Participatory development activities at local level : case studies in villages of Central Thailand : an analysis of people's participation in the planned development process using the concept of the "Linking loops"

Abstract

Participatory development activities at local level in a sub-district located in the Central Plain of Thailand were studied employing the theoretical concept of the "linking loops" to analyze the related interactions among target group members and between the local level and superordinated organizations.The participatory development planning approach was first introduced in Thailand through her Fourth National Economic and Social Development Plan (1977-1981) as a strategy to apply the bottom-up concept.The qualitative, in-depth study covers nine projects at different stages of the planned development process alternatively covering the stages of initiation, implementation and completion. Despite the variety of projects involving different groups of the local population within the three case study villages in close vicinity, all these are set in the same socio-cultural context which allows direct comparison.Drawing on selected theoretical sociological explanations of the dimensions and determinants of people's participation, the conceptual and analytical framework is focussed on an actor-oriented approach using the theoretical concept of the "linking loops" to explicate the complex dynamics evolving in Thai rural society when engaged in local-level planning.By their mechanism of initiation, as explained in terms of the "linking loops" concept, three categories of projects are distinguished including village initiated projects (VIP) and government initiated projects (GIP) as well as projects initiated by villagers with a view to securing government support (V/GP). The comparison of hypothesis test results by project category leads to their classification as explanations of narrow range pertaining to one project category only, of medium range covering two out of the three categories, or of wide range rendering explanations valid for all three project categories.Six general hypotheses and their sub-hypotheses addressing as many stages of the project cycle are tested. The results of hypothesis testing vary by project category as summarized hereunder.VIP were effective owing to people's involvement in setting the project objectives, despite differences and conflicts; utilization of local knowledge in data collection and analysis; broad formal consensus on project design; active involvement in project approval; active involvement in implementation; and involvement in project evaluation through participatory monitoring and evaluation.V/GP differ substantially because the test results show that local-level projects initiated by villagers and obtaining resources from on-going government programmes were of limited effectiveness. The constraints include lack of people's involvement in the formulation of objectives, thus reinforcing dissent and conflict; differences in perception between local people and government agents with regard to data collection and analysis; lack of people's involvement and formal consensus on project design; lack of local interest in project approval due to complicated procedure followed by several government organizations involved; lack of people's participation in on- going project implementation due to changed circumstances and reassessment of the erstwhile situation; and lack of involvement in project evaluation, in the absence of participatory monitoring and evaluation.GIP implemented at local-level were found ineffective as a consequence of lack of local people's involvement in the specification of objectives and formulation of projects, aggravated by conflicting priorities among local people; differences in perception between local people and government agents regarding data collection and analysis; limited extent of people's participation in designing activities and weak consensus; lack of interest among local people not involved in project approval; discontinuation of people's participation in on-going implementation due to new perception after reassessment of the erstwhile situation, poor organizational set-up by the implementing agency, disagreement between local people and government agent, and conflict among local people; and lack of people's involvement in project evaluation, in the absence of participatory monitoring and evaluation.Overall, it is concluded that local-level plans are, indeed, of interest to local people. They tend to become ineffective, however, at any of the various stages of the planned development process, if people's participation is lacking in the formulation of project objectives, complicated by differing and conflicting objectives among local people; if differences in perception prevail between local people and government agents with regard to data collection and analysis; if deficiencies in project design are aggravated by the exclusion of local people from endorsing projects and procedure is complicated engaging several government organizations at the approval stage; if discontinuation of people's participation jeopardizes on-going implementation; and if project performance and outcome are assessed without participatory monitoring and evaluation.Recognizing certain existing deficiencies with a view to people's participation in the planned development process of local-level projects, policy recommendations are made focussing on suitability, design and intervention, taking into account local socio-economic, cultural and political factors. Moreover, the necessity of decentralization is stressed so as to strengthen people's participation in the planned development process. This means that wholesome delegation of responsibility in terms of decision-making power and budget allocation as well as finance control to the local level of development administration is essential to facilitate and foster participatory planning.