1
Aspirations, Capabilities and Negotiations: Understanding Livelihood Strategies to Pursue Wellbeing Among Households in Northeastern and Southern Thailand Awae Masae, Dussadee Ayuwat, Buncha Somboonsuke and Malee Sabaiying
Abstract Thailand development process following the modernization model brings about rapid changes in various aspects and effect people aspirations and livelihoods strategies. The wide expansion of the market economy urges local people to adjust some of their aspirations and forces their livelihoods strategies to adapt in order to meet these aspirations and achieve their wellbeing. Plufiactivity and diversification of activities are increasing within each household with the main purpose to secure their livelihoods. Young members are inclined towards non-agricultural activities. Full-time farming is no longer common among rural and peri-urban households. As access and ability to make use of different types of resources differ among households in different socio-economic categories while their aspirations are generally similar, negotiations between initial aspirations and abilities to aspire are often common in the process of making their living. Although different types of resources and their transformation contribute to the fulfilment of aspirations, material resources are substantially significance in the livelihood process as their transformation can be easily made. The importance of human resources is widely seen as increasing given that other types of resources are decreasing in amount and level of using.
Keywords: Wellbeing, Aspirations, Livelihood Strategies, Resource Transformation, Northeastern and Southern Thailand.
This paper was prepared based on a partial analysis of the Thailand component of the research project on wellbeing in developing countries (WeD) funded by ESRC, United Kingdom. Contact address:
[email protected] or
[email protected]
1
2
Introduction The process of development in the contemporary Thailand has been widely known as following the modernisation approach that believes strongly on the leading role of enhancing economic growth to improve the country economy and well-being of the population. Based on this approach, all sectors have been enhanced to increase productivities. Several changes have been made to facilitate the growth, especially improvement of infra-structure and institutions (Keyes, 1989). The overall achievement in enhancing economic growth has been impressive at the macro level as evidenced by the rapid change in the country economy from being one of the poor countries in the world in 1950s to become a middle-income country at the present. Industrialisation and urbanisation have also been apparent, as a dramatic increase in values of products form industrial sectors and rapid expansion of urban areas have been evident (Wyatt, 2003; Warr, 2005). The agricultural sector has also been developed but in much slower paces. However, modernisation in Thailand seems to have its own style which is different from what is normally experienced in the western industrialized countries. Structural change in favour of urban-industrial sector did not reduce the importance of ruralagricultural sector greatly as the time passes. Agricultural modernisation in Thailand has been promoted through the enhancement of modern agricultural practices with the main aim to increase productivity especially of cash crops and other marketable commodities. The influence of the green revolution that became apparent in 1960s brought about remarkable changes in the agricultural sector with respects to type of commodities produced and mode of production (Silcock, 1970; Rigg, 1987; Tomosugi, 1995; Changrien, 1999; Falvey, 2000). The production of cash crops has been increasingly popular among farmers, although types of agricultural commodities produced varied regionally according geographical suitability. The adoption of high yielding varieties and agricultural technologies accompanied by intensification of practices has changed mode of production to be more cash oriented. These changes have been great and brought about substantial impacts on most rural areas throughout the country, especially on labour arrangement as wage labour and mechanisation have become increasingly important and partially substituted household labour. Industrialisation has also expanded remarkably but more recently. Unlike agricultural modernisation, early industrial development appeared to take place mostly in urban areas, especially Bangkok and other. Expansion to major cities of each region such as Chiangmai in the North, Rayong in the East, Khon Kaen in the Northeast and Hat Yai in the South happened later. This expansion is contributed by the continuation of infrastructural development together with a clear policy to promote industrialisation. More recently industrial expansion has been beyond major cities as some factories were built in many rural areas nearby where good infra-structure is available (The Industrial and Finance Cooperation of Thailand, 1990; Phongphaichit and Baker, 1995; Banphsirichote, 1993; Parnwell and Aghiros, 1996). Although the country economy is known as agricultural-based with a high proportion of the population engaging in farming, the increasing importance of the industrial sector in accelerating the overall economic growth has led agricultural significance to the country economy gradually faded out. The declining importance of agricultural sector has been more apparent most recently and appeared to be rather stagnation as compared to the fast growing industrial sector (Phongphaichit and Baker, 1995; Parnwell and Arghiros, 1996; Rigg, 1998a). As a consequence, farming activities lose their popularity especially among younger generation. This change results in deagrarianisation of rural societies. Full-time farming is no
2
3 longer common feature of rural households, as members of rural household tend engage in multiple activities of which some are off-farm (Rigg, 2005b). The availability of jobs with relatively higher wage sand more secure income in industrial sector as compared to the agricultural sector induces considerable proportion of rural labour mainly from farm households to migrate or commute to work in the industrial sector. The successful growth of the country economy has undoubtedly brought about several advancements in the country that benefit the overall population. Nevertheless, it has been also observed that unequal distribution of wealth is apparent and poverty incidence remain an important problem in the country. Disparities between regions and between rural and urban are often addressed, especially as reflected strongly in the area of income, and more recently through other areas such as occupation and education. These disparities are strongly caused by uneven development of the country and should affect people’s ways of living in many respects (Parnwell and Arghiros, 1996). The most common feature is the increasing dependence on cash income both in relation to production and consumption. Different groups of people tend to have ability to cope with this change differently. Entry into debt among disadvantaged groups is widely document (see for example Hirsch, 1990; Bunmee, 2000; Thongsongsang, 2004). Economic activities and job preference tend to change towards cashoriented activities and wage work. Educational importance increases in response to aspirations of ‘better jobs’ and ‘better social status.” At the same time local culture and social values remain strongly influential at the local level where social bonds and traditional practices are widely observed (Masae, 2001; Nartsupha and Lertwicha, 1998; Mulder, 1996). The co-existence of the relatively large but stagnant agricultural sector with the rapid growing industrial sector in the country is undoubtedly peculiar to the country in this stage of development. This peculiar feature of modernisation is particularly interesting for further investigation to understand how people change their aspirations in response to related forces in the name of development and their adaptation in making their living in order to pursue wellbeing. Based on our research fieldwork in various communities covering urban, periurban and rural communities in the northeast and the south regions of Thailand, this paper attempts to explore and discuss changes taking places at the local level and effects on livelihoods of Thai people under conditions of rapid change. The discussion is based on synthesis of both qualitative and quantitative field data based on WeD framework. In this framework, a livelihood is viewed as an important process involving resource transformation that is substantial for sustaining people’s livings and pursuing well-being. The focus of our discussion in this is on livelihoods strategies in which occupation, migration as well as commuting are highlighted. Education is also brought into the discussion as it functions as a driving force of change in livelihood that people often regard as an important investment for the future.
Research Background and Methodology The presentation and discussion made in this paper is based on a partial analysis of data collected under the Thailand component of the research program entitled “Wellbeing in Developing Countries” or “WeD Research Program”, a large research program operated in 4 countries including Ethiopia, Peru, Bangladesh, and Thailand. The general objective of this project is to reconceptualize wellbeing based on a thorough understanding its social and cultural constructions at the local level and communication with the universal conception. The overarching of this research program is to test the assumption that development brings not only prosperity, but also a better quality of life, despite its effects on social cohesion and cultural integrity (McGregor, 2007).
3
4 An integrated methodology was adopted by this research of both quantitative and qualitative natures. A wide range of techniques was adopted with some adjustments to suit each country and study site. Quantitative data collection was primarily undertaken through the use of a specially designed questionnaire for all research sites called “Resource and Need Questionnaire” (RANQ). Qualitative studies were undertaken by means of community profiling, key informant interview, household diary keeping and thematic process research based on in-dept interview of household heads and related individual members. Number of sites varied among four countries with the main idea to cover rural, peri-urban and urban sites. In Thailand, 7 sites were selected of which 4 in the northeastern region and 3 in the southern region. Rural sites selected were; Ban Dong and Ban Tha in the northearstern region region, and Ban Thung Naam in the southern region. Peri-urban sites selected were Ban Lao in the northeastern region and Ban Chai Khao in the southern region. Two urban communities selected were Chumchon Nai Meuang in the northeastern region and Chumchon Klai Talaad in the southern region. Samples used for quantitative investigation varied from 40 to 250 households per community, as we decided to include all households in cases they were below 250 and limit to 250 for larger communities. The total number of core households per community differed between 9 the northeastern communities and 12 in southern communities. Data used for writing this paper were based ob RANQ data and core household data which are related to the livelihood theme. The presentation that follows is based on synthesis of these two sets of data.
