html">2016 numbers</a> in brackets if there were changes.
<br />
<ul>
<li>Changwat: 76</li>
<li>Amphoe: 878</li>
<li>Tambon: 7255</li>
<li>Muban: 75032</li>
<li>PAO: 76</li>
<li>Thesaban: 2441 <ul>
<li>Thesaban Nakhon: 30</li>
<li>Thesaban Mueang: 178</li>
<li>Thesaban Tambon: 2233</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>TAO: 5333 (5334)</li>
<li>Special administrative units: 2</li>
</ul>
The only change at all is that one subdistrict administrative organization is gone, which was the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/11/wang-nuea-merge-officially-announced.html">merge of Wang Nua TAO and municipality</a>. And as usual, there is still the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2013/07/how-many-tambon-are-there-in-thailand.html">odd discrepancy of one subdistrict</a> which is not counted in this statistics, but still included in the population data.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-12175753572222277552018-02-27T13:00:00.000+01:002018-02-27T13:00:10.132+01:00Royal Gazette announcement of population numbers 2017<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnaWfwlhQ5kMNIXUpGXvMoIXfcfbpnXnOERK9hoWpsqI9hcWXmdP9gB0Z_503ANV20gjS13zhr04sP3QOuJml0W9F0pOM4xo7VeabvrZDhnKNQKJCR_jGEuxdxcFUHACc5rh6x05fV_UE/s1600/Population+2017+Announcement.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1600" data-original-width="1132" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnaWfwlhQ5kMNIXUpGXvMoIXfcfbpnXnOERK9hoWpsqI9hcWXmdP9gB0Z_503ANV20gjS13zhr04sP3QOuJml0W9F0pOM4xo7VeabvrZDhnKNQKJCR_jGEuxdxcFUHACc5rh6x05fV_UE/s200/Population+2017+Announcement.png" width="141" /></a></div>
Last Friday, the population numbers for each province were <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2561/E/041/22.PDF">officially announced in the Royal Gazette</a>. The numbers were already online on January 1st on <a href="http://stat.dopa.go.th/">stat.dopa.go.th</a><br />
as <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2018/01/population-data-2017.html">reported here before</a>, so there shouldn't have been any news about this - but oddly there are some differences. Whereas the total numbers are same, the numbers by nationality (Thai or foreigner) differ. These numbers are a bit hidden on stat.dopa.go.th, as they are only listed with the <a href="http://stat.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/upstat_age.php">age pyramid data</a> (see my <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2018/01/population-pyramid-for-thailand.html">blog post</a>). For the whole country, the Gazette announcement states that there are 875,814 foreigners, whereas the age pyramid data states there are only 680,549.<br />
<br />
The difference is that there two more rows in that statistics - the people who are currently moving, i.e. have unregistered at their old registrar but not yet registered at a new location. These are 157,722 people. The even bigger number are 722,717 who are registered only at the central registrar (<span class="t2e_line">ทะเบียนบ้านกลาง), but not at any local one. Thus most of the "missing" foreigners are only centrally registered, and thus don't show up as foreigners in the age statistics. I now have to think a bit how to best encode this fact in <a href="https://github.com/Ahoerstemeier/tambon/tree/master/AHTambonData/Population">my XML files</a>, and of course also clean up the previous years for which I already imported one of the numbers.</span>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-90700107118831178302018-01-18T13:00:00.000+01:002018-01-18T13:00:31.477+01:00Population pyramid for ThailandA <a href="http://thailandtip.info/2018/01/17/thailaendische-maenner-sollen-mehr-arbeiten-und-mehr-kinder-zeugen/">German-language news post</a> about a recent cabinet decision trying to increase the birth rate reminded me that I wanted to post about the age distribution in Thailand already. The DOPA statistics page has the <a href="http://stat.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/upstat_age.php">age distribution for every year since 1993</a>, and even not just for the whole country but down to subdistrict level. Though my Excel skills aren't that great, I managed to build a automatically calculated graphic.<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaFmNGHJzx5zrULp_DRGUY_Be0HCrD5BP-qbHi6kRQ5BhBoZFJLGA9Fp0Yqpo5KZ4cPrCk9o6SirAi4DQLZu5ZuoWcsOAy2E6NCJP1uuvNlLRbNnkJTnhn1-95MrJE0p0s-iiYGTMNXSY/s1600/AgePyramid2017.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="511" data-original-width="551" height="370" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjaFmNGHJzx5zrULp_DRGUY_Be0HCrD5BP-qbHi6kRQ5BhBoZFJLGA9Fp0Yqpo5KZ4cPrCk9o6SirAi4DQLZu5ZuoWcsOAy2E6NCJP1uuvNlLRbNnkJTnhn1-95MrJE0p0s-iiYGTMNXSY/s400/AgePyramid2017.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Age pyramid 2017</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
