106 The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development 27-29 January 2011 Thai social welfare policy: Synergistic approaches to social development of government and the public sector Apisak Dhiravisit , PhD Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University 123 Mittaparb Rd., Maung District, Khon Kaen 40002 Telephone: 0-4336-2039 E-mail: [email protected]Abstract This article aims to analyze changes in Thai social welfare policies in recent years and considers their impact on the mechanism of the Thai welfare state, with an eye to future underlying social change so the fact of a rapidly aging population will prompt policy makers to bring about significant changes in these policies. The paper concludes with a discussion of implications of the approaches for social welfare management in four regions of Thailand. Key word: welfare policy, social welfare, social development 1. Introduction Introduction of the Thai welfare state may significantly change Thai society. The concept and policy of social welfare development to enhance quality of life of Thai [Lucy1]has just recently been implemented under the scope of the 2007 Constitution of Thai Kingdom. This policy primarily recognizes the importance of the economy, public health, education, and religion and culture. The principal objective of the 10th National Economic and Social Development Plan covering 2007 to 2011 (Arkhom, 2008), which is adopted and based on the concept of a sufficiency economy, is to establish a green and happy society. Indeed, this is the first Thai law addressing social welfare, which is administered under a 2003 Act of Social Welfare Promotion amended in 2007. The main effect of this amendment is to acknowledge that a community can implement its own social welfare program in cooperation with state social welfare. The concept of state social welfare is defined in legal terms such that “Social welfare is a system of social services involved in prevention, solutions and development and support for social stability to respond to the primary needs of people so that they have a good quality of life and self-dependence under conditions of coverage, suitability and equality. The services cover education, health, shelter, work and income, recreation, justice and other social services. And, human dignity, social rights and involvement with all level of social welfare provision are subjects to take into consideration.” In fact, the majority of social welfare programs available in Thailand seem to rest on the fact that the government provides while people wait to be fed, as illustrated by a health welfare program called “30 baht Universal Healthcare Program,” monthly allowance for the aged, a vocational welfare program called the “One Million for Village Fund,” etc. However, despite a number of benefits, these types of welfare programs tend to mislead people into believing that these services are a right. In practice, even with limited understanding of and perspectives on welfare, a considerable number of the activities are traditionally based and adopted from cultures, traditions, and way of life in which community groups, individual families, or kinship support one another and share food, for instance, and where happiness is based on their own culture. Nevertheless, it is not called welfare but “tradition.” This is reflected in the definition given of welfare that it is “shared hospitality in a community where ‘giving and taking’ lies on dignity of a human.” It is widely accepted that the existence of a typical community with hospitality and self-dependence reflects effective adaptability and harmonizes with present phenomena. Compromising between globalization, which is supported by capitalism to create financial stability, and localization, the goal of which is to socialize, could prove this fact; however, building a community where people live happily is challenging, especially with globalization. This phenomenon is impacting people’s way of life, causing vocational shifts from agriculture to industrial sectors, and multiplying the so-called ageing society. For this reason, it is necessary that state policies balance economic development and social development. Particularly, the provision of state welfare requires cooperation among government sectors, private sectors, and public organizations. In addition, innovations in the social welfare program should be diversified and easily accessible to all, including the privileged and the marginalized. Moreover, the government and related agencies should be committed to supporting communities to organize and manage welfare so they are less dependent on authorities (deinstitutionalization). In fact, traditional elderly care homes should be downsized, and communities ought to be more actively involved in welfare management (Dewilde & Keulenare, 2003)
6
Embed
106 - มหาวิทยาลัยขอนแก่น · The concept and policy of social welfare ... religion and culture. The principal objective of the 10th ... not only
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
106
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
Thai social welfare policy: Synergistic approaches to social development of government and the public sector
Apisak Dhiravisit , PhD
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences Khon Kaen University
Total 1,566,200.0 100.0 1,660,000.0 100.0 1,835,000.0 100.0 Sources: Thailand’s Budget in Brief, fiscal years 2007, 2008, 2009
As shown in Table 1, when considering the budget spent over the last three years, the proportion of budget allocated to each of the aspects is not significantly different. In particular, the proportion of budget allocated to community services in 2009, 2008, and 2007 was 7.6%, 6.9%, and 6.5%, respectively, accounting for 41.8% of all budget. According to the budget for the country’s
development, the government is aware of the significance of community and social services. In addition, in terms of economic development, despite the fact that the recent GDP of the country has apparently risen, that income is still centralized, leading to wide overlap between people in the country. This is the reason the country’s strategic planning is subject to amendment.