Livelihoods and Well-being: Related Concepts Although individuals and households may view well-being in various ways, common to them is their endeavor to achieve it. In attempting to achieve well-being, livelihood is placed centrally as it is the means which people make their living. In this sense, livelihood plays a substantial role in the pursuit of well-being of people. Therefore, the link between livelihood and well-being is strong as it forms a key component of process under which various resources are transformed in a complex way in order to achieve well-being. The term livelihood may be defined differently in existing literature. In common English usage a livelihood is explained the term broadly as ‘a means of securing the necessities of life’ (New Oxford English Dictionary). This meaning is too simple and seems inadequate in its application to development studies. A more elaborative definition given by Chambers and Conway, two leading figures in the field of development as follows: “A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope and recover from stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base” (Chambers and Conway, 1992). Different approaches of livelihoods were developed that share the basic components corresponding to this definition. The most well known approach or framework is the Sustainable Livelihood Framework used by the UK Department of International Development (DFID) which draws upon a strong notion of capital assets namely natural, human, financial, physical and social capital assets. In this framework, livelihood strategies are influenced by access to various forms of assets and involve transformation and processes of these assets to produce livelihoods outcomes. Livelihood strategies can be natural resource (NR) and non-natural resource (non-NR) based as well as migration. Different levels of access to these resources together with ability to transform these resources should determine
4
5 type of strategies adopted by different households or individual. It is apparent in this framework that activities either NR or non-NR based including migration form main strategies to sustain people’s livelihoods. Among activities undertaken by households or individual members of households, occupation constitutes an undeniably important activity which contributes strongly to livelihood outcomes (Carney, 1998). However, there exist some arguments about the above framework. An interesting argument is given by Messer and Townsley (2003) who refer livelihood as different elements that contribute or effect people’s abilities to ensure a living for them and their households. This notion evolved from Sen’s formulation of “exchange entitlement” in his masterpiece study on famine. Sen forcefully argued that the famine or extreme poverty is not caused by the failure of production by providing an example of Bangladesh in which grain production in the year of famine was higher than in normal years. He called the cause of famine in this situation as “exchange entitlement” which he referred to the problem of access among the poor to benefit from the exchange of grain which is their main staple (Sen, 1981). After that the concept of entitlement has been widely applied in the study of natural resources management and rural development (Leach, Mean and Scoones, 1999). Based on this concept, the livelihood, especially in rural contexts, denotes the idea that rural households and individuals may have “choices” broader than what can be captured by views of “institutions” in the market framework. This is primarily due to limitation of “capital assets” they have at their disposal (Carney, 1998). Further observation made by McGregor (1998) suggests that people in rural areas compose their livelihoods by using variety of resources they command in various ways available to them at their best in a given time. Actions they make in composing livelihoods may sometime be seen as ‘irrational’ or not relevant to the institutional or market framework, and such actions could further erode their living in the future. Nevertheless, their actions are viewed as based on the foreseen of the “best possible outcomes”, and such outcomes could simply mean to sustain their livings at the point of time they make the decision. It is important to note here that the above conceal discussion on livelihood shows a strong connection between the livelihood framework and the Resource Profile Approach adopted in the WeD research. However, the point of departure of the Resource Profile Approach from the aforementioned sustainable livelihood framework can be distinguished by the Sen’s notion of “functioning capability” (Sen,1985; Sen, 1999). He differentiates between “what people actually have” (which indicate potential actions they could undertake) and “what people are able manage to do and to be”. From this angle, the sustainable livelihood framework offers a robust analysis of “having”, but has little to say about what actually people can manage to do. The Resource Profile Approach applied to the WeD research allows us to deal with both “what people have” and “what people do and think” (McGregor and Kebede, 2003). The term livelihood used here therefore is not confined only to the idea of having, but also includes the idea of doing and thinking. By conceiving livelihood from the view of Resource Profile Approach allows us to lay the premise in guiding our investigation as follows. First, resources are not in themselves the state of well-being, but they are critical factors that permit individuals and households to engage in the ‘process” through which they are transformed and well-being outcomes are resulted. Second, it is by means of process that individuals and households are convened to enormous possible ways to make their livings. Third, the process in which individuals and households engage becomes articulated in our analysis to explain how resources are transformed in ways that are possible to different households and individuals to achieve their aspirations which reflect their state of well-being.
People’s Aspiration and Values Related to Livelihoods
5
6
In the face of rapid change, some aspirations of local people in Thailand appear to follow the changes occurring in the wider environment. Their well connection to the market through the improvement of roads, communication networks and access to market and media spur their needs and aspirations beyond what they normally have under traditional settings. Based on our field investigation in different types of communities in both Northeastern and Southern regions, important aspirations include the areas of survival and having a good job, consumption, education, family and place, and social status. Some of these areas are common to all groups of people across different types of communities and regions, whiles others are varied among different groups of people and localities. Survival and having a good job form fundamental aspirations which individuals and households in different socio-economic status aim differently. Poor people tend to limit their aspiration to survival, while average and well-off people are more eager to have a good job. What they mean as a good job may not explicit, but they generally refer to any job with reasonable and secure income. Salaried jobs, especially permanent government employees are generally have a high preference as they are not only secure but also endorse other benefits of accessing to good welfare and endowing with good social status. However, there is no easy path to get a good job as it is generally required a reasonable educational qualification and sometime need additional social connection. As people in poor socioeconomic status cannot easily meet these requirements, thus they are discouraged to have such a high ambition. In the face of hardship and struggling to cope with more complicated lives under conditions of rapid change, they tend to limit their aspiration to survival or what they express in relation to job is to “have a job” rather than “a good job”. Having a job is more critically needed among the poor in urban communities as other sources of earnings are more limited than in rural communities. Aspirations on consumption are increasingly inclined toward having modern consumer goods of various kinds. Many consumer goods are known as “convenience goods” that are seen as increasingly important for the present days living. Although individuals and households in different socio-economic status tend to show their different levels of aspiration on the consumption of convenience goods at the time of the study, consumption mobilization is generally observed. Having a good house to live, or in some cases having their own houses separated from their parents is also important aspiration. The latter is quite common among relatively young families who still live with their parents. This can be very critical among poor households with large number of members sheltering in houses with poor conditions and limited spaces. Education is the area of aspiration that is common regardless of groups and localities. However, levels of education aspired are different among different socio-economic status and localities. Regional difference is not clearly evidenced. The majority households expressed their aspiration to have their children attain good education, ultimately to hold a university degree. Although this inspiration is common among household heads regardless of different socio-economic status, some poor households are mare reluctant or diffident to keep hold of this ambition as they have to balance with their foreseen obstacle to support their children as well as to negotiate with the need for their children to help ease household burden. Examples are found in rural communities in both Northeastern and Southern regions. A household in Ban Dong in Northeastern region expressed that their need to have their children easing household chores is more urgent than the need to have them graduated. A member of a poor in Ban Thung Naam in Southern region said that he could not aim to go beyond secondary education when he was young as he could not see how her poor and widowed mother could support him. Different levels of aspiration are found between Buddhists and Muslims
6
7 households in Southern region dealing with the importance of secular education. Common to the majority Muslim households are their aspiration to have their children receiving both religious education and secular education. The main purpose of religious education is to provide reasonable foundation for their children to have morally good life. The Buddhist households do not seem to see religious education is strongly important for their children. Thai values on family and place of origin is widely documented in literature and observed to remain strong among members of communities under this study. This is strongly evidenced by frequent observation of returning home of massive number of migrants during important festivals of Songkran among Thai Buddhists in general, and “Duan Sip” (the Tenth Month) among Buddhists or Hari Raya among Muslims in southern region which are considered as the family festivals, transferring remittance to parents, caring ageing parents, preferring living in the community of origin surrounding by relatives, and wishing to settle permanently at the home community at last, even among successful migrants. They are many examples in this study that confirm the strong values about family tie. Many households still have many members living together in the same houses or in some cases a few houses of close relatives are constructed in the same piece of land like a compound. When asked, common responses to these practices concern with their preference of living closely to their families and relatives, their concerned about ageing parents to be left alone, the feeling of “warm” or “ob-oon” to be together with family members and relatives, and so on. A household head in rural community of Ban Tha in the Northeastern region told us about monetary assistance form his children who migrated to Bangkok: “money to pay for fertilizer, tractor hiring was received from children working in Bangkok”. The majority of out-migrants interviewed expressed their wish to return home when they accumulate enough money to build their own houses or to improve the old houses with poor conditions. It is common to find ageing people living with one of their children who closely look after them. This is often surrounded by close relatives who also offer some helps. A few successful migrants were observed to buy lands and built houses preparing to return home in the near future. An interesting explanation received from a young Muslim couple in Ban Tung Naam in Southern Thailand, who successfully migrated to Phuket and work in Tourism. He and his family planned to return home by investing in agricultural land and rubber plantation. The husband expressed that he feel the life in a modern city like Phuket was “too complicated and risky” for their children to grow up, especially to maintain their identity as being Muslim, while the village “is more simple and provide them with good social environment”. Values of attaining as well as maintaining good social status is also important among Thais. Attempts to improve livelihoods can be partially related to improving social status of households and individual members. Although elevating social status is important to all groups, households with different socio-economic status seem to aim differently. While the poor seem to be less concerned and more humble about elevating their social status, the medium and well-off households seem to be concerned more about securing their and their children social status. Expressions of social status are related to having good jobs, assets accumulation, improving abilities to work and live, abilities to make contribution to communal activities, securing income and living, and good education. Key informants in Northeastern communities expressed that migrants change their status in various ways including showing modern styles consumption and dressing, ability to organize phaa pa (rope offering festival) in the home community, new skills for improving occupational activities. In a Northeastern remote village of Ban Tha, a key informant expressed further about the abilities to bring new ideas for community development, to accumulate highly valuable assets such as motorcycle and truck, to support children to have better education. Similar expressions were common in Southern communities. A special values exceptionally
7
8 found among Muslims in Southern region key is about being a religiously good person as holding a good social status.
Occupation: Pluriactivity, Diversification and Generational Difference Modernization enhances changes in occupation in various ways. Rapid industrialization together with urbanization increases job opportunities in industrialized and urban areas. While in rural areas, agricultural modernization induces the change in mode of agricultural production from a subsistence mode to a more commercial mode of production. Occupational mobility is generally a common phenomenon in the face these changes. On one hand, the availability of wide range of jobs with more secure incomes in urban-industrialized areas attracts people to be more flexible in their selection of jobs. On the other hand, change in mode of agricultural production towards more cash-oriented generally involves adoption of new technologies and practices that can also reshape patterns of agricultural production in rural areas which affect organization of labor in rural areas. At the same time there exists the increasing need for cash and change in values related to job and economic activities. These phenomena form important force on rural households and make full time farming no longer adequate for making their reasonable living, especially those with small landholding. Pluriactivity becomes a common feature in which members in each household engage in several economic activities at the same time to supplement farming activities. Dependence on agriculture is decreasing and with the trend of deagrarianisation becomes common. This means that diversification of occupations and economic activities among members of a household and community is becoming unavoidable trend. The above observations are supported by findings from this study that occupations and economic activities are diverse at the community and household level. At the same time, there exists generational difference in occupation and economic activities within each community. Regional difference and difference between types of communities are also evidenced. Household Main Occupation: rural-urban difference Considering at main economic activities undertaken by household heads as well as members and comparing between regions and types of communities, the difference in type of activities is apparent between types of communities. The difference between regions also exists but not as clear as the difference between types of communities (Table 1).
