ADB RETA 5771
Poverty Reduction & Environmental Management in Remote Greater
Mekong Subregion Watersheds Project (Phase I)

The Tambon Administration, Organisation and Rural Development:

Experiences In Northeastern Thailand

SPECIAL REPORT

By

Colin McQuistan

1. Introduction

The Northeastern region of Thailand, which was once endowed with abundant natural resources, now suffers from numerous social and economic problems resulting from severe environmental degradation. This degradation results from improper government planning and poor post planning management, in the region too often viewed as the backyard of Thailand’s pursuit for economic development. The persistent poverty in the Northeast of Thailand and the lack of employment alternatives to agriculture within the region, continue to be the principle concerns. The Northeast has suffered the highest degree of deforestation, provides the largest seasonal labour force and receives the lowest domestic product for any region of Thailand.

Forest status (RFD 1996);

Currently the Northeast has forest cover of 21,265 sq. km according to the Royal Forest Department figures for 1995. This is only 12.59 % of the area for the whole region. The forests are located in the peripheral provinces of Chayaphum 14%, Loei 13.6%, Ubon Ratchatani 11%, Nakhon Ratchasima 10.6%, Udon Thani 8%, Sakhon Nakhon 6.6%, Mukdahan 6.2% and Amnat Charoen 5.1%. The remaining provinces of the northeast have only very small forested areas with the province of Maha Sarakhram reporting less than 35 km² of a provincial area of 5,291.7 km² is covered with trees.

These shrinking forests are the result of logging concessions granted for export purposes, and the government policy of cash crop promotion in the area. This promotion of export crops resulted in uncontrolled encroachment onto forest reserves, in pursuit of increased yields form bigger cultivation areas. Another reason for deforestation in the northeast concerns security reasons. During the late 1970’s when the Communist party of Thailand was active the Royal Thai army encouraged villagers to encroach upon forest areas under the control of insurgent groups. In assisting the army in this process the villagers were often rewarded with the land formerly held by the Communist groups. Finally illegal logging has continued in the northeast a recent scandal involving the suicide of a district forestry official in Nakhon Ratchasima province, in 1997 (Bangkok post, 1997).

Agriculture;

Thirty years of agricultural development, chiefly based around diversification into production of export crops such as Cassava, Maize, Jute and Sugar cane, and intensification of production through the use of modern inputs, have resulted in only limited inroads on poverty in the region. In many cases, it has actually left farmers with less than before (Teerasaswat and Deesuancoke, 1993).

Unstable markets for export crops, the dramatic fall in the agricultural commodity prices, particularly for rice, and the rising costs of inputs such as fertilizers, pesticides and fuel, are all contributing to the problems of the region. Additionally the rapid deforestation experienced has all but eliminated traditional food resources in some places, and has adverse effects on soil hydrology and local climatic regimes.

Misuse of chemical fertilizers and pesticides has also produced adverse environmental effects. Farmers report declining yields even with increased inputs, and a hardening of the soil over time as chemical fertilizers are used. Pesticide misuse has resulted in incidents of pesticide poisoning among farmers applying the chemicals and among consumers. Resistance to many pesticides is also becoming increasingly common, and the lack of natural predators within agricultural systems has exacerbated problems of pest outbreaks.

The need for cash within farming households has risen as traditional "free" resources have been depleted, and the demand for consumer items increased. Debt is reaching epidemic proportions in many villages, with farmers having little or no chance of being able to pay it off through current forms of agriculture.

As new paradigms of sustainability are being developed, it is becoming increasingly apparent that development without due regard for the social and environmental consequences is not sustainable. Consequently, recent approaches to rural development are directing attention towards local innovation and community responses to rural problems.

Table 1: Basic Statistics for the Regions of Thailand. (Statistical yearbook of Thailand no. 43)

2. Government Development Planning

Since 1961, Thailand has embarked upon a succession of five year national economic and social development plans which set forth the governments objectives for the nation during each period. The effective execution of these plans requires the necessity for updated legislation with adequate scope and empowerment to achieve the plan’s objectives. This has to be achieved for example even though Thailand has an uncoordinated and often hodgepodge of 70 plus laws and regulations concerning the environment alone (TEI 1995). All plans prior to the 5^th plan of 1982 to 1986 have focused upon central authoritarian control for the implementation of policy objectives. But after the 5^th National Economic and Social Development Plan (5^th NESDP) the government has slowly shifted focus away from government controlled bureaucratic development and has began to recognise the need for development initiative which build from the bottom up. This has been refined over time until the latest NESDP the 8^th plan.

The Eighth National Economic and Social Development Plan (1997-2001) is a major step towards adopting a new approach to national development aimed at achieving the long term vision of an ideal Thai society. This plan differs from all other plans in that Thai people from all walks of life and from various regions of the country, participated in drafting the current plan. This was a deliberate change in plan formulation in order to move away from the top-down approach practiced by the public sector in the past. This can be considered the beginning of a new era in planning which emphasises collaborative efforts of the whole population.