Mechanisms of social welfare development in government and public sectors
In fact, schemes to develop social welfare systems in Thailand are addressed in the first five-year strategic plans (2007-2011), which are specified in the 10th National Development Plan. That is, social welfare development occurs at a provincial level, with provinces expected to play an active role in integrating development, whereas Tambols and villages serve as public areas for public hearings and formulation of local activities. The Office of Social and Human Development is the main government agency implementing the program and supports public and private sectors to involve them in organizing social welfare; however, in practice, it is ineffective because the agency is still based on a bureaucratic system, working as a charitable agency rather than developing social welfare activities. Thus, to be more effective in improving the social welfare system, it will be necessary for relevant workers to adopt a different attitude, for the framework to be corrected for more flexibility, and for the relevant
agencies to play a role in coordinating networks and supporting agencies. Nevertheless, if the idea that local agencies should cooperate while social welfare funds are allocated to provinces is taken into consideration, it
would be an initial step toward equalizing and distributing benefits to people. Again, in reality those who make decisions are involved in hierarchical government offices, and it is they who can exercise their power to compromise the benefits and allocate funds to their supporters. This means that the funds are not extensively distributed, nor can equity be verified.
Structural change of the aging population group and social welfare management
It is expected that the proportion of those aged 65 and older will increase from 7% to 17% to 23% in 2007, 2030, and 2050, respectively (Table 2). This affirms that Thailand will soon become a society of the aged.
4
Table 2 Thailand’s aging population
Year Population size (in millions)
Proportion below age 15 (%)
Proportion aged 65 and above (%)
2007 65.7 23 7 2030 69.2 17 17 2050 67.4 16 23
Sources: Asian Meta Center, 2009, cited from Population Reference Bureau, 2007; World Population Data Sheet for 2007; United Nation Population Division, 2006; World Population Prospects and 2007 World Urbanization Prospects
Table 3 Number of projects and organizations and budget for welfare activity in 4 provinces of Thailand (2007-2008)
Notes: P = number of projects, O = number of organization, B = budget (Thai million baht)
In fact, the social welfare policies of every political party in Thailand are virtually identical; that is, almost all the parties are aware of the importance of social welfare provisions and plan to manage welfare in the same form of charitable aid, a so-called life allowance. The difference is the amount the aged would get each month. This implies that the motive of political parties is to gain votes and win elections rather than to enable the communities to take care of the elderly and depend on one another. In particular, it is rare that the aging group in informal sectors can access the social welfare provided by the government. Based on this study, it is recommended that it be a requirement to establish a public social welfare fund partially funded by the government and managed by the communities.