Table 1: Selected data related to occupation by region and community type Items
Northeastern
Southern
Rural
Urban
Agriculture (75)
Periurban Agriculture (43.4)
Main occupation of household head (%) Main occupation of members - % in agriculture - % in commerce - % factory worker - % professional
Agriculture (46.5)
Agriculture (50.8)
28.3 11.6 5.9 4.7
40.9 11 5 2.4
50.7 5.3 4.3 2.1
27.7 9.9 8.8 4
2.2 28 2.8 7.2
Commercial (31.3)
Although the most common main economic activity of household heads in both Northeastern and Southern regions is agriculture, the figure shows a slightly higher proportion of
8
9 household heads in the Southern region than in the Northeastern region undertaking agriculture as their main economic activity. Nevertheless, they still represent around a half of the total household heads sampled under this study. When the data were broken down into three types of communities—rural, peri-urban and urban, it is apparent that agricultural activity is crucially important to household heads in rural communities and the degree of importance declines in peri-urban communities. In urban communities, the most common economic activity undertaken by household heads is commercial activity. Agriculture is no longer regarded as main activity to the majority households in urban communities, although a few households still engage in agriculture. Data on main economic activities undertaken by all able members of households illustrated a clearer picture of the decreasing importance of agricultural activity as compared to other economic activities among members as a whole. In both regions, the data illustrate the decreasing importance of agricultural activities among members as compared to household heads. Similar findings are found in all types of communities. Occupation-inclined towards non-agricultural activities is well illustrated. Although agricultural activity still remains the most common activity undertaken by members in rural and peri-urban area, their proportions when compared with those of household heads are significantly different. This finding reflects not only that de-agrirarianisation occurs in which members of rural households are inclined towards non agricultural activities, but also a trend of generational inclination of occupation and economic activity in all types of communities. The importance of salaried jobs tends to be increasing in slow pace in all communities as a response to the continual growth of industrial and service sectors that no longer limits to urban area but also expands to rural areas with reasonable infrastructure. Diversification and Generational De-agrarianisation Diversification of economic activities has also become a common feature not only at the community level, but also at the household level. A combination of different activities occurs at the household level through reallocation of labor to undertake different activities available to them. Generational difference appears to be common as younger generations are likely to move from agricultural to non-agricultural activities.
Table 2: Groups of occupations and activities engaged by members in different age-range
Region
South
North East
AgeRange
Occupation group(%) Agric.
Artisanal
Non agric.*
Transport
0.1
0.1
Professional
Home worker
Commercial
Not in labour force
0.2
0.2
96.1
Total Other
0-14
3.2
15-24
13.4
0.7
15.9
2.0
4.6
4.3
6.3
50.9
1.8
100.0
25-34
27.6
1.5
17.3
7.8
11.9
8.9
18.8
5.6
0.6
100.0
35-44
42.5
3.4
12.7
6.0
6.7
8.5
17.4
1.3
1.6
100.0
45-54
51.5
2.4
7.8
7.5
1.7
6.1
18.1
4.1
0.7
100.0
55-64
48.2
0.5
4.7
2.6
3.1
8.4
15.7
15.7
1.0
100.0
0.5
3.3
10.8
39.9
0.9
100.0
1.1
9.1
3.3
4.1
4.8
10.1
42.0
0.9
100.0
18.8
1.1
73.3
1.1
100.0
4.7
100.0
65 up
39.9
Total
24.6
0-14
5.5
15-24
28.7
1.3
13.9
3.6
3.0
12.6
12.4
16.5
7.9
100.0
25-34
39.1
1.0
15.7
5.2
3.9
7.6
12.9
3.4
11.0
100.0
35-44
52.4
1.6
11.1
8.2
0.8
4.3
9.8
1.9
9.8
100.0
0.2
9
10
45-54
48.1
3.0
10.8
3.0
1.9
10.4
10.4
1.1
11.2
100.0
55-64
44.2
1.3
10.9
2.6
2.6
12.2
7.7
3.2
15.4
100.0
65 up
33.6
7.0
2.8
0.7
0.7
14.0
4.2
27.3
9.8
100.0
Total
33.3
1.6
9.6
3.6
1.9
11.5
8.7
21.4
8.4
100.0
* This group covers all laboring activities including factory work
Data in Table 2 illustrate the phenomenon of generational difference in occupational activities among individual members comparing between regions. Although agricultural activities remain significantly important to all age groups among members who are in labor force, their importance declines among younger age groups. And this decline is clearer in the southern region than in the northeastern region. In contrast, the proportion of members engaging in other activities, especially in the non-agricultural group, which includes laboring, and factory work, is higher among younger members. These differences can be clearly seen when compared between members aged 15-34 with those aged 35 and above. Similar trends are observed in both southern and northeastern regions, although the levels of differences somewhat differ along different types of activities. These data show that there is a high tendency of generational de-agrarianisation, especially in rural and peri-urban areas in which a high proportion of households still depend on agricultural activities for their livelihoods. Diversification of economic activities at the household level is illustrated in Table 3. Data in Table 3 reveal that the average number of activities in both Northeastern region is 3.2, while in the Southern region is 2.2 with the overall average of 2.7 activities per household and the highest frequency found is 2 activities per household for both regions (3 for the Northeast and 2 for the South). It is interesting to inform further that households engaging in 2, 3 and 4 activities have considerable proportions in both regions and in all community types, and the maximum number of activities in each community varies from 5 in urban south to 8 in rural northeast. Households engaging in only one activity represents only 17 per cent overall. All these figures reveal that diversification of occupation and economic activity is likely to be common at the household level. Further investigation shows that change of activities occurs among some individuals which means that they undertake more than one activity in a certain period of time, normally in a year round. In rural areas, other activities undertaken are often supplementing agricultural activities which reflect that full-time farming is no longer the most common feature of households. This may raise the questions of why people diversify their occupation and economic activity, and do households in different economic status differ in their in their engagement with economic activities. In order to answer these questions, further analysis is needed
Table 3 Numbers of household economic activities by region and community type Region/ Community Type Thailand South - Rural - Peri-urban - Urban North East - Rural* - Peri-urban - Urban
N 1183 650 250 250 150 533 225 196 112
Minimum 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Maximum 8 7 6 7 5 8 8 7 7
Mode 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2
Mean 2.7 2.2 2.2 2.3 2.0 3.2 3.6 3.0 2.6
Std. Deviation 1.3 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.0 1.3 1.2 1.2 1.2
10
11 * This includes two communities—very remote and remote. There appears to be two main reasons behind people’s diversification of occupations and economic activities – to reduce risk from depending on a single activity and to seek other activities perceived as better than what are traditionally undertaken within each household. The first reason is more economic based as it is related to securing livelihoods of each household or individual, and even to improve living conditions by not taking so much risk of depending on a single occupation. The latter reason can be both economic and cultural based as it is associated with the level of return or income and values regarding status of different activities. To reduce risk a household may allocate their members to different types of activities with different natures, or sometimes an individual member may engage in supplementary activities to cope with seasonality of main activities. Better monetary returns together with the perception on non-agricultural activities as “better jobs” induce younger generation to overlook household-farm activities. Although diversification of economic activities appears to be common to households in all socio-economic groups, types of activities combined are somewhat different and depending on types of communities and localities. In rural communities, households belong to poor socio-economic status are likely to combine own farm activities with laboring activities both in farm and non-farm sectors. This combination is similar to households in medium socioeconomic status. Although a small proportion in this group may have their members engaging in other “better jobs” such as commercial and professional activities, this difference appears to be depending on their qualifications and job opportunities. There is no doubt that a member with reasonable qualification is willing to enter a job or economic activity outside agriculture which is considered to be a better or good job. Rural rich households are likely to combine own farm activities with other activities which are considered as “better activities” or “good jobs”. In urban areas which a wider range of activities can be found outside agricultural sector, commercial activities are common to all economic groups. However, scale, “level” or “grade” of activities undertaken differ across different socio-economic status. Small trading at home and in nearby markets are common among poor and medium households, possibly different in scale, while rich households are likely to operate their own businesses involving significant capital investments. Economic activities combined are related their perceptions of work in which rich households are likely to combine own business of commercial types with professional work, medium and poor households are likely to have a mix combination of different types of activities including small-scale commercial activities, laboring work, motorcycle taxi driving. Nevertheless, small-scale commercial activities undertaken by poor households are limited by their capital access and can be regarded as “pity trading”. A small proportion of households in medium groups have their members working as professional and in the service sector. Laboring work undertaken by some members of poor households can be considered as having a very low status such as pulling trolley in nearby fresh markets, loading goods for transportation etc. Regional comparison reveals a lot similarity in types of activities undertaken by households within each socio-economic category, with only minor exception in relation to specific kinds of activities and natural resource dependence. At the same time, economic activities engaged by average rural households in the northeastern region are of a wider rage than in the southern region. While rice is the most important crop cultivated in both rural and peri-urban communities in the northeast, it is no longer as important in all southern communities. Cash crops widely grown in rural and peri-urban communities in the northeastern region vary from cassava, eucalyptus tree, and para rubber tree. In the contrary the most popular cash crop grown in rural and peri-urban communities is rubber. Among rural households in the northeastern region, poor households tend to depend on collection of forest product more
11
12 than in the southern region. This is clearly observed in Ban Dong which is located in a very remote area surrounded by forest land. In a quite remote community of Ban Tha, a few kinds of non-farm activities undertaken show a strong link with urban communities, especially Bankok. Examples of these activities are contract garment making, taxi and tuk tuk driving. These kinds of activities are not found being engaged by members of the rural community in the southern region. The only non-agricultural activity that shows a clear link with outside engaged widely by members of the rural community in the southern region is factory work. The difference is less apparent among urban settlers in the northeastern and the southern regions as the most common of group of activities engaged is commercial activity. However, it is interesting to note that the proportion of members engaging in non-agricultural activities is significantly higher in the northeastern urban community than in the southern urban community, and the opposite in found in the professional group of activities.
