A panel data analysis of nonlinear government expenditure and income inequality dynamics in a macroprudential policy regime was conducted on a panel of 15 emerging countries from 1985–2019, where there had been a non-prudential regime from 1985–1999 and a prudential regime from 2000–2019. The paper explored the validity of the nonlinearity between government expenditure and income inequality in the macroprudential policy regime as well as the threshold level at which excessive spending reduces income inequality using the Bayesian spatial lag panel smooth transition regression (BSPSTR) and fix effect models. The BSPSTR model was adopted due to its ability to address the problems of heterogeneity, endogeneity, and cross-section correlation in a nonlinear framework. Moreover, as the transition variable often varies across time and space, the effect of the independent variables can also be time- and space-varying. The results reveal evidence of a nonlinear effect between government spending and income inequality, where the minimum level of government spending is found to be 29.89 percent of GDP, above which expenditure reduces inequality in emerging countries. The findings confirmed an inverted U-shaped relationship. The focal policy recommendation is that fiscal policy decisions that will reinforce the need for more emphasis on education and public expenditure on education and health, as important tools for improving income inequality, are crucial for these economies. Caution is needed when introducing macroprudential policies, especially at a low level of government expenditure.

Providing and using energy efficiently is hampered by concerns about the environment and the unpredictability of fossil fuel prices and quantities. To address these issues, energy planning is a crucial tool. The aim of the study was to prioritize renewable energy options for use in Mae Sariang’s microgrid using an analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to produce electricity. A prioritization exercise involved the use of questionnaire surveys to involve five expert groups with varying backgrounds in Thailand’s renewable energy sector. We looked at five primary criteria. The following four combinations were suggested: (1) Grid + Battery Energy Storage System (BESS); (2) Grid + BESS + Solar Photovoltaic (PV); (3) Grid + Diesel Generator (DG) + PV; and (4) Grid + DG + Hydro + PV. To meet demand for electricity, each option has the capacity to produce at least 6 MW of power. The findings indicated that production (24.7%) is the most significant criterion, closely followed by economics (24.2%), technology (18.5%), social and environmental (18.1%), and structure (14.5%). Option II is strongly advised in terms of economic and structural criteria, while option I has a considerable advantage in terms of production criteria and the impact on society and the environment. The preferences of options I, IV, and III were ranked, with option II being the most preferred choice out of the four.