In past plans, the national economic and social development concept has largely been based on the acceleration of economic growth utilising comparative advantages in terms of natural resources and low-cost labour to produce goods and services for export. This development strategy was suitable for the needs of the time and consistent with the economic and social situation of the country. However, successes in economic growth and material progress to date have not meant that all Thai people are enjoying greater wealth and a substantially improved quality of life. On the contrary, rapid economic growth has had negative effects on Thai culture, traditional ways of life, family, community and social values. The impact on natural resources and the quality of the environment has also given cause for serious concern.

Genuine sustainable development for Thailand in the future will depend on the degree to which the potentialities and creativity of the Thai people are strengthened and enhanced. For this reason, the 8^th NESDP has adjusted the development concept, shifting from a growth orientation to people-centred development. The state of the people is considered to be the final measure of success: economic improvement is treated only as a means to improve the will-being of the people rather than as the final objective of development. The planning process will also be shifted from the beginning, seeking to contribute to the whole system rather than trying to integrate separate sectors later, in order that the majority of the Thai people can realize genuine benefits from this development process.

To attain these objectives and targets for development the plan focuses firstly upon enabling good governance. This must involve the strengthening of the relationship between the government and the people, through collaborative and participatory efforts, with the provision of guarantees for freedom, human rights and equity, and the settlement of conflicts through peaceful means. Secondly, such a plan relies upon reform of the development administration system for effective translation of the plan into action. This requires a development system based on the area approach, the integration of functions and participation of all stake-holders, improvement of the efficiency of public government agencies at the central level, particularly in budget and personnel management, together with the development of indicators suitable for the monitoring and evaluation of holistic development (NESDP 1997).

One major effect of this decentralisation and people participation process is the development of the Tambon Administration Organisation (TAO). A local body whose members are elected by local people under the supervision of the Department of Local Administration (DOLA), Ministry of the Interior. The Thai parliament approved the Local Administration Organisation and Tambon Council Act in 1994 which came into effect on the 27^th March 1995. This act was seen as a significant measure to promote locally sustainable development with the TAO being managed by the local community for the benefit of the local community, thereby enabling local people to be responsible for their own lives.

3. Tambon Administration Organisation (TAO)

The TAI is the lowest level of the local government administrative structure. The tambon administrative organisation is legislated by The Executive Service Regulation of the Kingdom of Thailand Act 1914 this regulates the tambon administration as follows;

The tambon must comprise more than ten villages and a resident population in excess of 2,000 people.

The area must be easily administered by the tambon chief.

The designation of the tambon should follow natural boundaries for example; roads, rivers, etc.

The tambon must generate sufficient local GDP to support administrative costs.

If an area desires to form a new tambon it must satisfy all the above criterion.

The tambon council act was revised by the Ordinance of the Ministry of the Interior 222/2499, on the 8th March 1956, which initiated an organisation structure which was administered locally by the provincial administration and the PAO. The tambon councils thus formed were a non-juristic entity and had no independent legal status. The resulting council had two sections the tambon committee was responsible for administration and the tambon council had an advisory role to the tambon committee. The tambon council members were elected to their positions with two representatives being selected for each village. The tambon council was made up of local government officials including the tambon chief and the village headmen.

In 1966 the tambon committee was dissolved with the responsibilities being transferred to the tambon Council. In 1972 the tambon Council was further revised by Revolutionary decree 326; 13^th December 1972. This decree specified that the members of the tambon council consist of;

1. Committee members; constituted of the Tambon chief, Village headmen and the local Public health official.
2. Elected members; One member selected from each village.

Figure 1: Basic Structure of the Tambon Administration Organisation (TAO).

In 1994 all Tambon Councils and Tambon Administrative Organisations were combined in The Tambon council and Tambon Administrative Organisation Act. With the inaugural Tambon Administrative Organisation (TAO) resulting form this act being established in 1995. Today there are 6,397 TAOs and 568 ‘old style’ Tambon councils nationwide. Under the act a tambon council with an average income of 150,000 Baht per year for three consecutive years is entitled to become a TAO. The TAO is made up of the tambon chief, the village headmen from each village in the tambon and the tambon health officer, this group of automatic members is supplemented by two elected members who are democratically elected by each village in the tambon. The TAO comprises three different sections, which is explained below and detailed in figure 1, page 4;

1. The TAO is governed by the TAO council which is composed of the tambon chief, all village headmen, the local public health official and the two elected members from each village in the tambon. The council is responsible for the areas economic, social, cultural development and also the preservation of the local environment and conservation of local natural resources.
2. The TAO also has an committee which is chaired by the Tambon chief, 2 selected village chiefs and four people selected from the TAO council members. This committee undertakes the administrative duties of the council.
3. Finally the office of the TAO clerk provides administrative support to the work of the TAO committee. Responsible for general administration, ensuring procedures are followed correctly and maintain the TAO documents and other records.

The Thai parliament approved the TAO legislation in 1994 but the act came only into force on 27^th march 1995. At that time 2,760 TAOs were created. With the passing of the TAO legislation the TAO became a corporate body and was thus provided with administrative autonomy. The future plan is that all tambon councils, irrespective of local product are to be granted TAO status in 2001.