Social welfare management in four regions of Thailand
In 2007-2008 the government tried a pilot project in self-management of social welfare by local government and civil sectors in four areas. These included Changwat Pattalung (in the south), Changwat Chantaburi (in the east), Changwat Khon Kaen (in the northeast), and Changwat Lumpang (in the north) (Table 3). During the implementation, community social welfare management and development of quality of life were underlined. Regarding the budget for welfare activity, the total amount of allocated budget to Changwat Pattalung, Changwat Chantaburi, Changwat Khon Kaen and Changwat Lumpang was 0.6, 1.6, 0.4, and 1.8 million baht, respectively, while the budget for
career welfare was 1.6, 0.0, 4.5, and 0.9, respectively. In cooperation with government sectors, welfare activities have been transformed into various projects and distinct responsible agencies. When the terms of welfare management were considered in seven dimensions, it was revealed that such management was neither concerned with particular issues nor widespread to all possible groups of people. According to the study, civil welfare programs managed by the communities indicated a likelihood that resources of welfare were extensively distributed and that the budget spent was less than that managed by the government. Therefore, based on this study, a system of welfare activities managed by communities should be implemented nationwide. The advantages of doing this include dynamic management and linear actions; more equitable welfare distribution; involvement of people, ranging from individuals and families to the community, social institutions in the community, and government agencies; and stability of the economy at a grassroots level, where a full cycle of welfare is created, covering the human life cycle from birth to death. In fact, it seems like a kind of pension welfare for all. Furthermore, this model tends to be a people development process and to use social resources to strengthen a community for the ultimate goal: self-dependence in globalization.
One baht saving: Civil welfare
One baht saving is a concept in which daily expenditure must be reduced and one baht is
Pathalung Chantaburi Khon Kaen Lampang Development Activities P O B P O B P O B P O B
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
Table 3 Number of projects and organizations and budget for welfare activity in 4 provinces of Thailand (2007-2008)
Notes: P = number of projects, O = number of organization, B = budget (Thai million baht)
In fact, the social welfare policies of every political
party in Thailand are virtually identical; that is, almost all the
parties are aware of the importance of social welfare provisions
and plan to manage welfare in the same form of charitable
aid, a so-called life allowance. The difference is the amount
the aged would get each month. This implies that the motive of
political parties is to gain votes and win elections rather than to
enable the communities to take care of the elderly and depend
on one another. In particular, it is rare that the aging group in
informal sectors can access the social welfare provided by the
government. Based on this study, it is recommended that it be
a requirement to establish a public social welfare fund partially
funded by the government and managed by the communities.
Social welfare management in four regions of Thailand
In 2007-2008 the government tried a pilot project in
self-management of social welfare by local government and civil
sectors in four areas. These included Changwat Pattalung (in
the south), Changwat Chantaburi (in the east), Changwat Khon
Kaen (in the northeast), and Changwat Lumpang (in the north)
(Table 3). During the implementation, community social welfare
management and development of quality of life were underlined.
Regarding the budget for welfare activity, the total amount of
allocated budget to Changwat Pattalung, Changwat Chantaburi,
Changwat Khon Kaen and Changwat Lumpang was 0.6, 1.6, 0.4,
and 1.8 million baht, respectively, while the budget for career
welfare was 1.6, 0.0, 4.5, and 0.9, respectively.
In cooperation with government sectors, welfare
activities have been transformed into various projects and distinct
responsible agencies. When the terms of welfare management
were considered in seven dimensions, it was revealed that such
management was neither concerned with particular issues nor
widespread to all possible groups of people. According to the
study, civil welfare programs managed by the communities
indicated a likelihood that resources of welfare were extensively
distributed[Lucy5] and that the budget spent was less than that
managed by the government. Therefore, based on this study, a
system of welfare activities managed by communities should be
implemented nationwide. The advantages of doing this include
dynamic management and linear actions; more equitable welfare
distribution; involvement of people, ranging from individuals and
families to the community, social institutions in the community,
and government agencies; and stability of the economy at a
grassroots level, where a full cycle of welfare is created, covering
the human life cycle from birth to death. In fact, it seems like a
kind of pension welfare for all. Furthermore, this model tends to
be a people development process and to use social resources
to strengthen a community for the ultimate goal: self-dependence
in globalization.
