Connect the Dots with UNDP: Beyond Hotspots – Addressing Haze at Its Roots

Assistant Professor Dr. Nion Sirimongkonlertkun on PM2.5 through the lenses of health, economics, and regional cooperation

June 17, 2026

Smiling woman in white blouse and black pants stands on a city sidewalk under an elevated road.

From “Where Does the Dust Come From?” to a Lifelong Study of PM2.5

Assistant Professor Dr. Nion Sirimongkonlertkun, a lecturer at the Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna - Chiang Rai, began studying air pollution while pursuing her doctoral degree around 2007. At the time, Northern Thailand was experiencing increasingly severe haze episodes, long before PM2.5 became a familiar term among the Thai public.

“Back then, I was curious about where the pollution was coming from. I also happened to be pregnant, which made me wonder how it might affect children and human health. That was really the starting point that led me to study this issue seriously.”

Her early research compared satellite-derived hotspot data with PM10 concentrations in Chiang Rai Province. The findings led her to two important realizations.

1. Increases in hotspots across the Mekong region were closely associated with rising particulate pollution levels.

“We found that the burning seasons in Thailand, Laos, and Myanmar were all interconnected.”

2.Air pollution does not recognize national borders.

“Chiang Rai is particularly interesting because it does not have the highest number of hotspots, yet its pollution levels can be extremely high.”

These observations shaped her understanding that the pollution is not simply a local issue affecting a single province—or even a single country—but rather a shared challenge across the region.

Over the years, she has witnessed the problem intensify in ways that are impossible to ignore.

“The problem has become increasingly visible. It’s not that we can see PM2.5 particles with the naked eye, but the haze can become so dense that it filters sunlight. You can literally see the sun turning orange.”

Two men with long-handled hoes work in a dry, leaf-covered forest clearing.

Not All Fires Are the Same

When discussing hotspots as a source of PM2.5, many people immediately think of “forest fires.” Nion, however, is quick to complicate that picture: effective responses require understanding why fires are set in the first place.

Fires in forested landscapes can range from traditional community practices to large-scale agricultural burning driven by entirely different economic forces.

For some Indigenous communities, the use of fire in rotational farming systems is part of a long-established way of life. These practices are governed by community rules and seasonal burning calendars. Burning occurs within previously cultivated areas that are cyclically reused, rather than through the expansion of forest land, and fire management is often carefully controlled.

By contrast, agricultural burning linked to monoculture farming is tied to short-term cash crop production, agricultural expansion, and economic pressures.

“Behind every fire lies a story of economics, poverty, and livelihoods.”

Too often, policy responses have focused on suppressing fires rather than understanding the root caused. The distinction between traditional land use and industrial-scale production has gone largely unexamined.

Recognizing the cultural context of certain forms of burning, she notes, does not mean allowing fires to occur without restrictions. Instead, it means creating fair and appropriate regulations tailored to different forms of land use—starting with a shared understanding of how these activities are defined.

Group of people in red shirts gathered in a wooded clearing, some seated on the ground.

PM2.5 Is More Than Just an Environmental Issue; It’s Also About the SDGs

In recent years, Nion has increasingly connected her research on air pollution with the framework of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly after collaborating with UNDP on transboundary haze issues.

Her work involved examining provincial SDG Profiles in Chiang Mai, Mae Hong Son, Chiang Rai, and Tak.

“When we studied the SDG Profiles of these four provinces, we found strong links between severe haze pollution and health challenges. At the same time, people across all four provinces consistently spoke about livelihoods and economic concerns.”

PM2.5, in her analysis, is not merely an environmental issue. It cuts across SDG 3 on Good Health and Well-being, and reaches into poverty, inequality, and quality of life in ways that maps of hotspots cannot capture.

Children exposed to prolonged haze, research shows, face elevated risks of respiratory disease, cancer, and developmental harm. Several northern provinces still record higher maternal and child mortality rates than much of the country.