Migration and Commuting: Choices or Forces? Migration, especially rural-urban migration, has been a common phenomenon in contemporary Thailand since its early development towards modernization. Regional variation of out migration has been widely discussed in literature with less developed and less prosperous regions such as the northeastern and the northern regions have their population highly migrated to other regions, particularly Bangkok and its vicinity that industrial development is far greater than other regional towns or cities (Apichart et al., 1995; Goldstein and Goldstein, 1986). Although people migrated out to other places seem to have various reasons behind their migration, seeking better jobs with better and more secure incomes appears to be quite common. However, as more recent industrial development in Thailand has expanded widely to other regional towns and cities, even reached some rural areas with good potentials for industrial development, commuting has been observed as an increasingly significant alternative to seek jobs outside agricultural sector. This recent change together with the change in need for more cash as response to the increasing influence of the market economy forces people to adapt their livings to depend more on non-agricultural jobs that generate more stable incomes. It can be said modernization style as experienced in Thailand has made migration and commuting become important livelihoods strategies. However, as there is trade-off of out-migration and commuting, and different groups of population seem to cope differently in their livings, it is interesting to discuss about migration and commuting occurring in various communities under this study by considering them as livelihood strategies. Central to the discussion in this section are out-migration and commuting situations in different regions, types of communities, reasons behind outmigration and commuting, resources utilization and transformation related to migration and commuting. Regional Difference of Out-Migration and Commuting An overall observation of out-migration and commuting occurring in communities under this study reveals that there are regional difference and difference between community types. Although the majority households in all types of communities in both regions have their members currently working or used to work outside, the proportions are significantly lower in the southern region than in the northeastern region. In all northeastern communities, almost all households have their members experiencing out-migration, or at least working outside the communities via commuting (Table 4). Out-migration is more common among people in the northeastern region and in the southern region. Nevertheless, the difference is less apparent for commuting. People in rural communities appear to migrate out more than
12
13 those in peri-urban and urban communities, while commuting appears to be more common among urban and peri-urban settlers. However, we did not collect numerical data that can be used for more accurate explanation. Data on out-migration and commuting are at the community and regional levels are based mainly on key informant interviews.
Table 4: Households with members currently working or used to work outside Region/Community Type South - Rural - Peri-urban - Urban Northeast - Rural - Peri-urban - Urban
Percentage of Households 73.2 76.4 54.4 99.6 98.7 98.7
The majority households in the northeastern region have long been experiencing outmigration. Although Bangkok is the most common destination among migrants from this region, migration to other provinces in the central region is also not uncommon. A few were found to migrate to southern provinces such as Songkhla, Phuket and Surat Thani. Work undertaken by out-migrants are mainly of non-agricultural type, however some out-migrants are also engaged in agricultural work such as sugar cane harvesting in Kanchanburi and rubber tapping in Surat Thani. While out-migration is generally found in all types of communities, commuting is only common in peri-urban and urban communities because their locations close to a big city of Khon Kaen where various types of wage work are available. In contrast to northeastern region, out-migrants from the southern region represent a very small proportion of members in each community. Destinations are mainly within the region, with a few migrated to Bangkok and other places outside the region. Interestingly, there around 10 Muslims in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam migrated to Malaysia. Commuting is more common than out-migration in all types of communities under this study. Comparing between different types of communities, the most common is found in the urban community (Chumchon Klai Talaad), followed by the peri-urban community (Ban Chai Khao), while in the rural community (Ban Thung Naam) is least common. Even so, commuting in the rural community has been increasing in the last decade. It is generally observed that availability of non-farm wage work in nearby areas influences most on commuting. The variation of people’s commuting between different types of communities in the south is clearly associated with this reason, as peri-urban and urban communities are adjacent to Hat Yai city, the commercial centre of the southern region, and surrounded by industrially developed areas. The recent increase of commuting in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam is associated with the growing industrial development in nearby areas occurring in the last decade. Reasons for Out-migration and Commuting Out-migration and commuting as related to occupation in the study communities occur due to three main reasons. The first and most common reason appears to be seeking jobs with better as well as more stable incomes. The availability of this type of job is generally limited in
13
14 their home communities. A migrant in Ban Dong in the northeastern region told us: “...there is no job here, so I decided to go working outside.” A similar explanation gave by a female who migrated to Malaysia: “I decided to go there because there was no proper work here…income is higher there than doing factory work at home.” Incomes generated from outmigration and commuting are not only important for migrants and commuters, but also for their families such as to improve education of young members and to recover high debt. The jobs sought are often non-agricultural jobs even though some agricultural activities outside the communities are also included. As non-farm jobs with regular and stable incomes are generally available in more developed areas, especially urban and nearby areas, outmigration and commuting are likely to occur between less developed areas to more developed areas. At the same time wage agricultural activities are often found more in the areas where commercial agriculture is widely practiced. Findings from this study reveal that out-migration is more common among rural settlers than peri-urban and urban settlers. This is mainly because preferred jobs are limited in rural-less developed communities where they live, whereas in peri-urban and urban communities more non-farm activities are available within and nearby their communities. This makes out-migration becomes less common in peri-urban and urban communities, while commuting is opposite. The second reason is to reduce risk concerned with instability of main occupations and shortcoming of resources based livelihood strategies in the communities of origin. Some rural households mentioned about their risk connected to seasonality of farm work, low productivity due to poor soil conditions, and sometimes loss of agricultural products caused by natural disaster. Temporary out-migration can fill unemployment gap due to seasonality of farm work and generate reasonable amount of income to secure their living throughout the year as well as to pay for debts. The third reason related to mobilization of social and economic status of individual migrants or commuters as well as their households. In this sense, some migrants told that they decided to migrate with the aim to have more convenient lives in more developed areas, to seek valuable experience outside their home communities, to improve standard of living of their households, or to accumulate valuable assets. The success of earlier migrants provides a good example for many of current migrants to follow in mobilizing themselves and their families. A few migrants interviewed in both northeastern and southern regions show their aspirations to improve their houses, to provide better education for children and to accumulate some amounts of money that allow them to invest in new businesses at home. Characteristics of Out-migrants and Commuters Occupational migrants and commuters vary in their characteristics. Their educational background is mainly primary education, followed by secondary education. Those with higher educational qualifications are very small in numbers and often migrated permanently. This is similar across regions and community types. Females have slightly higher proportion than males. The majority of them belong to workforce age range. A small proportion is found among those aged above 60, especially in the northeastern communities. However, different characteristics are observed in relation to types of jobs and activities engaged. Factory work is more common among young and middle-age members, and more common among females than males. Males are more common in the construction work and wage-agricultural work. With respects to education, types of occupation engaging by migrants vary and seem to depend strongly on their educational qualifications. Low educated migrants are likely to engage in laboring jobs or other temporary jobs, either in Bangkok or outside. Laboring jobs outside Bangkok can be farm work such as harvesting sugar cane and cultivating cassava among northeastern migrants, or rubber tappers among southern migrants. Off-farm laboring jobs engaged by low educated migrants include construction labor, waiter
14
15 and waitress in restaurant, shopkeeper, cloth maker, taxi driver, lottery seller, housemaid and small trader. Factory work, sale assistant and security officer are found among migrants with secondary education. While migrants with higher educations beginning from vocational certificate are likely to engage in more skill-jobs such as jobs in factories, private companies, government officials and professionals etc. Common jobs engaged by commuters are factory work, construction work, trading and farm work. Among these various types of work, factory work is increasingly popular as it is widely available and does not require high educational qualification. Difference in socio-economic status of households is also observed among migrants and commuters and appears to be related with types of occupations engaged. While factory work is common among members of households belonging to poor and medium socio-economic status, laboring work including non-farm and farm laboring work is more common to members of poor households. Members of rich households are likely to engage in commercial, professional and government groups of occupations. These differences occur in an interwoven situation of forces and choices faced by members of different socio-economic groups. This situation can be explained simply that poor members are forced strongly to seek more income in order to survive with limited choices because they often have low educational qualification. The force is less strong among members of the medium socioeconomic group as economic pressure put on them is less strong than the poor. Members of rich socio-economic group are in the best position in facing with forces as their better off economic condition allows them to wait for better opportunities to get jobs and their better educational qualifications increase their abilities to seek better jobs than the other two groups.
Resource Transformation and Livelihood Strategies Resources of different types are important bases for livelihood strategies. According to the Resource Profile Framework, there are five different types of resources – material, human, social, cultural and environmental (Long and Long, 1989). These resources have different natures that affect people’s utilization and transformation. At the same time people may utilize and transform resources available to them to make their living in complicated and dynamic manners. In this sense, understanding of the relationship between livelihoods strategies and resources is not limited to the people’s ownership of different types of resources. Rather, it is their abilities to utilize and transform these resources are important for the analysis (McGregor, 1998; McGregor and Kebede, 2003). This section will deal with people’s utilization and transformation of different types of resources in making their livings as related to occupation, migration as well as commuting. The discussion will focus on resource utilization in a complex way with reference to socio-economic status of people and their localities. Occupation and Resource Transformation Access to different types of resources appears to differ among people in different types of communities and associated with types of occupations and economic activities they engage. The availability of different types of resources in each locality and access of different groups of people to these resources seem to relate strongly with types of occupation and economic activities undertaken. However, access to each type of resource does not happen in a simple manner. Rather it occurs as an interwoven relationship with other types of resources, which can be different among individuals and household socio-economic status. In rural communities where occupations and economic activities of the majority households and individuals fall in the agricultural group, human, environmental and material resources play dominant roles in their production.
