dc.description.abstractalternative |
This research aims to comprehensively examine the evolution and debates surrounding local self-government in Thai society while evaluating power relationships in federal, state, and local government sectors. It also assesses dynamic conditions within and outside the country that impact local government organizations. By synthesizing multiple perspectives, the study proposes a nuanced framework for self-government in Thailand. Using qualitative methods, empirical data is collected from practical contexts where autonomy is applied. The study areas include the Pattani Municipality, which has been designated under a special law due to the intensity of conflicts; the Khon Kaen Municipality, which is being developed as a smart city, leveraging civil state policies; and the Mae Sot City Municipality, designated as a special economic zone. In-depth interviews were conducted with three distinct groups: high-ranking officials from the Ministry of the Interior (at the central level), provincial governors, and executives from local government organizations, such as mayors and deputy mayors. Additionally, observation with participation was conducted, and a focus group comprising area residents and 33 individuals who had experience working with local leaders was convened. The collected data was analyzed descriptively to derive meaningful insights.
The research results are divided into 4 parts as follows:
1) The evolution of the concept of local self-government has been markedly evident since 1997, largely driven by the implementation of a people's constitution that advocates for comprehensive decentralization. Subsequently, in the year 2003, all categories of local leaders were directly elected. In 2011, the concept of self-management provinces emerged, with the representation dimension being particularly prominent. However, the decision-making dimension faced challenges in decentralizing project control effectively. Similarly, the participation dimension lacked a clearly defined mechanism. On the other hand, the concept of consultative democracy showed promise in encouraging local participation but encountered limited widespread implementation. The dimensions of autonomy that saw the least progress were resource allocation and accountability, which did not fully align with legal provisions.
2) The dynamics of power relations between central, regional, and local governments can be perceived as a partnership characterized by negotiation, particularly in economic matters. However, when issues pertaining to security arise, negotiations often result in the central government exerting control over the local areas. The structure transferred from the central government to the local level can be characterized as "disguised," signifying the state's policy intention to exploit the locality for the central government's benefit. As a result, the local government encounters limitations in fully implementing the five dimensions of governance due to extensive supervision by various provincial committees.
3) The internal conditions that both pressures and resistance for local government organizations are primarily rooted in the realms of politics and economy, including policies, internal structural change, and political changes. Conversely, external pressures on local governments originated from implementing and adhering to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
4) The outcome of the synthesis of local self-government models, derived from diverse perspectives, including abolition, lower-tier local government organizations, special urban localities, and self-governing provincial administrations. The challenge of local self-government presents itself in two scenarios. In the first scenario, local governments may face difficulties negotiating with the central government, especially if the nation is under a dictatorship, leading to unequal power dynamics. In such cases, policies are implemented in conjunction with the central government, often excluding the input of local governments. However, in certain instances, negotiations and collaborations between local and central governments may persist, as the central government seeks to utilize local resources for its own benefit. The second scenario involves a new democratic political context, wherein the prospects for decentralization and local self-government may experience a resurgence. In such democratic environments, there is a possibility of reintroducing bills that promote the administration of autonomous provinces, thereby fostering greater decentralization and regional autonomy. |
|