Cross-Border Transport and Trade Facilitation along R12 Route (Thailand, Lao PDR, and Vietnam): The Thailand Perspective

1. Cross-Border Transport and Trade Facilitation
along R12 Route
(Thailand, Lao PDR and Vietnam):
The Thailand Perspective
Warawut Ruankham , Naphat Rompho,
Nattaphon Rangsaritvorakarn and Athitaya Pathan
School of Management, Mae Fah Luang University,
Chiang Rai, Thailand
1R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

2. Content
The presentation covering 6 topics
1. Introduction
2. Research questions
3. Methodology and framework
4. Empirical Results
5. Conclusion
6. Q&A
2R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

3. 1. Introduction
3R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Thailand Trade Partner (2017)
Rank Border Trade (83%) Cross-Border Trade (17%)
1 Malaysia (52%) China (35%)
2 Lao PDR (19%) Vietnam (35%)
3 Myanmar (17%) Singapore (30%)
4 Cambodia (12%)
Thailand has been trading under border trade with 4
neighboring countries including Malaysia, Laos PDR,
Myanmar and Cambodia,
Source: DFT, Thailand (2017)
and cross-border trade with 3 countries namely
Singapore, Vietnam and southern China.
Source: DFT, Thailand

4. 1. Introduction
4R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Growth rate (%)
Rank Border Trade (4.7%) Cross-Border Trade (19%)
1 Malaysia (2%) China (21%)
2 Lao PDR (6%) Vietnam (45%)
3 Myanmar (7%) Singapore (7%)
4 Cambodia (10%)
Comparing to cross-border trade, the border trade has
grown up to 4.7% (YoY) in 2017 where the cross-
border trade has grew up to 19%.
Source: DFT, Thailand (2017)
The main source of growth mainly arises from
Southern China and Vietnam
Source: DFT, Thailand

5. 1. Introduction
5R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Source: DFT, Thailand
Import:
The top 3 import products are computers and
components , Magnetic Tape, Dispenser for Computer,
ready-made clothes as well as the circuit boards
Export:
The top 3 export products are computers and
components (48.67%), fresh, frozen and dry fruits
(23.96%) as well as the circuit boards (4.86%)

6. 1. Introduction
6R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
For Thailand-China cross-border trade, export products were mainly exported through 7 border
gates (Shown in table below). And relied on two modes of transport:
1. Road transport: R9, R12, R3A and R3B
2. Water transport: Mekong River
No. Border Gate Main Route
Proportion
(%)
Export Value
(USD mn) %YoY
2017 2018(jan-Jun)
1 Mukdahan Border R9 55.41 721.03 267.83 -2.01
2 Chiang Khong Border R3A 30.71 287.84 148.44 20.23
3 Nakorn Phanom Border R12 5.40 40.92 26.10 22.58
4 Chiang Saen Border R3A 1.77 58.34 8.56 -71.98
5 Mae Sai Border R3B 0.08 1.09 0.39 -50.27
6 Ha Chang Depot Mekong 4.02 - 19.45 N/A
7 Chinag Saen Port Mekong 2.60 - 12.57 N/A
Total 100 483.85
Source: Cross-border trade statistics, DFT (2018)

7. 1. Introduction
7
R3A
R3B Kong River
R9
R12
R8
R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Road Transport
4 main routes for cross-
border trade:
• R9
• R12
• R3A
• R3B
Water Transport
• Mekong river to
• Jihong port
• Dongguan Port
• Kuan Lan Pa Port
• Se-mao Port

8. 1. Introduction
8
R9
R12
R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Threat s and Difficulties of R9 route:
Source: Krishna S. (2010)
1. The transit traffic
2. Toll fees collection in Lao
3. The mark up at China custom
4. Coordination of hours of
operation
5. Speed limit
6. Single-stop inspection (SSI) is
difficult to achieve
7. Unpredictable trading regulation
of Lao PDR
8. Inefficient advance exchange of
information
9. Illegal ant trading between
Vietnam and China
R8

9. 2. Research questions
9R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Hypothesis:
“R12 route is “New-Different-better”
route relative to R9?”
Distance, time,
rules and traffic
laws
Road Transport
Facility
Road Condition
Transport
and Trade
Facilitation: TTF
Border-crossing
facility
Transit facility
Capacity building
and Technology
used
Soft
infrastructure
Hard
Infrastructure
R12 Transport
and Trade
Facilitation