“One study examined cancer-causing substances in children’s urine and found that those living near burned areas faced three times higher risks. If these children grow up and become patients, the costs will eventually be borne by the government. These are future public expenditures.”

“The patterns of haze pollution remain largely the same, while efforts to address the problem continue to evolve. Public awareness has increased significantly, and scientific evidence is receiving much greater attention.”

Yet an important gap remains.

“Many people still see it as something distant from their own lives. Yet the health impacts remain one of the most overlooked aspects of the issue.”

Group photo of participants in maroon shirts posing in a classroom with a projector screen.

From Blaming Burners to Examining the Entire Economic Chain

According to Nion, one of the biggest missing pieces in the haze conversation is the role of the private sector.

“What’s still lacking is the integration of businesses throughout the entire value chain—from upstream to downstream.”

She argues that public conversations tend to stop at the person holding the match. The economic systems behind the burning rarely come into view.

“We tend to look at hotspots and ask where they occur, but rarely ask what is being grown there, who is buying those products, and who ultimately benefits from the system.”

For this reason, solutions that focus only on banning burning or controlling symptoms are unlikely to succeed if they fail to address the underlying economic incentives. This is why she has increasingly advocated for traceability—the ability to track products back through their supply chains—both as an academic and through her work with international organizations.

“If we know who these crops are produced for, where they are going, and who benefits from them, then we can begin to create shared accountability.”

She notes that many companies have already begun developing their own traceability systems to ensure that products entering their supply chains do not originate from burned areas. Yet significant gaps remain, particularly among informal producers and farmers in remote areas who operate outside formal registration systems.

Still, she sees these efforts as an encouraging sign that the private sector is beginning to engage.

Sustainable solutions, she argues, require shared responsibility rather than placing the burden solely on farmers.

“True sustainability should begin before investments are made, by asking how a business will affect the environment in the first place.”

Governments, too, need to move beyond the annual firefighting cycle and toward structural change—starting with the incentives structure.

“Right now, provinces that successfully reduce hotspots often see resources redirected elsewhere, while areas with more burning receive larger budgets. It creates a situation where the more hotspots you have, the more funding you receive. The incentives are completely upside down.”

Provinces that succeed in reducing hotspots deserve recognition and resources—funding, forest restoration, community development—not to be quietly deprioritised. And none of this works without collective management and rules that everyone—not just regulators—regards as fair.

Forest fire with rising smoke and small flames on a hillside among trees.

UNDP as a Connector for Regional Cooperation

Dr. Nion describes UNDP as a key “connector of the dots,” bringing together governments, academics, businesses, and neighbouring countries—particularly on transboundary haze issues that require regional cooperation.

Before becoming directly involved in collaborative work on transboundary haze, she frequently participated in UNDP workshops and dialogue. Through these experiences, she came to see UNDP as an important facilitator of international collaboration.

“Thailand has forecasting systems and a strong knowledge base, and the burning situations across countries in the region are very similar. The question is how we can strengthen cooperation rather than blame one another.”

One area of focus has been fostering academic collaboration, including support for air-quality monitoring systems and knowledge exchange with neighbouring countries. Efforts are also underway to develop regional platforms related to haze management.

At the same time, she is working with UNDP to identify gaps across countries—examining what tools, platforms, and capacities already exist, and where additional support is needed. The discussion is increasingly expanding toward green economy initiatives and sustainable investment across the Greater Mekong Subregion.

For Nion, long-term solutions to PM2.5 require the creation of new economic mechanisms that ensure businesses and investors share responsibility for environmental impacts.

“This year, we are focusing on cross-border cooperation. It has to happen in parallel—we cannot simply conduct research and then tell others what to do. If investors are coming into our region, we need to work together to ensure that environmental costs are also taken into account, because ultimately the impacts affect all of us.”

Sustainable solutions, she believes, will only take hold when environmental responsibility, economic development, and regional cooperation advance altogether.