An Application of Design Thinking: A Case Study of the 'Klaeng Din' Royal Initiative Project

Abstract

The degradation of soil resources in the southern region of Thailand, specifically the occurrence of severe acid sulfate soils (ASS), represents a multifaceted challenge that aligns with the conceptualization of a “wicked problem.” Such problems are characterized by their extreme complexity, where scientific, economic, and social variables are inextricably intertwined, rendering traditional linear interventions largely ineffective. The complexity of this issue extends beyond the mere chemical transformation of soil; it is deeply embedded within the fundamental economic systems, food security, and social fabric of local farming communities. Scientifically, the root cause of this challenge lies in the accumulation of pyrite (FeS2) within brackish water sediment layers. When peat swamp areas are drained for agricultural expansion, this mineral undergoes a rapid oxidation process upon exposure to atmospheric oxygen and water. This chemical reaction, expressed as 4FeS2 + 15O2 + 14H2O  4Fe(OH)3 + 8H2SO4, results in the formation of sulfuric acid, causing the soil pH to plummet below 4.0. This extreme acidity triggers the dissolution of toxic heavy metals, such as aluminum and iron, while simultaneously locking away essential plant nutrients in insoluble forms. Consequently, these chemical processes transform once-productive agricultural lands into barren wastes, leading to entrenched structural poverty and the displacement of local populations. The primary objective of this study is to analyze the “Klaeng Din” (teasing the soil) Royal Initiative Project through the framework of Design Thinking (DT) to elucidate its human-centered innovation pathway and its inherent flexibility, which distinguish it from conventional linear problem-solving approaches that often fail to address such complexities.

The methodology employed in this study is qualitative, utilizing a systematic literature review and thematic synthesis of data gathered from annual reports, technical documents, research articles, and soil development manuals from key organizations supporting royal initiative projects, including the Office of the Royal Development Projects Board (ORDPB), the Land Development Department (LDD), and the Chaipattana Foundation. These data were analyzed retrospectively to decode the project’s problem-solving process into five distinct stages according to the Design Thinking framework. The process began with the Empathize stage, a critical starting point for innovation, which was exemplified by King Bhumibol Adulyadej’s direct engagement with the people of Narathiwat Province in 1981. By personally observing and listening to the hardships of farmers whose lands had become infertile, the project established a foundation of deep human empathy. This understanding facilitated the Define stage, during which the problem was articulated comprehensively as both a scientific challenge involving pyrite management and a social imperative to restore the dignity and economic security of farmers through land remediation.

The core innovation of the project emerged during the Ideate stage, characterized by a counterintuitive strategy termed the “Aggravate-to-Solve” model. Rather than focusing on temporary and costly pH adjustments through standard liming practices, the Klaeng Din project opted to "tease" or intensify the soil's acidity to its maximum level. This was achieved through accelerated cycles of drying and wetting the soil to force the oxidation of all available pyrite. This stage was followed by the Prototype stage, realized through the establishment of the Pikulthong Royal Development Study Centre as a “living natural museum.” These sites served as experimental fields to test a variety of integrated methods, including leaching, the application of marl for neutralization, and biological solutions such as the planting of vetiver grass to improve soil structure. These large-scale prototypes allowed the research team to identify practical limitations and refine their methods before national implementation.              

In the Test and Iteration stage, the project provided empirical validation of its success through dramatic results in actual community farms. For instance, in the Ban Khok Ith–Khok Nai area of Narathiwat, rice yields increased from 5-10 tang per rai to 40-50 tang per rai. In Surat Thani, systematic soil management increased yields from 431 kg/rai to 708 kg/rai. A vital discovery during this stage was that reclaimed land could revert to extreme acidity within just eight months if proper water management was not maintained. This critical feedback led to an iterative refinement of the process, emphasizing the establishment of robust water management systems and ongoing farmer education to ensure long-term sustainability.             

In terms of international academic contribution, the study of the Klaeng Din project addresses several key debates in the Design Thinking literature. First, it reinforces the concept proposed by Rittel and Webber (1973) that wicked problems require flexible, non-linear approaches, particularly amid global criticism that modern applications of Design Thinking often degenerate into mere “innovation theater”, characterized by superficial adherence to steps without achieving meaningful change (Schwab, 2023). The Klaeng Din case proves that when DT principles are embraced as a core problem-solving philosophy, they can yield sustainable outcomes in both scientific and social dimensions. Furthermore, the discovery of the “Aggravate-to-Solve” model expands upon Buchanan’s (1992) theory of innovative problem-solving, which emphasizes conceiving what does not yet exist. It demonstrates that groundbreaking innovation may sometimes require a willingness to temporarily intensify a problem to address its root cause permanently, a stance that challenges standard practices focused on incremental improvement.

The retrospective analysis of state-led projects through this framework is invaluable for translating tacit knowledge into explicit, replicable models that can be shared internationally. Theoretically, this article extends the scope of Design Thinking into a retrospective analytical tool for public policy and state-led innovation. Practically, the “Aggravate-to-Solve” model serves as a profound lesson for managing other complex issues, such as urban flood management or the restoration of degraded ecosystems, which demand decision-making rooted in human empathy and flexible experimentation to achieve true sustainability.