10. 2. Research questions
10
R9
R12
R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Hypothesis:
“R12 route is “New-Different-better”
route relative to R9?”
Research Questions
1. Are there any road facilitations ?
2. Are there any road conditions to
be aware of?
3. What about the transport and
trade facilitation ?
If yes,
1
2
3
4

11. 3.Methodology and framework
11R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
According to the research questions set earlier, the survey instrument and methodology has
been designed as following:
1: Are there any road
facilitations
Measurement
Road Transport facility
measure
Visual Inspection
Rating (VIR)
Methodology
2: Are there any road
conditions to be aware
of ?
Road Condition
measures
Present Serviceability
Rating (PSR)
3: What about the
transport and trade
facilitation?
transport and trade
facilitation (TTF)
Non-participation
observation (NPO)
Questions

12. 4. Empirical Results
12R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.1 General road information, rules and traffic laws of R12
From To Route
Cost of
transport
(USD) *
Distance
(Km.)
Time
(Hr.)
Speed
Limit
km./hr.
Max
Gross
Weight
(Tons)*
Over
speed
Fine
[1] Nakhon
Phanom
Nam Phao R12 -1E
40 195 2:50
City: 40
Rural: 80 38
5.89
USD
[2] Nam Phao Vinh AH15-QL1A
1,350-
1,500
291 2:00 City:
40-60
EWEC:
60-80
not
exceed
45
12.93-
1,077
USD
[3] Vinh Thanh Hoa QL1A 140 2:30
[4]Thanh Hoa Ninh Bình QL1A 85 2:30
[5] Ninh Bình HaNoi QL1A-CT01 110 1:35
[6] Hanoi Langson
QL1A-QL37-
AH1
180 3:20
Total distance, time and average speed 1,540 800 15:15 55-60
Source: Author’s survey and Yushufeng (2013)
Note: *cost of transport for 20ft container, 6-axle Articulated Vehicle
From the survey, it was found that the journey of R12 is 290 Km. shorter than R9 and 24 hours
faster. However, there are obstacles to bare in mind such as the traffic laws and prohibition
along the route

13. 4. Empirical Results
13R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.2 Road Transport facility along R12
No. Road Transport Facility
Efficiency, Potentiality and Readiness score
𝒙 S.D.
Nakhon
Phanom-
Nam Phao Nam Phao- Vinh Vinh-Hanoi
Hanoi-
Lang son
1 Standards of the route 3.00 1.75 3.75 3.75 3.06 0.94
2 Conveniences 2.75 1.25 3.25 3.50 2.69 1.01
3 Highway funding 2.75 1.75 3.50 3.75 2.94 0.90
4 Telecom network 2.00 1.50 3.25 4.00 2.69 1.14
5 Traffic congestion 3.75 2.50 2.50 2.25 2.75 0.68
6 Risks of using the route 1.25 1.75 2.00 2.25 1.81 0.43
7 Traffic signs 2.75 1.75 2.75 3.75 2.75 0.82
8 Rest areas 1.50 1.50 3.00 3.75 2.44 1.13
9 Gas station 2.00 1.75 2.75 3.75 2.56 0.90
10 Car repair shop 2.00 1.50 2.50 3.75 2.44 0.97
11 Restaurant 1.50 1.50 3.00 3.00 2.25 0.87
12 Accommodation/hotels 1.50 2.00 2.25 3.00 2.19 0.63
Average Road Facility Score 2.23 1.71 2.88 3.38 2.55 0.73
Source: Author's Survey

14. 4. Empirical Results
14R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.2 Road Transport facility along R12
Source: Author's Survey
2.23
1.71
2.88
3.38
2.55
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Nakhon
Phanom-
Nam Phao
Nam Phao-
Vinh
Vinh-Hanoi Hanoi-Lang
son
Average
Efficiency, Potentiality and Readiness score of
R12
Efficiency and Potentiality score:
The result claimed that average
score of road transport facility is
2.55 out of 4, meaning that the
overall is in the “meet the standard”
level or complies with international
standards/GMS framework and
users can conduct commercial
activities with some interruptions
and delay, e.g., the risk of using
route, geographic condition or traffic
condition/ roadside barrier.