One can clearly see in this pyramid that the Thai population is aging, and the number of births has decreased a lot. There are two bulges, one of births around 1970 and a smaller one for births around 1995 - maybe simply those from the 1970 bulge having children at that time. The pyramid is not much different from that of the industrialized countries in Europe.<br />
<br />
I am currently adding the national age pyramid data from those DOPA statistics into my XML, and since it is probably easier to use for non-technical users also add them into a <a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/p1bf6qetf7ctm7o/Age%20data.ods?dl=0">spreadsheet</a>. The census reports also include age distribution data, but so far I have only typed in a small part of those - the one from DOPA can be done with copy-and-paste and just a little manual work.Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-13023702716541549842018-01-04T13:00:00.000+01:002018-01-04T13:00:23.557+01:00New historical sitesThe new year started the same way as the last year ended considering the Royal Gazette announcements - both the final one and the first announcements by the Fine Arts Department on historical sites.<br />
<br />
On December 28th, the historical site <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q724970&lang=en">Wat Arun</a> was announced [<a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2560/E/323/30.PDF">Gazette</a>]. However, as it was already announced before in 1949, this time it probably was only a clarification of the extend of the protected site, as the <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2492/D/064/5280.PDF">original announcement</a> did not include any map, but was just a listing of 36 site names all over Bangkok.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0DIHChNUF1X0ERfLG7iferUgmvl_upEsiBBwbFh0E4krFzUuy3NL-4grGudwspOLWtbRiI0usPtffsE125tn9dweH76NvDj__ssjme60y9XaB34_w6Yrxls2zaHmDqV9CQ0wkT49AFxA/s1600/Ban+Damrong+Phaetyakhon.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="699" data-original-width="1021" height="219" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh0DIHChNUF1X0ERfLG7iferUgmvl_upEsiBBwbFh0E4krFzUuy3NL-4grGudwspOLWtbRiI0usPtffsE125tn9dweH76NvDj__ssjme60y9XaB34_w6Yrxls2zaHmDqV9CQ0wkT49AFxA/s320/Ban+Damrong+Phaetyakhon.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Map of Damrong Phaetyakhon residence</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
January 3rd a new site <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2561/E/001/9.PDF">was announced</a>, the <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q47034650&lang=en">residence of Phraya Damrong Phaetyakhon</a> (Huat Wirawaithaya) [in Thai: บ้านพลตรีพระยาดำรงแพทยาคุณ (ฮวด วีระไวทยะ)], a building now used by the Operation Center for Displaced Persons (สำนักงานศูนย์ดำเนินการเกี่ยวกับผู้อพยพ) of the Ministry of Interior. As it is not far from the National Library I guess I'll have a photo opportunity next time I'm in Bangkok - I probably have to visit the National Library in order to get any detailed data on the 1919 and 1929 census, so far did not find any other library to have anything.<br />
<br />
<br />Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-78610891961072502902018-01-03T13:00:00.000+01:002018-01-03T13:06:04.884+01:00New geocodes<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXZkuAVQE9BcHea0sJUto8RxXFsUytWpNwzJ2h6EI-yBaERL_5OgUbLSHHngHJgcRVfUBhaw-BDozC0BBf5byVpwPHDxvHC86M0_Qq_nsaKk6A2oxNyyQHlUEGLZSKtLqyyhtiB_3d6lI/s1600/Screenshot-2017-10-17+Statistics.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="725" data-original-width="893" height="257" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXZkuAVQE9BcHea0sJUto8RxXFsUytWpNwzJ2h6EI-yBaERL_5OgUbLSHHngHJgcRVfUBhaw-BDozC0BBf5byVpwPHDxvHC86M0_Qq_nsaKk6A2oxNyyQHlUEGLZSKtLqyyhtiB_3d6lI/s320/Screenshot-2017-10-17+Statistics.png" width="320" /></a></div>
When I <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2018/01/population-data-2017.html">yesterday mentioned</a> the geocodes missing in the October update of the ccaatt spreadsheet, I forgot to check whether there is a new version of these spreadsheet online already. Sadly there is now no text-only website anymore which indicates the last update of the tables, so I cannot rely on the <a href="https://sneakypete81.github.io/updatescanner/">web-browser app</a> to automatically check for a new version, but have to download the Excel sheets and check them each time.<br />
<br />
It turns out that on December 21st, both the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/ccaatt.xlsx">ccaatt</a> and the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/dload/rcode.xlsx">rcode</a> files were updated, adding the missing geocodes for the new subdistricts of Bangkok and assigning a code to one further municipality.<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li><span class="wikibase-labelview-text"><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q38294873&lang=en">Ratchadaphisek subdistrict</a> (</span><span class="wikibase-labelview-text"><span class="wikibase-labelview-text">แขวงรัชดาภิเษก</span>), Din Daeng: </span>102602</li>
<li><span class="wikibase-labelview-text"><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q38295359&lang=en">Rat Phatthana subdistrict</a> (</span><span class="wikibase-labelview-text"><span class="wikibase-labelview-text">แขวงราษฎร์พัฒนา</span>), Saphan Sung: </span>104402</li>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q38295431&lang=en">Thap Chang subdistrict</a> (<span class="wikibase-labelview-text">แขวงทับช้าง</span>), Saphan Sung: 104403</li>
<li><a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q47016496&lang=en">Ban Duea subdistrict municipality</a> (เทศบาลตำบลบ้านเดื่อ), Chaiyaphum province : 3677</li>
</ul>
Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-20498765748049472122018-01-02T13:14:00.000+01:002018-01-02T13:14:33.280+01:00Population data 2017Directly on New Year, the population data as of December 31st 2017 was made online on the <a href="http://stat.dopa.go.th/">DOPA website</a>, giving the population numbers for each province, district and subdistrict. Sadly, its not possible to link to the actual data for the whole country directly, only for each province - however, the <a href="http://stat.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/upstat_age_disp.php">age distribution page</a> also shows the total population numbers.<br />
<br />
The total population has increased to 66,188,503, an increase of <span class="cwcot" id="cwos">256,953 or 0.4%. One percent of the registered population are foreigners. As one can see in <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1q4KhRkkXrcJmyjuMrASZnjEkKvsSZSxgOBrqQEKsYGY/edit?usp=sharing">my spreadsheet with the numbers at province level</a>, the biggest increase by percent was in Samut Sakhon by 2.1%, in fact all of the provinces around Bangkok gained whereas Bangkok again lost a little.</span><br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEht__m77udqCQNolTUKV985ik9R6-4mksDi2f_bN1vKm3-K1s46Bf4Fab2zG9C8GruA9DWPF-sSWCE-iyttGpsez2sfN0wtjyLWF1yjgoUkF8iE5ttB020N4NhdMKpFVDfVid2J17bREi4/s1600/population2017.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" data-original-height="368" data-original-width="597" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEht__m77udqCQNolTUKV985ik9R6-4mksDi2f_bN1vKm3-K1s46Bf4Fab2zG9C8GruA9DWPF-sSWCE-iyttGpsez2sfN0wtjyLWF1yjgoUkF8iE5ttB020N4NhdMKpFVDfVid2J17bREi4/s400/population2017.png" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Population development since 1993<br />
(decrease in 2004 was data correction)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<span class="cwcot" id="cwos"><br /></span>
<span class="cwcot" id="cwos">As a little side-note - the <a href="http://stat.bora.dopa.go.th/stat/statnew/statTDD/views/showZoneData.php?rcode=1044&statType=1&year=60">population data for Saphan Sung</a> district finally gives the codes for the two new subdistricts which were forgotten in the <a href="http://tambon.blogspot.com/2017/10/new-ccaatt-geocodes.html">latest update of the ccaatt spreadsheet</a> - <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q38295359&lang=en">Rat Phatthana</a> got the 104402 and <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q38295431&lang=en">Thap Chang</a> the 104403. I still have to look through the data to check whether any municipality got a new code additionally to those already in the October update.</span><br />
<span class="cwcot" id="cwos"><br /></span>
<span class="cwcot" id="cwos">Another thing I still have to look into is the fact that at least for some months already, the population data no longer stops at the subdistrict level but also includes the administrative villages. However, as this means a tenfold increase of data (and thus download time, and XML file size) this creates some technical problems with my processing - besides the fact that the Muban data is a bit odd in some cases I have looked into so far.</span><br />
<span class="cwcot" id="cwos"><br /></span>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2883204318916261809.post-66327489918352848202017-12-20T13:00:00.000+01:002017-12-20T13:00:15.157+01:00131th National park createdLast week the 131th National Park became officially established by publishing the <a href="http://www.ratchakitcha.soc.go.th/DATA/PDF/2560/A/123/41.PDF">Royal Act</a> in the government gazette. The park covers an area of 354 km² of Chiang Mai and Lamphun province. Oddly the Royal Act does not include the name of the park, but an <a href="http://www.dnp.go.th/wildlife_it/Pic/File-PDF/GIS%20%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%90%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%82%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%B9%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%B7%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%97%E0%B8%B5%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%9B%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A9%E0%B9%8C.xls">older list of the IDs of the protected areas</a> assigned by the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation includes those parks in the process of being established, and thus it was possible to identify this new one to be the <a href="https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q6652851&lang=en">Mae Ta Khrai National Park</a> (อุทยานแห่งชาติแม่ตะไคร้).<br />
<br />
The agendas of all cabinet meetings are searchable online, and with that resource I was able to find that this new park was first discussed in <a href="https://cabinet.soc.go.th/soc/Program2-3.jsp?top_serl=99218666">November 2008</a>, and then again in <a href="https://cabinet.soc.go.th/soc/Program2-3.jsp?top_serl=99319828">June 2016</a>. I guess the first time was to get the go-ahead on the preparations, while the second was the final approvement to prepare the Royal Act.<br />
<br />
According to that ID list there are still another 16 parks pending their creation - but sadly that Excel sheet is from 2013, so there may be some other changes to that pending list in the meantime. It would be good if the DNP would have an up-to-date version of that list online, and especially not change the values anymore after a protected area became official - there are several versions of that ID list with sometimes different values floating around in long-forgotten parts of their website which only Google can still find. For example, Mae Ta Khrai according to the 2013 list has the ID 9105, however the <a href="http://park.dnp.go.th/visitor/nationparkshow.php?PTA_CODE=9101">description of the park</a> on the DNP website uses a PTA_CODE of 9101.<br />
<br />
Not being a stable ID is the reason why I haven't yet proposed it to become a property in Wikidata, to further help identifying the protected areas of Thailand. When I rechecked the list of items there to prepare the map below, I found one duplicate entry which was added under its present and a former name separately. The map below should show all of the current and (and least most) proposed national parks as saved in Wikidata.<br />
<br />
<br />
<iframe referrerpolicy="origin" sandbox="allow-scripts allow-same-origin allow-popups" src="https://query.wikidata.org/embed.html#%23National%20park%20in%20Thailand%0A%23defaultView%3AMap%0ASELECT%20DISTINCT%20%3Fentity%20%3FlocationLabel%20%3Farea%20%3Finception%20%3Fcoord%20%3Fimage%20%3FentityLabel%0AWHERE%0A%7B%0A%20%20%3Fentity%20wdt%3AP31%20wd%3AQ1969240.%0A%20%20%3Fentity%20wdt%3AP17%20wd%3AQ869.%0A%20%20OPTIONAL%20%7B%20%3Fentity%20wdt%3AP571%20%3Finception.%20%7D%0A%20%20OPTIONAL%20%7B%20%3Fentity%20wdt%3AP625%20%3Fcoord.%20%7D%0A%20%20OPTIONAL%20%7B%20%3Fentity%20wdt%3AP18%20%3Fimage.%20%7D%0A%20%20SERVICE%20wikibase%3Alabel%20%7B%20bd%3AserviceParam%20wikibase%3Alanguage%20%22en%22.%20%7D%0A%7D%0ALIMIT%201000" style="border: none; height: 50vh; width: 80vw;"></iframe>Andyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17710647861853833065noreply@blogger.com0118, Tambon Pa Miang, Amphoe Doi Saket, Chang Wat Chiang Mai 50220, Thailand18.966363773665115 99.242076873779318.962609773665115 99.2370343737793 18.970117773665116 99.2471193737793