IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-05213662.html

Insights from six case studies in the Mekong countries - 2.1. Social identities and unequal vulnerabilities in the structural transition to community-based flood risk governance in the Yom River Basin (Thailand)

Author

Listed:
  • Rebecca M. Colvin

    (ANU - Australian National University)

  • Phaothai Sin-Ampol

    (ANU - Australian National University, Fenner School of Environment and Society - ANU - Australian National University, CMU - Chiang Mai University)

  • Katherine A. Daniell

    (Fenner School of Environment and Society - ANU - Australian National University, ANU - Australian National University)

Abstract

In response to the urgency of sustainability and climate change, the Lower Yom watershed in Thailand is the site of a pilot project in floodwater detention. This has been claimed as a "participatory management" approach that develops drainage systems, micro-scale structural mitigation, and livelihood changes under community-based adaptation to flooding. This study adopted a participatory research approach to explore how different social groups experience vulnerability, as well as the changes brought about by the pilot project. This research develops a micro-level, social identity based analysis of experiences in the pilot model. Data were gathered through in-depth interviews with 38 organizational representatives and 44 individuals from urban and rural communities to capture the strengths of, and barriers to, adaptation to flooding. Participatory action research workshops at the local level, focusing on interpersonal learning, were also employed to motivate subgroups to discuss their vulnerabilities in the context of flooding and how to stabilize adaptation measures. The results show that community policy drafts were able to articulate approaches to help vulnerable groups by improving flood protection, drainage capacity for water security, flood retention conditions, and livelihood alternatives. However, a key sentiment that "flooding is acceptable, but no flooding is better" confirmed a reluctance among rural farmers, workers, the elderly, and physically exposed citizens to live with floods. From this analysis, it can be interpreted that genuine participation to support flood risk governance from the local level requires substantial effort. Engaging stakeholders beyond governments to create a more effective power balance may support the revision of existing measures and initiate a means of improving practices for community-based flood adaptation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rebecca M. Colvin & Phaothai Sin-Ampol & Katherine A. Daniell, 2022. "Insights from six case studies in the Mekong countries - 2.1. Social identities and unequal vulnerabilities in the structural transition to community-based flood risk governance in the Yom River Basin," Post-Print hal-05213662, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05213662
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-05213662v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-05213662v1/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J Rosenhead, 2006. "Past, present and future of problem structuring methods," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 759-765, July.
    2. Duncan Shaw & Alberto Franco & Mark Westcombe, 2006. "Problem structuring methods: new directions in a problematic world," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(7), pages 757-758, July.
    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. Midgley, Gerald & Cavana, Robert Y. & Brocklesby, John & Foote, Jeff L. & Wood, David R.R. & Ahuriri-Driscoll, Annabel, 2013. "Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 229(1), pages 143-154.
    2. Ya Li & Zhichang Zhu & Catherine M. Gerard, 2012. "Learning from Conflict Resolution: An Opportunity to Systems Thinking," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 209-220, March.
    3. Khadka, Chiranjeewee & Hujala, Teppo & Wolfslehner, Bernhard & Vacik, Harald, 2013. "Problem structuring in participatory forest planning," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-11.
    4. Luke Houghton & David Tuffley, 2015. "Towards a Methodology of Wicked Problem Exploration through Concept Shifting and Tension Point Analysis," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(3), pages 283-297, May.
    5. Abuabara, Leila & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2021. "Surveying applications of Strategic Options Development and Analysis (SODA) from 1989 to 2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(3), pages 1051-1065.
    6. Nina Tura & Lea Hannola & Mikko Pynnönen, 2017. "Agile Methods for Boosting the Commercialization Process of New Technology," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(03), pages 1-23, June.
    7. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    8. Vieira, Fabiana C. & Ferreira, Fernando A.F. & Govindan, Kannan & Ferreira, Neuza C.M.Q.F. & Banaitis, Audrius, 2022. "Measuring urban digitalization using cognitive mapping and the best worst method (BWM)," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    9. Scholz, Roland W. & Czichos, Reiner & Parycek, Peter & Lampoltshammer, Thomas J., 2020. "Organizational vulnerability of digital threats: A first validation of an assessment method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(2), pages 627-643.
    10. Mahmoud Dehghan Nayeri & Moein Khazaei & Fatemeh Alinasab-Imani, 2020. "The Critical Heuristics of Iranian Banking Credit System: Analysis of the Antithetical Opinions of the Beneficiaries," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 363-392, June.
    11. Wright, George & Cairns, George & O'Brien, Frances A. & Goodwin, Paul, 2019. "Scenario analysis to support decision making in addressing wicked problems: Pitfalls and potential," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 278(1), pages 3-19.
    12. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm, 2023. "Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 461-478, June.
    13. Gabriela Viale Pereira & Elsa Estevez & Diego Cardona & Carlos Chesñevar & Pablo Collazzo-Yelpo & Maria Alexandra Cunha & Eduardo Henrique Diniz & Alex Antonio Ferraresi & Frida Marina Fischer & Flúvi, 2020. "South American Expert Roundtable: Increasing Adaptive Governance Capacity for Coping with Unintended Side Effects of Digital Transformation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-47, January.
    14. William Jones & Mahesh Sooriyabandara & Mike Yearworth & Angela Doufexi & R. Eddie Wilson, 2016. "Planning For 5G: A Problem Structuring Approach for Survival in the Telecoms Industry," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 301-321, July.
    15. Konsti-Laakso, Suvi & Rantala, Tero, 2018. "Managing community engagement: A process model for urban planning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1040-1049.
    16. Ackermann, Fran, 2024. "Managing grand challenges: Extending the scope of problem structuring methods and behavioural operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 319(2), pages 373-383.
    17. Ha TN Hoang & Norma RA Romm, 2020. "Systemic Research Practices Towards the Development of an Eco-Community in Vietnam: some Joint Post-Facto Reflections," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 599-624, December.
    18. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    19. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    20. Ackermann, Fran & Andersen, David F. & Eden, Colin & Richardson, George P., 2011. "ScriptsMap: A tool for designing multi-method policy-making workshops," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 427-434, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:hal:journl:hal-05213662. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.