15
16 Human resources in form of labor with skill related to activities undertaken is crucially important as production of most activities are still of labor intensive with low levels of technological employment. In agricultural production that is predominant in rural communities, chemical and mechanical technologies are widely used but their application is limited to certain tasks. At the same time levels of technological employments vary in relation to commodities they produce and their ability to invest, either through purchasing or hiring. This means that socio-economic status matters in the level of technologies used. Poor households are more limited in their ability to adopt such technologies as compared to medium and rich households. Non-agricultural activities such as construction, trading, crafting, are similar in terms of level of technologies used. Related skills are also increasingly important. Acquiring skills needed in undertaking each of these activities is generally through traditional learning and practice. More recently some skills are acquired through training provided, often by state related agencies. These skills are often related to new or more advanced practices, such as cage fish farming, new style weaving and multiple cropping, which are apparent in rural northeastern communities. Although acquiring these skills seems to be not limited by socio-economic status, some types of skills are difficult for members of poor households to acquire and developed. A good example is found in the case of a male member of a very poor household in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam in southern region who decided to undertake low-paid work in a rubber processing factory on a daily arrangement in stead of being a shared rubber tapper in the community with a better earning because he could not acquire the proper tapping skill. He simply explained that none of rubber plantation owners allowed him to try tapping rubber in their plantations as it involves risk of destroying rubber trees. Being unable to develop this skill is therefore reducing the opportunity of poor members to be employed as shared rubber tappers, the activity which can be found quite easily in many rural communities with a considerably good return. As the number of labor available is generally high in overall, rubber plantation owners do not face labor shortage problem. Although there are some other agricultural activities that can be done in rural communities, the low return of these activities together with changing values among young members shift their interest away from such activities. A clear example can be seen in the case of rice farming in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam in the southern region which a considerable amount of rice fields left abandoned, and was told to be due labor shortage and insufficient return of rice production, while unemployment or underemployment among young members of the community is observed. The situation is not the same in rural communities in the northeastern region where rice production is still widely practiced. Its less prosperity and lack of other economic opportunities as compared to the southern region do not allow them to leave this traditional practice easily in this circumstance. Material resources that are important for making a living appear to differ among different types of communities. The most important kind of material resources in rural and peri-urban communities both in Southern and Northeastern regions is land, while financial capital is substantially important for making a living in urban communities in both regions. At the same time, financial capital has also been increasingly important for rural and peri-urban livelihoods in the last three decades, as agricultural production has been through modernization of its practices and amount of land available for agricultural production has been decreasing. Ownership of land, especially productive land, is different among households in different socio-economic groups. Regional difference is also observed, as the average amount of land use per household is higher in the northeastern region than in the southern region. However, land productivity appears to be opposite. Although access to land is not limited through ownership as other forms of arrangement (e.g. renting-out of lands, hiring labor and sharecropping in agricultural production are widely practiced in rural and per-urban communities, returns to laborers and tenants under these arrangements are significantly lower as compared to land owners. At the same time those who hire their labor
16
17 out or rent their land in are less secured than land owners. Additionally, those who hire their labor and rent-in land are mainly from poor households, although a considerable proportion is also found among households in medium socio-economic status. Availability of financial capital, both in form of savings and access to credits from formal sources, differ among households belonging to different economic groups. Even access to credits from informal sources is also likely to be more limited among the poor due to the possibility of social exclusion. Therefore, the gaps are wide between poor households and rich households, but not very much between poor households and medium group of households. These gaps deter their choices of and abilities to undertake economic activities efficiently. Limitation in their access to lands and credits restrains the poor households to limit them to engage in comparatively inefficient agricultural activities, and in some cases to engage in nonagricultural activities with low return to labor. Eventually this pressure forces some members of poor households to seek other jobs outside communities through migration or commuting. Difference in occupations and activities engaged by rural households in the northeastern region as compared to the southern region can be explained partly through differences in access to land, especially productive land, and financial capital. The majority households and their members in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam in the southern region engaged in a better income generating activity of rubber production which is widely available to them, while households in two rural communities of Ban Dong and Ban Tha in the northeastern region engage predominantly in low profitable rice farming and cassava cultivation accustomed to them. Lands in these communities are widely allocated to two types of crops not only because of their suitability, but also because of lacking of financial capital to invest in adjusting patterns of land-use to more profitable activities. Social and cultural resources are found to be important in easing hardship, acquiring as well as altering some kinds of work. Among rural settlers, sharecropping arrangements are likely to occur among relatives than others. This is mainly due to the values of “helping relatives first” which forms a subset of family values remains strong in rural communities. Engaging in certain activities can be tied up with perceived good social status, although economic returns are minimal. Persons who serve as religious or cultural leaders, religious teachers, or even those who lead certain ceremonial activities evidence this. Their roles are bound with belief and cultural values that lead them to sacrifice their time and properties and overrides heir direct economic benefits. There exists also values related to sexual differentiation of roles among Muslims in the southern region which still remain considerably strong. An example can be seen in relation to working outside and far away from the community without accompanied close relatives is not preferable among Muslim females. As a result, most of activities outside the community among females in Ban Thung Naam take place in nearby communities and they mainly travel in groups. Out-migration to places far away is unlikely to happen among females except their spouses or close relatives accompany them. Networks of friends and relatives are found to be helpful in acquiring off-farm jobs. Having a friends or relative who owns businesses or has a good position in a well-recognized organization provides a member or his children a better opportunity to get a good job. This can also include the opportunity to be trained in related skills. A few young members of rural core households who engaged in off-farm jobs both in the northeastern and southern regions were told to acquire their jobs through relatives working in the same places, or they were persuaded by relatives or friends to go and seek jobs in the same areas. A young mechanics from Ban Thung Naam working in a motorcycle repairing shop in the nearby town of Chana told that he got the job because the owner was his father’s friend, despite that he had no proper training before starting the job. The importance of environmental resources regarded as common properties varies between rural communities under this study. Rural settlers in the northeastern region appear to depend
17
18 more on environmental resources than those in the southern region. This is evidenced by purposes of using various types of resources and proportions of households using for each purpose. And the more remote the community is, the higher they are dependent on environmental resources. In Ban Dong, the most remote community under this study, collection of non-timber forest products such as firewood, mushroom, bamboo shoot, wild vegetable, wild animal and honey is widely practiced. The use of timber is also common. While in Ban Tha which is less remote, the use of timber and collection of non-timbers forest products are slightly less. Fishing in natural water bodies is also widely practiced when available in rural northeastern communities as fish forms the most important protein source in local diet. In the rural community of Ban Thung Naam in the southern region, the use of water for irrigation, land for grazing and collecting wild crops as well as mushroom, trees for firewood and other related products are also evidenced but less common than in the northeastern communities. Fishing from natural water bodies is not widely practiced, although there are a river trunk pass through the community and surrounding flood plains. Poor household tend to practice more and for wider purposes than medium and rich households. Their more limited income and opportunities to acquire the same or similar products from other sources lead them to depend more on natural sources. Further more some poor households in the northeastern rural communities were observed to sell these products to generate cash income, while in the southern rural community most people do only for domestic consumption, with minor exception of very poor households who may do this sometimes in order to reduce their hardship. In peri-urban and urban areas, all types of resources remain important to settlers but in different degrees. However, levels of importance of some types of resources differ substantially from rural communities and may shift from one kind to another. Human resources appear to be increasingly important. The importance of material resources shifts from land-based to more financial capital based that allows settlers to invest in education and non-agricultural activities. Social and cultural resources are likely to decline its importance and shift towards more formal arrangements, whereas the importance of environmental resources tend to shift away from direct concerns of households and individuals. The increasing importance of human resources is associated with occupational requirements of jobs in peri-urban and urban areas, as jobs and economic activities shift towards non-farm and off-farm types. Although farm jobs and activities remain important in peri-urban communities, their importance is much less as compared to rural communities. Engaging in non-farm and off-farm jobs available to peri-urban and urban settlers require knowledge and skills which are mainly acquired through formal training or proper experience. Salaried jobs which are considered as “good jobs” are ultimately aimed by members, especially young generation, required proper formal training, at least at the secondary level and the higher the better. Even unskilled factory work mostly under daily-wage arrangement, requires at least the secondary school qualification. In peri-urban communities under-qualified members are likely to remain in the agricultural sector or engage in commercial activities which are mainly small trading. For urban settlers apart from undertaking small trading, under-qualified members also engage in laboring activities. Although members of urban communities mainly engage commercial activities, good commercial activities require high skills to be successful, and the skills are generally accumulated through long experience. This makes human resource development is increasingly important with respect to occupations and economic activities in peri-urban and urban communities. However, views towards the importance of education differ slightly between people in the northeastern communities and the southern urban communities. More people from the southern community acquire higher education than those from the northeastern community. This seems be related to the difference in their opportunities of getting ‘better jobs’ between the two communities selected.
