IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae11/114428.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Political Economy of Decentralization in Thailand - Does Decentralization Allow for Peasant Participation?

Author

Listed:
  • Dufhues, Thomas
  • Theesfeld, Insa
  • Buchenrieder, Gertrud
  • Munkung, Nuchanata

Abstract

One of the most important issues in rural development is empowerment and entitlement of farmers through participation. Decentralisation and participation are seemingly interdependent. Therefore, the paper begins with a theoretical discussion on the cause and effects of this interdependence. Decentralisation is often advertised as means to better incorporate the views and wishes of local actors. Yet, a decentralization process is no guaranty for political participation of local actors. The state induced decentralisation process in rural Thailand serves as an example to investigate forces that hamper or facilitate political participation. Change and uncertainty are inherent of political systems and the agricultural sector. Hence, this paper focuses in particular, on the last two politically turbulent decades in Thailand and its impact on political participation in rural Thailand. The Tambon Administration Organization (TAO) as one means of and likewise outcome of the decentralization process will serve as an example to discuss the effects of decentralisation on participation in the TAOs, using the concept of accountability. After increasing decentralization at the end of the 90s the last decade was coined by centralization policies. The ongoing political unrest could potentially trigger a new wave of political decentralization. However, the real reason for decentralization is not to distribute power but to maintain central effectiveness. Thus, we expect to see more decentralization without participation.

Suggested Citation

  • Dufhues, Thomas & Theesfeld, Insa & Buchenrieder, Gertrud & Munkung, Nuchanata, 2011. "The Political Economy of Decentralization in Thailand - Does Decentralization Allow for Peasant Participation?," 2011 International Congress, August 30-September 2, 2011, Zurich, Switzerland 114428, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114428
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.114428
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/114428/files/Dufhues_Thomas_106.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.114428?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ghazala Mansuri, 2004. "Community-Based and -Driven Development: A Critical Review," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 19(1), pages 1-39.
    2. Andersson, Krister P., 2004. "Who Talks with Whom? The Role of Repeated Interactions in Decentralized Forest Governance," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 233-249, February.
    3. Weerasak Krueathep, 2004. "Local Government Initiatives in Thailand: Cases and Lessons Learned," Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 217-239, December.
    4. Mutebi, 2004. "Recentralising while Decentralising: Centre-Local Relations and "CEO" Governors in Thailand," Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 33-53, June.
    5. Gavin Shatkin, 2004. "Globalization and Local Leadership: Growth, Power and Politics in Thailand's Eastern Seaboard," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(1), pages 11-26, March.
    6. Blair, Harry, 2000. "Participation and Accountability at the Periphery: Democratic Local Governance in Six Countries," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 21-39, January.
    7. Jean-Paul Faguet, 2008. "Decentralisation's Effects on Public Investment: Evidence and Policy Lessons from Bolivia and Colombia," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(8), pages 1100-1121.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grillos, Tara, 2017. "Participatory Budgeting and the Poor: Tracing Bias in a Multi-Staged Process in Solo, Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 343-358.
    2. Muhammad Shakil Ahmad & Noraini Bt. Abu Talib, 2013. "Local Government Systems and Decentralization: Evidence from Pakistan’s Devolution Plan," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 7(1), March.
    3. Andersson, Krister P. & Gibson, Clark C. & Lehoucq, Fabrice, 2006. "Municipal politics and forest governance: Comparative analysis of decentralization in Bolivia and Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 576-595, March.
    4. Batterbury, Simon P.J. & Fernando, Jude L., 2006. "Rescaling Governance and the Impacts of Political and Environmental Decentralization: An Introduction," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 1851-1863, November.
    5. Speer, Johanna, 2012. "Participatory Governance Reform: A Good Strategy for Increasing Government Responsiveness and Improving Public Services?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(12), pages 2379-2398.
    6. Faguet, Jean-Paul & Sánchez, Fabio, 2008. "Decentralization's Effects on Educational Outcomes in Bolivia and Colombia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1294-1316, July.
    7. Md. Imran Hossain Bhuiyan & S. M. Kamrul Hassan & Kazi Maruful Islam, 2018. "Role of Community-based Organisations in Promoting Democratic Local Governance at the Grassroots in Bangladesh," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 3(2), pages 215-224, July.
    8. Zarychta, Alan, 2020. "Making social services work better for the poor: Evidence from a natural experiment with health sector decentralization in Honduras," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    9. Ganesh Prasad Pandeya & Shree Krishna Shrestha, 2016. "Does Citizen Participation Improve Local Planning? An Empirical Analysis of Stakeholders’ Perceptions in Nepal," Journal of South Asian Development, , vol. 11(3), pages 276-304, December.
    10. Suebvises, Ploy, 2018. "Social capital, citizen participation in public administration, and public sector performance in Thailand," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 236-248.
    11. Theesfeld, Insa & Pirscher, Frauke (ed.), 2011. "Perspectives on institutional change - water management in Europe," Studies on the Agricultural and Food Sector in Transition Economies, Leibniz Institute of Agricultural Development in Transition Economies (IAMO), volume 58, number 109519.
    12. Barbara Pozzoni & Nalini Kumar, 2005. "A Review of the Literature on Participatory Approaches to Local Development for an Evaluation of the Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and Driven Development Approaches," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 20203, December.
    13. Beard, Victoria A., 2007. "Household Contributions to Community Development in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 607-625, April.
    14. Ashwini Chhatre, 2007. "Political Articulation and Accountability in Decentralization: Theory and Evidence from India," CID Working Papers 22, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    15. Krister Andersson & Elinor Ostrom, 2008. "Analyzing decentralized resource regimes from a polycentric perspective," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 41(1), pages 71-93, March.
    16. Helen M. Haugh & Alka Talwar, 2016. "Linking Social Entrepreneurship and Social Change: The Mediating Role of Empowerment," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 133(4), pages 643-658, February.
    17. Abu Elias Sarker & Faraha Nawaz, 2019. "Clientelism, Partyarchy and Democratic Backsliding: A Case Study of Local Government Elections in Bangladesh," South Asian Survey, , vol. 26(1), pages 70-91, March.
    18. Misra, Jaydev, 2008. "Centralization of Decentralized Governance - Evidence from West Bengal Panchayat," MPRA Paper 15718, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2009.
    19. Pratyusna Patnaik, 2005. "Affirmative Action and Political Participation: Elected Representatives in the Panchayats of Orissa," Working Papers 166, Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore.
    20. Araujo, M. Caridad & Ferreira, Francisco H.G. & Lanjouw, Peter & Özler, Berk, 2008. "Local inequality and project choice: Theory and evidence from Ecuador," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(5-6), pages 1022-1046, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural and Food Policy;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:eaae11:114428. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.