One baht saving: Civil welfare
One baht saving is a concept in which daily
expenditure must be reduced and one baht is collected to
make merit. This thought has been developed by Scholar Chop
Yodkeaw, a local scholar in the south of Thailand. In practice,
members of a community make merit on Buddhist Day and
have the common objective of reducing selfishness. As a result,
members of the community increase a sense of hospitality by
helping one another, and they have been involved in this kind of
welfare from the time they were born until they die. The money
borrowed to practice their occupation can be diversified to other
development such as public activities for the village, community
shops, forestation, etc. The objective of establishment of a
community welfare fund is to run a campaign to raise awareness
of saving, independence, morals, and hospitality and support of
one another, especially in the event that a member experiences
illness or death. Virtually, welfare in the form of a financial fund
becomes a welfare system related to cultural bases and
resting on local resources. This principal would be a mainstream
for sufficiency and sustainability for any community (O’Neal &
O’Neal, 2003; Browing, Halcli, & Webster, 2000). A suggestion
for public sectors to improve the welfare fund for sustainability
(Figure 1) is that people organizations be granted permission to
implement and manage social welfare, cooperating with government
agencies through vertical linkage. This is similar to a pattern of a
local state and a central state. In addition, horizontal relationships
4
Table 2 Thailand’s aging population
Year Population size (in millions)
Proportion below age 15 (%)
Proportion aged 65 and above (%)
2007 65.7 23 7 2030 69.2 17 17 2050 67.4 16 23
Sources: Asian Meta Center, 2009, cited from Population Reference Bureau, 2007; World Population Data Sheet for 2007; United Nation Population Division, 2006; World Population Prospects and 2007 World Urbanization Prospects
Table 3 Number of projects and organizations and budget for welfare activity in 4 provinces of Thailand (2007-2008)
Notes: P = number of projects, O = number of organization, B = budget (Thai million baht)
In fact, the social welfare policies of every political party in Thailand are virtually identical; that is, almost all the parties are aware of the importance of social welfare provisions and plan to manage welfare in the same form of charitable aid, a so-called life allowance. The difference is the amount the aged would get each month. This implies that the motive of political parties is to gain votes and win elections rather than to enable the communities to take care of the elderly and depend on one another. In particular, it is rare that the aging group in informal sectors can access the social welfare provided by the government. Based on this study, it is recommended that it be a requirement to establish a public social welfare fund partially funded by the government and managed by the communities.
Social welfare management in four regions of Thailand
In 2007-2008 the government tried a pilot project in self-management of social welfare by local government and civil sectors in four areas. These included Changwat Pattalung (in the south), Changwat Chantaburi (in the east), Changwat Khon Kaen (in the northeast), and Changwat Lumpang (in the north) (Table 3). During the implementation, community social welfare management and development of quality of life were underlined. Regarding the budget for welfare activity, the total amount of allocated budget to Changwat Pattalung, Changwat Chantaburi, Changwat Khon Kaen and Changwat Lumpang was 0.6, 1.6, 0.4, and 1.8 million baht, respectively, while the budget for
career welfare was 1.6, 0.0, 4.5, and 0.9, respectively. In cooperation with government sectors, welfare activities have been transformed into various projects and distinct responsible agencies. When the terms of welfare management were considered in seven dimensions, it was revealed that such management was neither concerned with particular issues nor widespread to all possible groups of people. According to the study, civil welfare programs managed by the communities indicated a likelihood that resources of welfare were extensively distributed and that the budget spent was less than that managed by the government. Therefore, based on this study, a system of welfare activities managed by communities should be implemented nationwide. The advantages of doing this include dynamic management and linear actions; more equitable welfare distribution; involvement of people, ranging from individuals and families to the community, social institutions in the community, and government agencies; and stability of the economy at a grassroots level, where a full cycle of welfare is created, covering the human life cycle from birth to death. In fact, it seems like a kind of pension welfare for all. Furthermore, this model tends to be a people development process and to use social resources to strengthen a community for the ultimate goal: self-dependence in globalization.