18
19
Material resources important for occupation and economic activities in peri-urban areas appear to be both land and capital resources, while in urban areas land does not seem to be significantly important to the majority households as their access to land is limited. However, land appears to be among important resources used by rich households. In peri-urban communities land can function as the most important productive resource both for agricultural production and as a property that can be developed for commercial purposes, while in urban communities land functions mostly as a property for generating nonagricultural income either through commercial development or renting out. In the southern region, households belonging to medium and rich socio-economic status in peri-urban community mainly own land, whereas only rich households in urban community commonly own land used for generating income. The importance of land to occupation and economic activities in peri-urban and rural communities in the northeastern region is similar to the southern region. A considerable proportion of people in peri-urban community engage in agriculture, while in the urban community land becomes very scarce. Those who own land in the urban community is likely to be better-off or rich as it is highly need for housing and commercial purposes. A few rich members of the urban community (Chumchon Klai Talaad) own several plots of land that are rented out for housing, while in Chumchon Naimuang, this phenomenon is unclear as the community is located on public land that has no private legal right. The capital resources are also important in both peri-urban and rural communities, both in the southern and the northeastern regions. The degree of importance is more in urban communities as the most common occupation and activities undertaken by members are in commercial group that requires substantial capital for investments. The importance of social resources for acquiring occupation and economic activities is strong in both peri-urban and urban communities. Their influence appears to be stronger in urban communities than in peri-urban communities, especially in dealing with off-farm jobs and activities which are mainly under informal arrangements. Social connection becomes important in this type of arrangements, as there is generally no clear regulation in recruiting workers. Seeking jobs outside communities makes this connection even more important, as proper trust is needed. Common practices under informal arrangements are persuasion by those who are already working in the same places and recommendation by trustful, or sometime powerful, persons. A key informant in Chumchon Naimuang, the northeastern urban community under this study, pointed out: “To get work in restaurants (as a waiters or waitress), if you do not know anyone, forget about it. Having connection (sen sai) is necessary. Even laboring work…without friends leading you, it is impossible.” Nevertheless, this importance becomes less for those with proper qualifications in seeking jobs under formal arrangements, even though a proper recommendation is preferable. Comparing between urban communities in the southern and the northeastern regions, the importance of social connection in relation to occupations and economic activities is stronger in Chumchon Nai Muang than in Chumchon Klai Talaad. The wider practice of working outside the community among members of Chumchon Naimuang makes them to depend more on social connection than in Chumchon Klai Talaad. However, this does not mean that other aspects of social resources are not important and follow the same trend. Borrowing money to invest in economic activities is still practiced among relatives in both communities, but in a less degree as compared to rural communities and peri-urban communities, since members of urban communities do not normally have a strong kinship relation. The role of cultural resources is somewhat unclear in relation occupation and economic activities with an exception of religious values among Muslims in the southern region. Members of the Muslim group are often restricted to engage in certain economic activities, especially in entertaining business widely available in the adjacent city of Hat Yai. Sexual differentiation of role among Muslims appears to be less strong in peri-urban and urban communities, as more
19
20 females are observed to work independently outside the community as compared to those in the rural community. Environmental resources are still important to undertake occupations and economic activities in peri-urban communities, but the importance is much less in urban communities, especially for some poor households. A small proportion of households in Ban Chaikhao in the southern region and Ban Lao in the northeastern region still do fishing in nearby common waterbodies, grazing in common lands, collecting firewood, and collecting non-timbers forest products, especially mushroom. However, the degree of utilizing different kinds of environmental resources tends to vary by region. For examples collecting of mushroom, wild fruit, firewood and fishing are more common in Ban Lao than in Ban Chai Khao. This difference is mainly related a few factors – their traditional acquaintance to certain practices, the availability of related resources in surrounding environment and their access to the same or substituting kinds of resources on their own expenses. The last factor seems to affect differently on households belonging to different socio-economic status. Households in rich and medium socio-economic status are less likely to utilize some kinds of these resources that have other alternatives such as trees for firewood and wild fruit, water for fishing, and forest for mushroom collecting, as they can purchase the products or substituting products easily from nearby markets. Households in two urban communities under this study use environmental resources only for a few purposes and proportions of users are much smaller as compared to those in rural and peri-urban communities. More than a half of households in Chumchon Nai Muang in the northeast do fishing in common water bodies and collecting firewood from near areas, while these two practices are minimal in Chumchon Klai Talaad. Other practices which are done by considerable proportions of households in these two communities include collecting wild fruit and using trees for other related products. The availability of the same or substituting resources against the limitation of access to environmental resources differentiate the use of the resources among urban settlers as compared to rural and peri-urban settlers and between urban settlers in different regions. Resource Transformation Associated with Out-migration and Commuting Various types of resources play important roles in relation to migration and commuting in the study communities. Variation of roles appears to depend on types of work engaged by migrants and commuters, destinations and backgrounds of migrants. Findings from this study reveal that human resources and social resources are particularly important in relation to migration and commuting. Aspects of human resources that alter types of work engaged include skills, experience and educational attainment of migrants and commuters. Migrants and commuters with good educational backgrounds are likely to get good jobs with stable income such as salaried and professional jobs. Destinations of migration and places of work for commuters depend on availabilities of jobs and abilities of members. People with good educational backgrounds have better chances to select jobs, while those with low education have limited choices. A Few Buddhist migrants in the rural community of Ban Thung Naam work outside the community as government officers because they have good education meet job qualifications. Migrants and commuters with low education have to rely on their skills and experiences together with the use of other types of resources, especially social resources, in making decision about destination, types of work as well place to work in case of commuting. In the circumstance job availabilities are limited in nearby areas, this group of people, especially those in poor socio-economic status, may have to travel a long distance to get paid jobs in order to survive. The following examples are dealing with skill and experience of migrants. Taxi drivers in the north eastern region who migrated to Bangkok require a good driving skill
20
21 as well as experience of driving taxi in such a very big city. There experience keeps them repeating to come to Bangkok doing the same work several times without any difficulty to enter the job. Sugar cane harvesters from rural communities in the northeastern region travel as far as Kanchanaburi to work in commercial sugar growing fields on temporary basis because they are accustom to this kind of work and no other work available to them in nearby areas. Social resources that contribute much to migration and commuting are networks of relatives and friends from the same regions. The availability of these networks often induces migrants from both regions to migrate in groups to the same areas, and sometimes to the same working places, through persuasion of earlier migrants. Earlier migrants who have already settled are often influential in bringing new migrants to the places or even to take the same jobs. This phenomenon is quite common among out-migrants from the northeastern region. A few outmigrants from the southern region also went through a similar route. Commuting factory workers from the southern region also mentioned about the importance of social connection and communication that earlier workers passed on to them in their acquisition of the jobs. All Muslim migrants who work in Malaysia mentioned that they first traveling Malaysia because their relatives brought them and recommended to the working places. These networks also help ease new migrants to move conveniently to and settle in the places with a warm and secure impression. Although the use of social networks are common to all groups of migrants irrespective of socio-economic status, good networks seem to be more limited among the poor and affect their opportunities to get better jobs. Availability of good relatives and friends in the communities of origin does help also in acquiring material resources to invest in the cause migration.
Education: Increasingly Important and Good Investment for the Future Educational development in the contemporary Thailand had been rather slow in the early period of the country’s economic advancement. Effort to accelerate educational development with the aim to improve education of the country’s population is a more recent phenomenon. However, this effort is substantial involving a series of reform, especially regulatory reform that increases level of compulsory education from four years at the beginning to six years, an most recently nine years. This change has effected greatly on educational attainment of the population throughout the country. Generational difference in educational attainment has been apparent in the last three decades, as more and more younger generations have improved their education beyond the primary level. This phenomenon is clearly illustrated at the local level in different communities under this study (Table 4 and Table 5).
Table 4: Educational attainment of members currently not in school by region and age-range Region
Level of Education (%)
Age-Range none/no grade
South
Primary
Secondary
Total Higher
Other
0-14
90.4
8.7
1.0
15-24
2.3
36.4
56.2
5.1
25-34
3.4
51.6
34.2
10.5
0.3
100.0
35-44
9.9
63.0
20.9
5.8
0.4
100.0
45-54
9.3
73.6
13.4
2.1
1.6
100.0
55-64
21.1
69.4
6.2
1.7
1.7
100.0
65 up
42.6
50.7
3.5
3.2
100.0
Total
17.8
56.5
20.3
1.1
100.0
100.0
4.2
100.0
21
22
North East
0-14
87.2
11.4
1.4
15-24
2.7
41.4
48.4
7.0
0.5
100.0
25-34
3.0
56.2
27.4
13.0
0.4
100.0
35-44
11.1
64.2
19.1
5.6
100.0
45-54
11.1
81.9
5.3
1.8
100.0
55-64
24.0
68.3
7.7
65 up
46.7
52.0
1.3
Total
18.6
51.3
23.7
100.0
100.0 100.0 6.3
0.2
100.0
Note: In 0-14 age-range includes members very young member who are not yet enrolled in school system.
22
23
Table 5: Educational attainment of members currently not in school by community type and age-range Region South Thung Naam
Chaikhao
Klai Talaad
Age-Range
Level of Education (%) none/ no grade Primary
Laow
Nai Muang
Other
50.0
50.0
15-24
2.7
40.5
48.6
8.1
25-34
6.8
52.5
32.7
8.0
35-44
8.4
62.2
21.4
7.1
0.8
100.0
45-54
9.7
70.5
14.2
4.0
1.7
100.0
55-64
22.9
69.5
5.1
0.8
1.7
100.0
65 up
35.1
56.1
5.3
3.5
100.0
Total
13.9
61.2
18.7
4.8
1.3
100.0
15-24
14.3
28.6
57.1
25-34
1.1
53.9
41.6
2.2
1.1
35-44
9.9
63.9
22.0
4.2
45-54
9.3
75.6
13.2
0.5
1.5
100.0
55-64
19.7
69.7
7.4
1.6
1.6
100.0
65 up
47.2
47.2
2.5
3.1
100.0
100.0 100.0 100.0
100.0 100.0
Total
18.0
63.0
15.9
92.0
7.0
1.0
15-24
1.7
35.8
57.8
4.6
100.0
48.0
30.0
22.0
100.0
63.9
11.1
5.6
100.0
19.4
45-54
100.0
55-64
50.0
65 up
54.5
45.5
Total
25.2
35.5
1.7
100.0
0-14
35-44
Tha
Higher
0-14
25-34
Northeast Dong
Total Secondary
1.4
100.0 100.0
100.0 50.0
100.0 100.0
31.5
7.7
100.0
100.0
0-14
57.1
39.3
3.6
15-24
4.1
39.4
49.5
6.9
25-34
1.8
50.2
30.4
16.7
35-44
8.2
57.1
26.5
8.2
100.0
45-54
8.2
81.6
8.2
2.0
100.0
55-64
16.7
70.8
12.5
65 up
52.0
48.0
Total
8.7
50.2
100.0
100.0 31.5
9.3
0.3
1.8
86.3
13.7
15-24
0.9
38.2
50.9
8.2
35-44
4.3
60.9
21.7
13.0
100.0
55-64
80.0
100.0
100.0
0-14
45-54
0.9
100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
20.0
100.0
65 up
60.0
40.0
Total
18.3
38.1
33.0
9.9
59.4
31.3
9.4
100.0
15-24
100.0 0.7
100.0
25-34
6.8
75.2
14.5
3.4
100.0
35-44
14.5
69.2
13.2
3.1
100.0
45-54
12.1
81.9
4.3
1.7
100.0
55-64
29.6
64.8
5.6
100.0
65 up
34.2
63.2
2.6
100.0
Total
14.8
71.7
10.9
0-14
93.6
5.0
1.4
15-24
2.5
43.8
48.8
2.6
100.0 100.0
5.0
100.0
23
24
25-34
2.0
35-44 45-54
33.3
55-64 65 up
85.7
60.0
30.0
62.5
37.5
8.0
100.0 100.0
66.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
14.3
100.0
Total 48.3 28.8 20.2 2.7 Note: In 0-14 age-range includes members very young member who are not yet enrolled in school system.
