National Resources Atlas of Thailand

National resource mapping in Thailand

Larry Sternstein · 1974

This paper provides a systematic review of the National Resources Atlas of Thailand, published by the Royal Thai Survey Department in August 1972 in both Thai and English. The atlas, comprising a series of maps at the scale of 1:2,500,000, was intended to assist development planning. The author first criticizes the organizational structure of the atlas and proposes an alternative arrangement grouped under political, physical, social, and economic environments. Through this rearrangement, several serious omissions become apparent, most notably the absence of agricultural maps—a strange deficiency for a country whose economy depends on primary production and whose population is overwhelmingly rural. The review then proceeds map by map. The hypsometric map is criticized for poorly chosen altitude intervals, misleading color screens, irregularly distributed spot heights, and lack of distinction between major and minor drainage features. Climatic maps are also assessed: the Koppen classification is deemed unsuitable for a small country like Thailand, and the delimitation of tropical rainforest and monsoon climates is shown to be erroneous, while outdated meteorological data were used. The author points out that the atlas suffers from common design flaws, including cluttered layouts, imprecise color registration, and the inclusion of irrelevant information. In examining resource maps such as geology, soils, minerals, forests, land use, and water resources, he notes that while some maps are informative, others are oversimplified or based on obsolete data. The population and education maps are likewise considered inadequate in classification and timeliness. Regarding transportation and communications, the paper argues that the atlas merely describes facilities without discussing transport policy or the role of transport in development planning; inland waterways are treated superficially despite their potential. The administrative divisions map is deemed useful but does not address the question of optimal territorial organization for development. The author also examines the physical format of the atlas, criticizing its permanent binding as impractical for frequent revisions and recommending loose-leaf or boxed formats, citing the Atlas of Australian Resources as a positive example. Finally, the paper traces the atlas's lineage from earlier editions: the 1964 maps accompanying the Encyclopaedia of Thai Geography, the two-volume atlas of 1966 and 1968, the 1969 edition, and the 1972 edition. The author expresses regret that the later edition dropped the vital maps of electric power systems and telecommunications that existed in the 1969 version. In conclusion, while praising the atlas as a creditable first effort, the author emphasizes the need for comprehensive coverage, improved design, up-to-date data, and coordinated agency input to produce an effective national resource atlas in the future.