One baht saving: Civil welfare
One baht saving is a concept in which daily expenditure must be reduced and one baht is
Pathalung Chantaburi Khon Kaen Lampang Development Activities P O B P O B P O B P O B
management byetween local government and civil sectors in four areas. These included Changwat Pattalung (in the south), Changwat Chantaburi (in the east), Changwat Khon Kaen (in the northeast), and Changwat Lumpang (in the north) (tTable 3). DuringIn the implementation, community social welfare management and development of quality of life were underlined. Regarding the In respect of budget for welfare activity, the total amount of allocated budget tofor Changwat Pattalung, Changwat Chantaburi, Changwat Khon Kaen and Changwat Lumpang was 0.6, 1.6, 0.4, and 1.8 million baht, respectively, while the budget for career welfare was 1.6, 0.0, 4.5, and 0.9, respectively. In cooperation with government sectors, the welfare activities have beenwere transformed into variousdifferent projects and distinct responsible agencies. When considering the terms defined forof welfare management were considered in seven7 dimensions, it was revealedshowed that suchthe given welfare management was neither concernedvered with particular issues nor widespread to all possible groups of people. According to the study, civil welfare programs managed by the communities managed indicated a livkelihood that resources of welfare were extensively distributed and that the spent budget spent was less than that managed by the government. Therefore, based on this study, a systemthe idea thatof welfare activities managed by a communityies be supported should beto implemented nationwide. The advantages of doing this includeo do this, one advantage is dynamic management and linear actions; more equitableanother is coverage of welfare distribution; the third one is involvementestablishment of people, involvement ranging from an individuals, and familyies, to the community, social institutesions in the community, and government agencies; and the last one is stability of the economy atin a grassroots level, where a full cycle of welfare is created, covering thea human life cycle from birth to deathd. In fact, it seems liketo a kind of pension welfare for all. Furthermore, this model tends to be a people development process and to useconstitute social resources to strengthen a community for the ultimate goal-: self -dependence in globalization. One baht saving: Ccivil welfare One baht saving is a concept thatin which daily expenditure must be reduced and one baht is collected to make merit. This thought has beenis developed by Scholar Chop Yodkeaw, a local scholar in the south of Thailand. In practice, members of a community make merit on Buddhist dDay and have the common objective ofto reduceing selfishness. As a result, the members inof
the community raiseincrease a sense of hospitality by helping one another, and they have been who are involved in this kind of welfare from the timesince they were born until they die dead. The money borrowed to practice their occupation can be diversified to other development such activities as public activities for the village, community shops, forestation, etc. The objective of establishment of a community welfare fund is to run a campaign to raise awareness of saving, self independence, morals, and hospitality and support of one another, especially in the event that asome of the members experiences illness andor death. Virtually, welfare in the form of a financial fund becomes a welfare system that is related to cultural bases and restings on local resources. This principal would be a mainstream for sufficiency and sustainability for any communitiesy (O‟Neal and & O‟Neal, 2003; Browing, Halcli, & and Webster, 2000). AThe suggestions for made by public sectors to improve the welfare fund for sustainability (fFigure 1) is that people organizations be granted permission to implement and manage social welfare, while cooperationng with the government agencies is in the form ofthrough vertical linkage. This is similar to a pattern of a local state and a central state. In additionBesides, horizontal the relationships in horizontal linkage among people organizations and local states is probably closer as they are a conventional group. This means that the form of network structure shifts from “ „getting by‟” to “getting ahead‟,” and a shift from bonding to bridging network structure occurs (Crow, 2007). WithUnder public welfare management, theits fund is raised byfrom three parties in thewith same ratio;: 1:1:1. Through which pPeople organizations can manage the collected money to distribute welfare to the members thoroughly.
