Deliberative Policy Model to Water Conflict Resolution for Improving Agricultural Entrepreneurs’ Business: Case Studies in Suphanburi and Samutprakarn Province, Thailand
Keywords:
Deliberative Policy, Water management, Agricultural entrepreneur business, ThailandAbstract
This research studied the process of deliberative policy-making in environmental conflict resolution, concerning water resources in conflict areas in Thailand, and the construction of a deliberative policy model concerning water management, in order to seek for an efficient model to reduce conflicts regarding this issue. Moreover, following the research findings it was determined that stakeholders related to the deliberative model, particularly agricultural entrepreneurs, receive opportunities to set up sustainable income when water conflicts are resolved. The research reviews the relevant literature on deliberative policy concepts, conflict management and resolution concepts, and other case studies concerning deliberative models for conflict resolution relating to water management, and pursues desirable mutual agreements regarding water management in Thailand.
The areas of study in this research cover several administrative sections of the Royal Irrigation Department, operated under the Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives. These administrative sections have direct responsibilities related to water management, the deliberative policy-making processes, and are stakeholders of the policies. The two case studies chosen in this research consist of two irrigation project sites (Dan Chang district, Suphanburi province and Klong Dan District, Samutprakarn Province) due to their exceptional success in local water management. During these case studies it was found that the deliberative model drives the co-creation of agricultural entrepreneur business among the stakeholders. Moreover, this model can drive trust in open-space conditions, desires, and sustainable decision making, for building opportunities for improving incomes and quality of life. In conclusion, the deliberative policy model on water conflict conditions contributes alternative opportunities to agricultural entrepreneurs in conflict areas, to implant their engagement and build relationships for conflict resolution trough peace talks and systematic change.
References
Reference
Carcasson, M. & Sprain, L. (2010). Key Aspects of the Deliberative Democracy Movement. Public Sector Digest (July2010), Center for Public Deliberation,Colorado State University
Elster, J. (1998) ‘Introduction’, in J. Elster (ed.), Deliberative Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–18.
Goodin, R. (2003). Reflective Democracy. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Goodin, R. (2012). Innovative Democracy: Democratic Theory and Practice after the Deliberative Turn. Oxford:Oxford University Press
Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2000,p.161
Habermas, Jürgen (1989). The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 2. Cambridge: Polity
K.H. Bowmer .(2014). Water resources in Australia: deliberation on options for protection and management. Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 2014 Vol. 21, No. 3, 228–240,Retrived from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2014.913269
Niemeyer S, Dryzek JS. (2007).The Ends of Deliberation: Meta –consensus and Inter-substantive Rationailty as Ideals outcomes.Swiss Polit.Sci.Rev.I(4):497-526.
Smith, Deliberative Democracy and the Environment (2003 ):p.94 London ,Routledge
Smith, Graham and Wales, Corinne.(2000).“Citizens’ Juries and Deliberative Democracy”,Political Study,Vol.48 .Oxford : Blackwell Publishers, pp.51-65.
Stasavage, D. (2007) ‘Polarization and Publicity: Rethinking the Benefits of Deliberative Democracy’, Journal of Politics, 69 (1),59–72.
Wachiraporn Kumnerdpet, (2010). Community Learning and EmpowermentThrough Participatory Irrigation Management:Case Studies from Thailand. ( Doctor Dissertation ),University of Minitoba, Clayton H. Riddell Faculty of Environment, Earth, and Resources Natural Resources Institute.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Yankelovich, D. (1991). Coming to public judgment. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.