15. 4. Empirical Results
15R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.3 Road Conditions and things to be aware: Geographical condition
Source: Author's Survey
1.5
0.5
0
0.5
2
0
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
Rocks Rain/flood Hail Smoke
/Fog
Glare Thunder
Geographical Condition
Nakhon Phanom- Nam Phao Nam Phao- Vinh
Vinh-Hanoi Hanoi-Langson
Average
4 geographic condition drivers need to
take extra careful
1. falling rock (Nam Phao-Vinh, up and
down hill)
2. glare of the sun in the afternoon
during the return driving, especially
from Lang son to Nakhon Phanom
3. smoke could be happened in some
mining industrial areas in Lao PDR.
Dusts and particles as the result of
stone mill or mining could easily be
found and could distract driver’s
attention.
4. Rain and slippery during the downhill
(Nam Phao-Vinh)

16. 4. Empirical Results
16R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.3 Road Conditions and things t o be aware: Road Roughness Condition
Source: Author's Survey
Route
Road Roughness Condition
Pothole Depression Rutting Bad Patching Raveling Crack 𝑥
Nakhon Phanom-
Nam Phao
D C C B D C C
Nam Phao- Vinh D C D C C C C
Vinh-Hanoi A A A B B A A
Hanoi-Langson A A A A A A A
Average grade C+ B C+ B C+ B B
Road roughness is one condition that drivers need to be careful as it could distract the speed and
time spent. The road roughness by Local Road Maintenance Management System (LMMS) and
International Roughness Index (IRI) consists of 6 conditions namely pothole, road depression,
rutting, bad patching from damages, raveling and cracks. The result was measured as following

17. Appendix: Road Condition
17R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

18. Appendix: Road Condition
18R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

19. 4. Empirical Results
19R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.3 Road Conditions and things to be aware
Source: Author's Survey
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
3
3.1
Pothole Depression Rutting Bad
Patching
Raveling Crack average
Road Roughness Condition (Service Grade)
C+
B
C+
B B B
C+
Road Roughness Condition
Results from Present Serviceability
Rating (PSR) found that the
average condition of R12
considered as the B grade,
which means the overall route is in
a good condition for travelling with
a few roughness and some
damages/patches.

20. 4. Empirical Results
20R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.1.3 Road Conditions and things to be aware: Traffic Condition/ Roadside barriers
Source: Author's Survey
Level of awareness
The survey have found 5
conditions regarding to the
traffic condition and
roadside barriers (animal,
plants/bush, pedestrian,
motorcycle and bicycle,
agricultural vehicle and
traffic jam)
1.5
0.75
2.5
2
0.75
1.5 1.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Animal
Plants/Bush
Pedestrian
Motorcycle
Agri.vehicle
Trafficjam
average
Traffic Condition/ Roadside barriers
(Awareness Score)
The overall level of
awareness Is 1.5 out of 3.0.
Driver should take extra
careful of pedestrians,
motorcycle, bicycle, traffic
jam, crossing animal, plants
and agricultural vehicle
respectively

21. 4. Empirical Results
21R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
4.2 Cross-Border Transport and Trade Facilitation (TTF)
Source: Author's Survey
3.06
2.44
2.88
3.17
3.06
2.38
3.63
2.38
3.38
2.31
3.06
3.19
3.17
2.38
3.19
2.91
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
(TH-LA) (LA-VT) (VT-CN) Overall
Border Crossing Facility: BCF
Transport facility: TPF
Capacity Building: CAP
Transport and Trade Facilitation Index(TTF)
R12 Transport and Trade
Facilitation (TTF)
The results found that at
overall TTF was 2.91 out of
4, which means that the
overall facilitation is the
“meet standard” level.
The facilitation complies
with the GMS and
international standards
where trader can conduct
commercial activities with
some interruptions and
delay.

22. 4. Empirical Results
22
4.2 Cross-Border Transport and Trade Facilitation (TTF)
Source: Author's Survey
3.06 3.06
3.38 3.17
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Border
Crossing
Facility: BCF
Transport
facility: TPF
Capacity
Building:
CAP
Transport
and Trade
Facilitation
Index(TTF)
(TH-LA)
2.44 2.38 2.31 2.38
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Border
Crossing
Facility:
BCF
Transport
facility: TPF
Capacity
Building:
CAP
Transport
and Trade
Facilitation
Index(TTF)
(LA-VT)
2.88
3.63
3.06 3.19
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Border
Crossing
Facility: BCF
Transport
facility: TPF
Capacity
Building:
CAP
Transport
and Trade
Facilitation
Index(TTF)
(VT-CN)
3.17
2.38
3.19
2.91
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
Border
Crossing
Facility: BCF
Transport
facility: TPF
Capacity
Building: CAP
Transport
and Trade
Facilitation
Index(TTF)
Overall

23. 5. Conclusion
23R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Conclusion
We found that R12 has potentiality and
readiness relative to R 9 because of 3
reasons as following
1) R12 is a shorter and faster route
2) the facility along R12 is in a
substantial level which implied to
GMS and international standards
and
3) The transport and Trade facilitation
is also implied to international and
GMS standard
R9
R12

24. 5. Conclusion
24R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Conclusion
New-Different-Better route?
When considering both hard and soft Infrastructure, we can conclude that the R12 is “New and
different” but might not be able to claim that better or not.
However, R12 could be the better route than R9 if “AQSIQ agreement “ between Thailand and
China and GMS CBTA are completely complied more effectively in this route.
Moreover, to pursuit the “sustainable development “ of this route, it is necessary to look into
others dimension beside economics trade and investment. For instance, the positive externality
spill over to society along the R12, the social benefit of the route, society development, citizen
participation, equality and development.
For our further study, it is very interesting to put forward the hypothesis into the “tourism
readiness” a nd facilitation of R12 as we believed in its potentiality to bring the society benefit
spill over and local economic development along the route.

25. Reference
25R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation
Attaporn P. (2010) New Trade Lane:Nanning-Bangkok Economic Corridor, 南宁-曼谷经济走廊 .
Consul-General at Nanning, China Thailand Business Information Center
Department of Foreign Trade, DFT (2018) , Cross-border trade statistics Ministry of Commerce.
http://www.dft.go.th/bts/trade-statistics
Department of International Trade Promotion (DITP) (2015) R12 connectivity of Thailand to China, Economic
worldwide, Bangkokbiz, Vol 28, No.9846, pp7
Department of Transport, DOT (2018 ) Road Inspection and Assessment Manual Local Road Maintenance
Management System (LMMS), Department of Rural Roads, Thailand
International Institution for Trade and Development, ITD Thailand (2012) Project on economic opportunity and
impact of Nan-Luang Prabang route, Phayathai, Bangkok, pp 19-20
Krishna S. (2011) R12: New Economic Route from East Thailand to Southern China And the role of
Vietnamese middlemen.ThaiBiz in China Thailand Business Information Center.
http://www.thaibizchina.com/thaibizchina/th/articles
Nucharee S.(2012). A study on Cross-Border Trade Facilitation and Regional Development along
Economic Corridors: Thailand Perspectives in Emerging Economic corridors in the Mekong Region. BRC Research Report
No.8, Bangkok Research Center, IDE-JETRO, Bangkok, Thailand
Tuangmalee P.(2015) Trade facilitation along the path of ASEAN economy: Case study of R3A route
through Lao PDR. MFU Connexion: Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences (ISSN 2286-6477), Vol. 4 No. 1. Jan-Jul 201,
Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, Thailand, pp121-147
Smith T. (2015) Regulatory direction and Import of agricultural and food products of China, Academic Seminar
on Food Safety and Food Security Year 2015 Consulate (Department of Agriculture), Consulate
General, Guangzhou, China
Yushu F.(2013) Operations Manual for Cross-Border Road Transport in Lao PDR, Thailand and Viet Nam:
A Practical Guide for Drivers, East West Economic Corridor, First edition. GMS TTF. http:// http://www.gms-cbta.org/online-
resources
Yushu F.(2011) Greater Mekong Subregion Cross-Border Transport Facilitation Agreement, Instruments
and Drafting History. Asian Development Bank, ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines, pp 9-18

26. Appendix: Border Gate (TH-LA)
26R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

27. Appendix: Border Gate (LA-VT)
27R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

28. Appendix: Border Gate (LA-VT)
28R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

29. Appendix: Border Gate (VT-CN)
29R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation

30. Appendix: Border Gate (VT-CN)
30R12 Transport and Trade Facilitation