FTA Watch and allied Thai civil-society organizations have urged the EU Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) Team to strengthen its evaluation of the proposed EU–Thailand Free Trade Agreement (FTA), warning that trade commitments must not undermine public health, food sovereignty, livelihoods, consumer protection, and environmental sustainability.

On 23 January 2026, coalition members formally submitted their comments through the official SIA consultation website, addressing identified gaps in the Draft Inception Report — the phase that defines the analytical scope, methodology, and consultation framework of the assessment.

“The inception stage is critically important because it determines what will — and will not — be examined,” said Kannikar Kijtiwatchakul, Vice-chairperson of FTA Watch. “A sustainability assessment must not narrowly interpret human rights. It must reflect a holistic framework, including the right to health, the right to food, the right to livelihood, and the right to a healthy environment.”

The Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA) is a multi-phase study commissioned by the European Commission to evaluate the potential economic, social, human-rights, and environmental impacts of a proposed trade agreement. The Draft Inception Report sets the analytical framework, methodology, and consultation design. While it does not contain findings, decisions made at this stage carry significant implications, as they shape the scope and direction of subsequent assessments that may influence negotiations and policy debates.

Kannikar Kijtiwatchakul

The coalition expressed concern that the current framework places strong emphasis on trade expansion and efficiency while insufficiently analysing regulatory constraints, distributional impacts, and long-term structural risks. Civil-society organizations also stressed that several provisions reportedly sought by the European Union — particularly in areas such as intellectual property protection — extend far beyond the standards established under the WTO TRIPS Agreement.

“Trade agreements are not purely economic instruments,” Kannikar added. “They reshape policy space, market structures, and public-interest safeguards. The SIA must rigorously assess how proposed commitments may affect access to medicines, farmers’ rights, consumer protection, and environmental governance.”

Thai civil society identified several priority concerns requiring deeper and more integrated analysis:

Intellectual Property & Access to Medicines

The coalition warns that TRIPS-plus IP rules — including data exclusivity, market exclusivity, and patent term extensions — may delay generic entry, increase medicine prices, and constrain Thailand’s Universal Health Coverage system.

Agriculture & Seed Systems

Alignment with plant-variety protection standards such as UPOV 1991 may restrict farmers’ rights, increase production costs, and contribute to market concentration, with long-term implications for food sovereignty.

Market Access & Tariff Liberalisation

Rapid tariff reductions on sensitive agricultural products and alcoholic beverages may generate significant public-health risks and impose disproportionate pressure on small-scale farmers and small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

Digital Trade & Regulatory Autonomy

Binding digital trade rules may affect Thailand’s ability to regulate cross-border data flows, platform governance, consumer protection, and cybersecurity.

Environmental and Regulatory Risks from Hazardous and Problematic Waste Trade

Regulatory gaps may increase risks associated with plastic waste, electronic waste, and other environmentally harmful trade flows.

FTA Watch reaffirmed its commitment to constructive engagement throughout the SIA process and called for stakeholder consultations that meaningfully engage public-health advocates, small-scale farmers, consumer organizations, labour representatives, and environmental groups.

“A credible sustainability assessment must fully capture real-world social, health, and environmental risks — not merely projected trade gains. Human-rights principles cannot be invoked rhetorically while the practical consequences of TRIPS-plus and other trade commitments are downplayed or ignored,” Kannikar stated.