The thesis examined factors influencing Khmer beggars coming into Thailand, their living conditions, the begging careers of Khmer migrants, and beggar problems that caused Thailand over 200 million baht annually from exported remittances. It was found that of all the foreign beggars in the country, Khmer beggars were the most numerous. Most came voluntarily through brokers and settled in Bangkok in their own communities or resided with their friends to help one another.
However, bilateral assistance between Thailand and Cambodia has not been successful, because, when repatriated, they usually come back again. This is because begging can generate a good income and the beggars perceive that begging is an honest career and the income can improve their and their family’s living conditions.
    
From a survey conducted from October 1, 1999 to September 30, 2002, it was revealed that, of all 7,804 foreign beggars, Khmers accounted for 7,702 or 98.7%, followed by 94 Burmese (1.2%), seven Laotians (0.09%), and one Bangladeshi (0.01%). There were 4,167 adult Khmer beggars, divided into 3,464 females and 703 males, and 3,562 children, divided into 1,699 females and 1,863 males (p. 68).
    
Some Khmer child beggars came voluntarily while others were tricked into taking up the career. Many came from broken families or were orphaned. First-timers were brought into the country by brokers and worked under their supervision. They were from poor farming families doing hawking or being handymen for supplementary income. Child beggars also perceive that begging is an honest career, and a means to earn money to support their families in their homeland (pp. 86, 106). For illegal migrant beggars, they came voluntarily, paying their dues to brokers about 2,500 baht per person. Children might pay 1,000 baht per person and the brokers would take them to Bangkok (pp. 108-109). They could earn as much as 1,000 baht per day, whereas a domestic worker might earn around 1,000 baht to 2,500 baht per month, averaging 50 to 100 baht per day. However, a child beggar might earn approximately 6,000 baht a month (p. 88).
    
To provide assistance to Khmer beggars, the Thai government authorized the Department of Public Welfare to give shelters and psychological rehabilitation at a welfare house in Nothaburi Province before repatriation. Nevertheless, the problem was that these child beggars illegally returned to the country, because they had no one to turn to, owing to being orphaned or to being neglected by their parents. Additionally, begging could generate a large sum of money. Their supervisors or brokers also tried to smuggle them in. As for bilateral assistance attempts, meetings were held to find legal channels to help these beggars. Thailand also recommended that Cambodia train beggar returnees to work in agricultural careers, so that they were able to work in their community permanently. The two countries signed an agreement in 2003 on the prevention and solution to the problem of human trafficking. A Homeland Center was established in Phnom Penh to accommodate child beggar repartees. These returnees are provided with career training and education for one year. It is believed that this attempt might be able to solve child beggar problems in the long term and to reduce the number of Khmer beggars in Thailand (pp. 114-123).