Supanat highlights the lesson from neglected sidewalks lacking clear ownership, urging the BMA to develop a “Bangkok Asset Management Map” to open a citywide map of public assets and end the cycle of passing responsibility between agencies.
On 15 Jun 2026 GMT+7, reporters noted that Supanat Minchainan, MP for Bangkok's 9th district from the Prachachon Party, posted on Facebook about issues managing public assets in Bangkok. He referenced a key lesson from a complaint received in May 2025 GMT+7 via the Bangkok Sightseeing page concerning damaged sidewalks opposite the Orange Line BTS station in Minburi district. He explained that he coordinated with district councilors to contact Minburi District Office for repairs, as Ramkhamhaeng Road is a BMA asset. However, the district office responded that the area was under the Orange Line construction project, thus under the Mass Rapid Transit Authority of Thailand's (MRTA) responsibility. Supanat then contacted MRTA, which inspected and completed repairs by March 2026 GMT+7.
Interestingly, MRTA later replied with a letter and site plans confirming that the location was never within their jurisdiction. This incident raises an important question for society: although the sidewalk was repaired, who truly holds responsibility—BMA, MRTA, or perhaps the Metropolitan Electricity Authority (MEA), which had previously requested to use the area to bury power lines underground?
Supanat continued that the biggest current problem for BMA is the inability to identify the responsible party. This is not isolated but a chronic issue citywide, causing delays in resolving public grievances. Multiple agencies overlap in managing public assets along the same road, including district offices, the Department of Public Works, Drainage and Sewerage Department, Traffic and Transportation Department, Environment Department, Department of Highways, Department of Rural Roads, Expressway Authority, MRTA, State Railway of Thailand, MEA, Metropolitan Waterworks Authority, National Telecom (NT), and various communication service concessionaires. During construction phases, responsibilities become even more complex and confusing. Sometimes, asset owners deny responsibility due to forgetfulness. Citizens see damaged sidewalks, potholes, sunken manholes, leaning poles, or broken bridges but must contact many agencies and pass requests back and forth to find who must fix them.
Given these limitations, Supanat proposed that BMA urgently take the lead to develop the “Bangkok Asset Management Map” —a map displaying public assets and their responsible agencies within Bangkok. The data should be publicly accessible with an easy-to-use backend system allowing citizens to verify details. It should specify roads, sidewalks, bridges, overpasses, tunnels, canals, embankments, pumping stations, manhole covers, lamp posts, electric poles, communication towers, CCTV cameras, and other utilities, indicating which agency manages each. It should also detail areas temporarily handed over to other agencies during construction, current maintenance responsibilities, maintenance history, budget usage, repair schedule alerts, and clearly distinguish between public and private roads.
Supanat concluded that effective urban problem-solving does not start with repairs alone but begins with knowing who owns and is responsible for each asset. If such information is openly available and verifiable through the Bangkok Asset Management Map, the tendency to pass responsibility among agencies will diminish. Monitoring work will be easier and more efficient, ultimately improving convenience and restoring genuine safety for Bangkok’s citizens.