Figure 1 The model of fund raising for local welfare management
However, an understanding of theand
value towardof community welfare that the principal objective of saving is to borrow some
Comment [Lucy5]: do you mean, were not extensively distributed ? The following are recommendations for welfare
development in Thailand. (1) The government should advocate
welfare development by authorizing people, with the govern-
ment playing a role of supporter, because the conventional
systems, which are implemented by the government, induce
red tape, and such systems seem to be a passive strategy, not
emphasizing process but output; in fact, the process of project
approval can reflect patronage culture. (2) Strategies should be
formulated and driven by authentic requirements of areas. That
is, communities should be granted involvement in management
of welfare activities while collaborating with the government.
(3) A database should be established in each area, where such local
organizations as Tambol and municipalities are agencies for
it. Necessary data would include amount of budget, activity
descriptions, and evaluation of related agencies. Problems
should be categorized, based on the area and issues, in order to
formulate precise strategies. (4) All agencies concerned with
welfare management should be integrated for collaboration,
starting with exchange of information, implementation, plans,
schemes, budget allocation, etc. The advantage would be a
common and clear orientation via synergistic approaches.
5.Acknowledgments Thailand Research Fund (TRF) is acknowledged for
its financial support. The author gratefully acknowledges the
contribution of four social welfare research teams in four regions.
The author would like to thank Aj Peem Pakamaethavee,
Dr. Tipawan Sri jan, Dr. Pattamavadee, and Susuki
Phochanukul[Lucy6] for offering useful suggestions during the
research.
6.References[1] Asian Meta Center. (2009). Asian demographic and human
capital, Data Sheet 2008. Austria: Wolfgang Lutz.
[2] Browning, G., Halcli, A., & Webster, F. (2000).
Understanding contemporary society: Theories of the
present. London: Sage.
[3] Bureau of the Budget. (2009). Thailand’s budget in brief,
fiscal year 2007. Bangkok: P.A. Living.
[4] Bureau of the Budget. (2008). Thailand’s budget in brief,
fiscal year 2008. Bangkok: P.A. Living.
[5] Bureau of the Budget. (2007). Thailand’s budget in brief,
fiscal year 2009[Lucy7]. Bangkok: P.A. Living.
[6] Buckingham, A., & Saunders, P. (2004). The survey
methods workbook: From design to analysis. Cambridge:
Polity Press.
111
The International Conference on Sustainable Community Development27-29 January 2011
[7] Carrington, P. J., Scott, J., & Wasserman, S. (2005). Model
and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
[8] Chambers, R. (2004). Ideals for development: Reflecting
forwards. Brighton, UK: XPS.
[9] Crowe, J.A. (2007). In search of a happy medium: How the
structure of interorganizational networks influence
community economic development strategies. Social
Networks 29(1): 469-488.
[10] Dewilde, C., & Keulenare, F. D. (2003). Housing and poverty:
The ‘missing link.’ European Journal of Housing Policy,
3(2), 127-153.
[11] Dhiravisit, A. (2009). Government policy for urban poor
community management in developing countries: Case
study—Thailand. Journal of Business & Economics
Research, 8(5), 89-97.
[12] Ishihara, H., & Pascual, U. (2009). Social capital in
community level environment government: A critique.
Ecological Economics, 68(1), 1549-1562.
[13] McNeill, P., & Chapman, S. (2005). Research methods (3rd
ed.). Abingdon Oxon: Routledge.
[14] Montgomery, J. D. (2007). The structure of norms and
relations in patronage systems. Social Networks, 29(1),
565-584.
[15] Office of National Economic and Social Development.
(2006). National Economic and Social Development Plan
(Vol. 10). Bangkok.
[16] O’Neal, G. S., & O’Neal, R. A. (2003). Community
development in the USA: An empowerment zone example.
Community Development Journal, 2(38): 120-129.
[17] Prior, L. (2003). Using documents in social research.
London: Sage.
[18] Rapley, M. (2003). Quality of life research: A critical
introduction. London: Sage.
[19] Termpittayapaisith, A. (2008). The 10th national economic
and social development plan. Bangkok: Office of National
Economic and Social Development.
[20] White, H. (2008). Identity and control (2nd ed.). Cambridge: