On October 4, 2025, Thailand lost Ammar Siamwalla, one of its most respected economists and a towering figure in the country’s development discourse.
As a former president of the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), Ammar’s contributions shaped economic policy, academic thought and public debate for decades. His passing at age 86 marks the end of an era, but his legacy endures through his ideas, writings and the countless individuals he influenced.
A global perspective
Ammar Siamwalla was born into a Muslim family of Indian descent, an identity that would give him a broad, inclusive worldview. His academic journey began at the University of London where he earned his bachelor’s degree in economics. He later pursued a PhD at Harvard University, a testament to his intellectual rigor and ambition.
Before returning to Thailand, Ammar taught economics at Yale University, immersing himself in global economic thought and research. He also served as visiting professor, Food Research Institute, Stanford University in 1975-76 and was research fellow, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington, DC from 1978 to 1984
His international experience would later inform his critical approach to Thai economic policy.
Upon returning to Thailand, Ammar assumed a special professorship at Thammasat University, where he nurtured a new generation of economists. In 1990, he took the helm as president of TDRI, guiding the think tank’s research and public advocacy until 1995. Under his leadership, TDRI became known for its independent and evidence-based analysis, influencing policymakers and civil society alike.
Challenging the rice premium policy
One of Ammar’s most celebrated contributions was his critique of “rice premium” — a government-imposed export tax introduced in around 1949 on rice that was exported by the private sector.
The rice premium was increased substantially in 1955 as a quick fix after the Thai government had abolished the multiple exchange rate regime that used to keep the domestic rice price well below the world price, which made it easier for the government to procure 1.5 million tons of rice for Great Britain after World War II in lieu of war reparations.
During the next 30 years the rice premium had become a substantial tax for exported rice until the rate was set to zero in 1986.
Ammar argued that the policy unfairly depressed the price of paddy rice for Thai farmers, forcing them to bear the cost of state intervention.
“Under the rice premium policy, the government had seized the opportunity to sell more rice via its government-to-government trade as the Commerce Ministry could export rice at lower prices than commercial entities due to its ability to lower the rice premium rate for its own export, usually to 1 baht per ton,” explained Viroj NaRanong, research director at TDRI and a close former colleague who co-authored the book, “Compendium on Rice”, with Ammar.
The debate between Ammar and a few other economists with the Commerce Ministry spanning almost three decades finally resulted in a complete policy change in 1986 when the government decided to scrap all rice export taxes a few years after a world price slump.
1997 Asian financial crisis
In the run-up to the 1997 Asian financial crisis, Ammar was among the few economists who called in early 1997 for the devaluation of the baht to avert disaster.
The Finance Ministry, the Bank of Thailand and high-profile banker Olarn Chaipravat, then president of Siam Commercial Bank, however, insisted on defending the fixed exchange rate, leading to the depletion of international reserves and forcing Thailand to totally float the baht and seek emergency credit from the International Monetary Fund.
In the aftermath of the 1997 financial crisis, Ammar led TDRI researchers in a comprehensive analysis of the crisis and advocated reforms in the financial system. His critical commentary on government policies consistently made headlines and influenced policy debates at the highest levels.
Market intervention: A critical perspective
Despite his support for farmers, Ammar was consistently skeptical of government intervention in market pricing, particularly subsidies during periods of low market prices.
He famously pointed out that rice, unlike crude oil which can be monopolized by OPEC, is a perishable commodity. And the fact that rice is traded by many countries makes price fixing both impractical and potentially harmful.
Nevertheless, Thai governments have continued to offer price subsidies, buying rice directly from farmers, especially during the harvest season when market prices drop due to a flux of supply.
Ammar repeatedly warned that heavy-handed government intervention could foster widespread corruption. He was vindicated during Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra’s administration, which implemented a rice mortgage scheme that practically offered to buy every grain of rice at a fixed price.
The project proved a disaster when the government was unable to sell its rice as expected and as a result ran out of money to pay the amount it owed the farmers. The scheme was also blamed for the military coup.
Yingluck was accused and eventually convicted for her failure to prevent the severe losses and corruption while she fled into exile. Her commerce minister, along with senior officials and rice traders, were jailed for corruption.
Backing universal health coverage
During the era of populist policies under the Thai Rak Thai government led by Thaksin Shinawatra, Ammar was a vocal critic of several projects.
However, he was almost entirely supportive of the universal health coverage scheme, known popularly as the 30-baht programme.
His main reservation concerned the scheme’s per capita funding. Ammar and his colleagues fought for higher financial support to ensure sustainability and quality of universal healthcare.
A gentleman with integrity and principles
“Personally Ammar was an outspoken person who was always keen in going into public debates, but he was also very cautious when his actions might affect other colleagues, even indirectly,” said Viroj.
For instance, Ammar used his pen names “Ivory Tower” or its Thai version Hor Koy Nga-Chang to write and circulate a few articles in several media, calling for a significant devaluation of the baht, instead of organizing a press conference, out of respect for the differing opinions within the TDRI.
And while he consistently turned down offers to be appointed as a cabinet minister, in 2006 he quietly, although reluctantly, accepted his appointment to the National Legislative Assembly after learning that another senior colleague was willing to accept the same appointment.
Ammar’s approach to politics was one of principled distance, unlike his friend the late Virabongsa Ramangkura who worked closely with several prime ministers. But he always acknowledged Virabongsa’s capabilities, once calling him “the best macro economist Thailand ever had”.
In a Facebook post, Somchai Jitsuchon, research director at TDRI, summed up Ammar’s legacy pithily: “… A straight man in a crooked country.”
Ammar had once used the phrase to describe Puey Ungphakorn, the founding father of modern Thai economics, who was forced into exile after the 1976 Thammasat University massacre. Somchai added, “Ammar is the best Thai economist I have ever met.”
“The professor can also be considered one of the first inclusive economists in Thailand, consistently demonstrating an interest in the lives of ordinary people. This is reflected in the choice to specialize as an economist in fields such as agriculture, poverty, household debt, and rural development, among others,” Somchai said.
A defender of economic discipline
Among Ammar’s many written works, one stands out for its robust defense of economic science. In the 1998 book, “Ecological Crisis: Knowledge and Debates”, co-authored with Yos Santasombat, Ammar engaged in a profound debate about the role of economics in Thailand’s development.
Yos, an anthropology professor at Chiang Mai University, argued that the government and industry had deprived farmers and communities of natural resources, leading to environmental degradation and the marginalization of rural people.
Yos criticized mainstream economics, or neoclassical economics, for focusing on growth at the expense of environmental and spiritual concerns, and for supporting centralized policies that violated rural rights.
He lamented the shift toward monoculture farming, deforestation, and consumerism as Thailand pursued industrialization in western footsteps.
Ammar countered that Yos misrepresented the discipline of economics, clarifying that economists do consider the environmental impact of development.
Ammar pointed out that so-called neoclassical economists hold diverse opinions on development and do not uniformly support centralized, growth-at-all-costs policies.
A lasting influence
Ammar’s legacy is defined by his intellectual rigor, personal integrity and a commitment to the public good. He championed policies that balanced economic growth with social equity, environment and transparency.
As Thailand reflects on his life and achievements, Ammar’s example serves as a reminder of the power of principled scholarship, open debate and dedication to the welfare of ordinary people.