100.0
The proportions of members who are not currently in school are clearly higher in younger age-groups (15-24, 25-34 and 35-44) than in older age-groups in both regions and all community types with significant difference are evidenced from secondary level of education upwards. Differences between regions and community types are not substantial. Even in periurban and urban communities where access to secondary and higher education is better than in rural communities, their figures are not extensively different. The generational change in educational attainment of the population is highly meaningful to livelihood strategies and adaptation of local people. By focusing on two main livelihood strategies central to this study, as already discussed to some extent earlier, the significance of educational background on individual opportunities to acquire desirable occupations and economic activities either through migration or not is undeniable. The association between education and occupation is generally recognized as good educational qualifications allow for better opportunities in acquiring good jobs or even to improve existing jobs and economic activities. In the face of rapid change towards modernization, the increase in occupational opportunities in the modern sector is obvious following rapid growth of industrialization and urbanization. Paradoxically the traditional sector dominated by agricultural and other natural resources-based activities does not improve in the same pace, but is rather stagnant in its development. This circumstance creates a significant occupational disparity between the two sectors that lead to shift in occupational preference towards industrial or non-agricultural occupations and activities. Although the dissimilarity is observed in urban communities as most common occupations and economic activities are non-agricultural based, struggle to seek better and more stable jobs is not uncommon among younger generations. Findings in this study reveal that there is a tendency of generational change of occupations and economic activities with younger generations tend to engage more in non-agricultural activities in both rural and peri-urban communities. Moreover, it is also observed that educational qualification is important in acquiring nonagricultural occupations under formal arrangements. This observation is supported by data indicating that those who engage in non-agricultural activities, especially in the industrial sector, are more common among members who completed secondary education and above. Additionally, members with good educational qualifications (generally higher than secondary level) engage mainly in salaried and professional jobs which are considered as “good jobs” in Thai contexts. The increasing involvement of younger generations in non-agricultural occupations and economic activities makes education is increasingly important. Actually, the importance of improving education of young members is widely expressed by key informants and heads of most core households involved in this study. The importance of education in association with occupational migration and commuting is also increasing, as educational qualification links to type of occupations and economic activities engaged by migrants and commuters are clearly observed. At the same time person’s educational background is also found to be influential on adaptation and mobility of migrants and commuters once they decided to migrate to other places and to work outside their homes and communities. Migrants and commuters with reasonable educational qualifications are likely to engage in good jobs with stable position and incomes in both government sectors and private sectors. While those with no education and low educational
24
25 attainment are generally unable to get good jobs, thus end up with taking laboring jobs or other activities including agricultural activities. These jobs or activities are generally low paid, less stable and sometime under informal arrangements. Most agricultural activities such as sugar cane harvesting and cassava cultivation found among temporary migrants in the northeastern region come under informal arrangements, and those who engage in these activities are generally uneducated or lowly educated. Similar situations are found among commuters who engage in shared rubber tapping in the southern region. Migrants as well as commuters engaging in non-agricultural laboring activities such as construction work are also mostly uneducated or lowly educated. Factory work requires at least primary educational qualification with the tendency to accept workers with secondary education. Further more, migrants and commuters with reasonable educational qualifications are likely to have better chances of promoting to higher positions even if they begin their work at lower positions. This group of migrants are also more mobilized in their styles of living. For those who undertake their own business, better-educated migrants seem to be able to improve their businesses and even moving to more profitable businesses. A case of young Muslim couple who run a tourist business in Phuket informed that the husband used to work as a mechanic in a small company, while the wife was a tour guide before they set their own tourist business based on connections built by the wife. Their business generates very good incomes with low risk, although it involves seasonal variation. Under given situations of growing and expanding industrialization alongside the decline of the traditional sector, the tendency of increasing participation in non-agricultural occupations and activities is incontestable in the near future. This tendency makes the importance of education undoubtedly increasing on livelihoods the population. Local people appear to realize this tendency and the importance of providing good education for their children in order to survive and ultimately to live well in the foreseen future. Therefore they see that unless they provide their children with good or at least reasonable education, their children will face with uneasy lives. The most common view of parents expressing that having their children achieving good education supports this observation. Many parents told that they are trying their best to support their children to pursue good education even to work hard outside the communities to generate more income in order to cover a high cost high education generally involved. Some migrants were told to send their remittance mainly to support younger members of their households to pursue good education. Although we cannot say strongly here that educational contribution to livelihoods of local people in Thailand is great, as the majority individuals involved in this study do not have good education and they still manage to survive in various ways, they commonly agree that it is a good investment for the future of their children.
Aspirations, Capabilities and Negotiations in Pursuing Well-being Earlier in this paper, we discussed about common aspirations of people in the contemporary Thai society with special emphasis on communities under this study. In the discussion we also pointed out that some common aspirations might not be easily fulfilled by some individuals and households due to their limited capabilities. At the same time we also observed that people might adjust some aspirations that are unlikely to be fulfilled easily to a lower level. This means that although in general people’s aspirations appear to be common, they involve some kinds of consideration to weight according to their capabilities under a given situation. Living in the era of rapid changes makes individuals and households in local communities faced with a complex situation that forces them to mobilize their living standard in order not to be left far behind their neighbors. Coping in this situation appears to be different between members of different socio-economic status as they differ in their resource profiles. Since resource transformation that influences strongly on livelihood process occurs
25
26 in dynamic and complex manners, negotiations are often involved to balance between overestimated aspirations and capabilities in transforming available resources to fulfill these aspirations. In dealing with aspirations to survive and have a good job, which are fundamental of having a good life, people in the poor socio-economic group tend to concern more about survival or having a job than having a good job. Nevertheless, some members of this group may set their initial aspirations higher than what they are actually capable to fulfill, they are generally considerate with some negotiation in order not to be so vulnerable in the process of making their living. Most members of poor socio-economic status expressed their satisfaction with “having a job” even though the job they have is among a perceived good job in their communities. Having a job to do is generally not so difficult in rural and peri-urban areas in most Thai communities where access to land and natural resources is possible under various arrangements. Even in urban areas, several economic activities are opened for poor people to work in order to survive. People in the middle socio-economic group seem to be sometime struggling, especially the young generation who tend to aim more at having a good job and only some of them can achieve. Although negotiations do involve in process of making a living among members of this group, they seem to be less patient in their coping and lowering their initial aspiration. Members of the rich socio-economic group are often capable of fulfilling their aspirations of having a good job through transforming of their abundant resources in different ways which not only allow them to be qualified for a good job but also create appropriate job for themselves. Material aspirations seem to be growing sharply following their interactions with the market. Households in poor and middle socio-economic status aspire to have more and more convenience goods and proper houses both to ease their life and to uplift their social position. Rich households aspire to invest in valuable properties as most of other material aspirations are already fulfilled. Although the majority households in poor and middle socio-economic status are able to own several kinds of convenience goods, regional difference is observed. Owning motorcycle and gas stove is far more common among southern households than northeastern households. Moreover, very poor households are unlikable to own motorcycle easily and to have a proper house to live. Households in the middle socio-economic generally have reasonable house to live but still want to have proper furniture. Both groups are struggling at different levels seem to be have a clear gap in their achievements when compared to rich households. In the midst of rapid change, it is quite hard for them to escapes from material aspiration even though most households own all material to fulfill their basic needs. They seem to be influenced strongly by market forces and changing values towards more materialistic consumption. Aspiration on education that is apparent in all socio-economic groups and community types in both regions with special emphasis on children to have good education is not always easy to be fulfilled. Although the state policy on education provides rooms for free education up to the lower secondary level and makes educational loan available for higher levels of education until completing the first degree of tertiary education, many children from poor households seem to face various obstacles. Financial and caring problems in combination with anxieties of parents about their abilities to secure livelihoods in the short run and to continually support children education cause many young members of poor households to stop their education halfway. A few poor households in northeastern rural communities mentioned about the necessity for some of their children to work at a quite early age to ease their household economic burden as an important reason. Some young members of poor households in the southern region expressed the mixture of anxiety about the ability of their parents to support and concern about hardship. Financial shortcoming does not seem to be significant for
26
27 households in middle socio-economic status, but some of them are likely to face with their children intention on education. Eventually rich households seem to have more alternatives to encourage their children in pursuing a good education such as putting more investments to seek special tutors and to send to private schools. An interesting point found Muslim households in the southern region, especially in rural and peri-urban communities. In comparison Buddhist households in the same communities, the proportion of Muslim children pursuing high education is much less with the main reason of the ambiguity of their parents to strongly support their children to pursue secular education. This is influenced strongly by cultural values of prioritizing religious education among Muslims in this region. Ties with family and place of origin are aspirations that still remain high among households in rural and peri-urban communities, but not so in urban communities. Many households in rural and peri-urban communities put a strong attempt to keep their strong relation with family members and close relatives. There efforts to fulfill these aspirations appear in forms of building their houses closed to (often in the same compound when possible), providing caring and financial assistance, caring their ageing parents, and expecting to return and live permanently in the place of origin after migration. However, in the rapid changing environment, it is not always easy to fulfill all these aspirations as they are imposed by some shortcomings such as limited proper job opportunities, land shortage etc, especially among households in poor and middle socio-economic status. Many young couples have to migrate out or commuting while their young children are left with their elderly parents. For poor households, this practice may be unavoidable given that no better alternatives available. In most cases remittance and financial support given by migrants or commuters are significant for these households. Although most of them are eventually able to return home, they are struggling along their ways to fulfill these aspirations. The struggle is not clear among rich households as separation from families and close relatives happens as a matter of choices rather than forces. Aspiration to mobilize their social status does not hasten much in a situation which several other aspirations are competing, especially among poor members whose priority should be given on having reasonable job for survival. Even members from middle socio-economic status do not seem to focus directly on fulfilling this aspiration, rather they seem to concern with accumulating capital assets and ability to provide good education for their children which may lead to mobilizing their social status in the future. However, only small a small proportion of people in both poor and middle socio-economic status can successfully mobilize their social status in the short term. Rich households tend to concern about maintaining their already good social status by trying to prioritize their investment on their children’s education and skill development. In general, members of the rich socio-economic status do not have much trouble in maintaining their social status as long as wealth and good relationship with their neighbors is reasonably maintained. The discussion we made so far in this section illustrates that the relationship between livelihood strategies and wellbeing outcomes under conditions of rapid change under conditions of rapid in Thailand does not confront with severe obstacles even among poor households which most disadvantaged. However, given different resource profiles they have, people in different socio-economic status seem to differ in their coping. Material resources matter a lot in livelihood process to fulfill aspirations that are dynamic and increasingly material oriented. Because of this trend rich households tend to be the most advantaged. However, poor households do not seem to be highly neglected as the remaining rich social and cultural resources contribute significantly in easing some of their hardship and in reconsidering some aspirations through negotiations and sympathy. The overall difference in material resource endowments, both with respect to quantity and quality, seem to affect most
27
28 on the difference wellbeing outcomes between people in the northeastern and southern regions.
Conclusions Thailand’s development following the Modernization Model has brought about rapid changes in many aspects, especially dramatic economic growth that have been apparent in the last few decades together with the wide expansion of the market economy. Effects of these rapid changes can be seen in the livelihood adaptation and dynamic aspirations of people are evidenced at the local level, as illustrated in this study. The expansion of the market economy that reach local communities forces local people to increase their aspirations and adapt their livelihood strategies. In predominantly rural and peri-urban areas where traditional farming used to be widely practices in a fulltime form, more cash-oriented production are presently adopted in order to generate more cash income to meet their needs and fulfill their increasing aspirations. As aspirations also change in response to the overall rapid changes (for examples aspirations to have a good job, good education and to consume convenience goods), more and more cash income is needed to fulfill. Livelihood strategies appear to be changing not just because they cannot generate adequate income to meet their present needs but also to invest in the future, especially for their children to have a good education that will lead to a good job and possible a good social status. When available strategies in each community are not sufficient for generating reasonable cash income, pluriactivity is like to adopt with some members of households engage in activities out side their homes. This makes commuting and out-migration become increasingly popular, especially among young members. By using a community profile framework to analyze local phenomena of livelihood strategies and their adaptation, our findings reveal that people in different socio-economic groups vary in their household resource profiles, and this variation effects their abilities to aspire and adapt livelihoods strategies. Material resources are substantially beneficial for transformation into other types of resources, including social and cultural resources, as people with good access to material resources (either land or financial) are likely to be able to convert into other resources easily such as investing in education for children, building good relationship with others, joining social groups and holding a good social status, which benefit their livelihood strategies. Nevertheless the general richness of social and cultural resources in Thai society is helpful in reducing hardship. This can explain why those who are shortage of material resources (i.e. individuals and households in the poor socio-economic category) do not seem to face severe obstacles in their living because they often receive helps from relatives and neighbors in some ways and also make use of existing environmental resources to reduce their hardship. However, shortage of material resources seem to lead members of the poor socio-economic category to realize about their ability to aspire by negotiating in their thinking to reduce some high aspirations to a level that is not so difficult for them to fulfill. Although peoples in other socio-economic categories also face a similar situation which makes negotiation necessary, their degree of lowering their actual aspirations tend to be lower than the poor. In the future, human resources especially proper educational qualification and working skills should be increasingly important as material resources, especially land, can no longer obtained easily through inheritance and purchasing without competition because its increasing scarcity. The increasing importance of education is clear and realized by people in all socio-economic categories in both northeastern and southern regions, but their ability to provide proper education for their children again differ according their resource profiles, especially material resources. Findings from this study with respect to livelihood strategies and adaptation illustrate the contribution as well as interactions of various types of resources, both material and non-
28
29 material, in the construction of wellbeing in the contemporary Thai society. They also prove that resources transformation occur in a complex manner and is substantial for livelihood adaptation to respond to rapid changes that effect their aspirations. Even though all types of resources are important in the construction of wellbeing in local communities, the trend that material resources and human resources are increasingly important is very interesting for further investigation
References Carney, D. (1998). Sustaible Rurla Livelihoods: What contribution can we made? London: Department for International Development. Chambers, R. and Conway, G. (1992). Suatainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century. IDS Discussion Paper 296. Brighton: IDS. Appadurai, A. (2004). “The Capacity to Aspire” in Vijayendra Rao and Michael Walton (ed.s), Culture and Public Action, Stanford University Press, 2004. Banpasirichote, Chantana. (1993). Community integration into regional industrial development: a case study of Klong Pho, Chachoengsao. Bangkok: Thai Development Research Institute. Bunmee, S. (2000). Ways to Reduce Incurring Debt among Clients of BAAC. M.A. Thesis. Khonkaen University. Chamratrittirong, A., Achavanitkul, K., Ritcher, K.,Guest, P., Thongthai, V., Boonchalaksi, W., Piriyathamwong, K. and Wong-Ek, P. (1995). National Migration Survey of Thailand. Nakhon Pathom: Institute of Population and Social Research, Mahidol University. Changrien, Phaipul (1999). Evaluation of Agricultural Development in Thailand (1961-2001). Bangkok: Thai Watana Panich. Falvey, L. (2000). Thai agriculture: golden cradle of millennia. Bangkok: Kasetsart University. Goldstein, S. and Goldstein, A. (1986). Migration in Thaialnd: a twenty-five year review. Honolulu: East-West Population Institue. Hirsch, P. (1990). Development dilemmas in rural Thailand. Singapore: Oxford University. Industrial and Finance Cooperation of Thailand. (1990). Industrial development in Thailand. Bangkok: The Industrial and Finance Cooperation of Thailand. Keyes, C.F. (1989). Thailand: Buddhist Kingdom as modern nation-state. Boulder, CO, USA: Westview Press. Leach, M., Mearns, R. and Scoones, I. (1999). “Environment Entitlements: Dynamics and Institutions in Community-Based Resource Mnagement.” World Development 27(2): 225-247. Long, N. and Long, A. (1989). Battlefields of Konwledge: The interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development. London: Routledge. Masae, A. (2001). An Exploratory Study of the Role of Community Business in Capital Accumulation in Southern Thailand. Hat Yai: Prince of Songkla University. Masser, N. and Townsley, P. (2003). Local Institutions and Livelihoods: Guidelines for Analysis. Rome: Rural Development Division, FAO. McGregor, J. A. (1998). A poverty of agency: Resource management amongst poor people in Bangladesh. Paper presented at the Plenary Session of European Network of Bangladesh Studies Workshop, University of Bath, England. April 1998. Mimeo http://staff.bath.ac.uk/hssjam/povertyofagency.pdf. McGregor, J.A. and Kebede, B. (2003). Resource Profiles and the Social and Cultural Construction of Wellbeing. WeD Working Paper 5. Bath: WeD ESRC Research Group, University of Bath.
29
30 McGregor, J.A. (2007). Researching wellbeing: From Concepts to Methodology. In: Gough, I., McGregor, J.A. (eds.) 2007. 'Wellbeing in developing countries: new approaches and research strategies', Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (in press). Mulder, N. (1996). Inside Thai Society: Interpretations of Everyday Life. Amsterdam: The Pepin Press. Nartsupha, C. and Lertwicha, P. (1998). Thai Village Culture (2nd Edition). Bangkok: Saang san Publications. Parnwell, M. J. and Arghiros, D.A. (1996). Uneven Development in Thailand. Aldershot: Avebury. Phongpaichit, P. and Baker, C. (1995). Thailand Economy and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press. Phongpaichit P.and Baker C. (2005). A History of Thailand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Puntarigvivat, Tavivat. (1998). Toward a Buddhist Social Ethics: The Case of Thailand. Cross Currents, 48, 3. Rigg, J. (1997). Southeast Asia: the human landscape of modernization and development. London: Routledge. Rigg, J. (1998a). Rural-urban interactions, agriculture and wealth: a southeast Asian perspective. Progress in Human Geograph, 22 (4), p499-522. Rigg, J. (1998b). Tracking the poor: the making of wealth and poverty in Thailand (19821994). International Journal of Social Economics, 25, p1128-41. Rigg, J. (2005). Poverty and livelihoods after full-time farming: a South-East Asian view. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 46, p173-184. The Industrial and Finance Cooperation of Thailand. (1990). Industrial Development in Thailand. Bangkok: The Industrial and Finance Cooperation of Thailand. Thongsongsang, A. (2004). Factors Related the Debt of Farmers who are Clients of BAAC: a case study in Tambon Chian Yai, Amphoe Chian Yai, Changwat Nakhon Si Thammarat. M.Sc. Dissertation in Agricultural Development, Prince of Songkla University. Sen, A. (1981). Povery and Famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sen, A. 1985. Commodities and Capabilties. Amsterdam: North-Holland. Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tomosugi, T. (1995). Changing Features of a Rice Growing Village in Central Thailand: a fixed point study from 1967 to 1993. Tokyo: Centre for East Asian Cultural Studies. Silcock, T. H. (1970). The Economic Development of Thai Agriculture. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University. Warr, P. (2005). Boom, Bust and Beyond. London: Rootledge. Wyatt, D.K. (2003). Thailand: A Short History. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
30