The level beneath the TAO is the village, which is the smallest community unit in Thailand. The designation of a village is legislated by The Executive Service Regulation of the Kingdom of Thailand Act 1914 this regulates villages as;

1. Existing villages must have more than 400 resident villagers before they can be divided into the existing village and a new village.
2. If the existing village has more than 400 people but the village headman can comfortable care for the enlarged population there is no requirement for designation of a new village.

The village is managed by the village headman, two assistant village headmen and the village committee. This committee is the basic operating structure at the village level. The village headman is chairman of the village committee with the committee separated into two subcommittees the first concerning village defense and the second for village management, with one of the deputy village headmen appointed to each of these committees. Therefore one village deputy headman is responsible for community defense and the second is responsible for village management.

The members of the village committee must be nominated by at least two villagers. The village committee acts as the advisory board to assist the village headman in his routine work. The village committee is subdivided into sections related to work areas. The village development and occupational extension section, is responsible for developing village plans and related projects to; develop the village, villager’s occupations and assist the formation of occupational associations. The work of this section focuses upon the formation of villager groups which usually include; Savings fund group, Agriculturists group, Women’s group and Youth group etc.

To facilitate village development and occupational extension activities in each village, funding support is required. Thus the savings fund is often seen as a way of facilitating collaborative assistance between farmers in the same village, who wish to establish a particular activity. Apart from the savings group other village groups can be established to facilitate villager to villager collaboration. This approach is thought to be more practical than working with individual villagers. The promotion of such groups comes from a number of administrative levels but is usually dependent upon, Provincial, District or Tambon plans and/or policy. This policy promotion has resulted in almost every village in Thailand having at least one such group. In some villages these are functioning groups but in other villages these groups exist in name alone, lacking management and having no collaborative activities within the village.

Recent legislation changes have enabled village groups to register under The Co-operative (No. 2) Act 1981, which specifies that the group must consist of at least 10 members. The group applies to the district co-operatives office or the provincial co-operatives office, which will assist the group and provide advice regarding operation and administration. For groups which do not upgrade to co-operatives status they can continue with their activity but will no longer be able to operate in a tax free status and will not be able to access government assistance as easily as previously.

4. Development at the village level

The TAO presented suggests that organisational development for local administration in Thailand is well developed. The combination of the TAO, the village committee right down to groups based upon specific activities indicates that Thailand’s rural communities are well prepared to implement and benefit from sustainable development.

According to most villagers understanding, the TAO should act as the facilitatory body to enable local development activities to occur. In principle for a development process to occur an idea would develop among a group of villagers. These villagers together would produce a collaborative strategy. This group would then develop their strategy into a proposal to submit to the TAO for deliberation and acceptance if it is deemed worthwhile, and fits with the TAO local development plan. The TAO administrative body could then assist with development of the proposal further until it was ready for submission to the responsible government agency. If the government agency accepted the proposal it would then receive assistance and support if the agency had available resources.

In establishing the TAO the idea was to create a local management structure which would take care of the locality, which was composed of local people. It was therefore proposed as a democratic structure, with local people selecting their local representatives from the resident population. This organisation would have the authority to deal with local problems and thus facilitate the local people to decide their own development strategy. Additionally as the members were locally elected they would be responsible to their neighbours for fair and effective management. The organisation is also responsible for local collection of taxes and for the use of these taxes to develop the tambon. The idea behind the inception of the TAO was to achieve the following;

1. Development of the tambon.
2. Ensure that this development is appropriate to the local economy, community and traditions.
3. Manage the local community to the benefit of the local people; for example ensure hygiene and cleanliness, women and children’s development, conservation of natural resources and the environment.
4. To facilitate the TAO to achieve municipality status in the future.
5. The network and collaborate with government agencies and other organisations.
6. Develop local people’s capacity and awareness.

The responsibility and the activities of the TAO are also clearly identified and are outlined as follows;

• Promote development of farmers groups and other cooperatives.
• Development of village industry.
• Promote local job security.
• Develop local assets
• Construct and maintain a local market.
• Develop local commerce.

• Ensure adequate water supply and irrigation supply.
• Ensure adequate drainage provisions.

• Ensure provision of electricity.
• Construct and maintain meeting rooms, sports areas, recreation areas and other community areas.

The funding for the TAO is derived from 4 principle sources. These are;

1. Collection of local administration taxes and income tax on specific items in the tambon as provided by law
2. Benefit derived from tambon assets
3. The provision of funding from central government.
4. Interest earned from any deposits

The TAO structure and policy appears at first hand to be well designed and suitable to manage local development in Thailand. But unfortunately after only three years in existence the TAOs appear a major flop in the steps towards decentralisation. Corruption is seen as the main reason according to academics and local administrators (Bangkok post 1999). The severe lack of essential public utilities and infrastructure at the village level enabled the local TAO members the chance to use TAO budget to fund infrastructure development projects. Bridge, road and water supply works top the agendas of almost all TAOs given a free hand to spend their budgets.

With this total focus upon infrastructure construction, project concerning natural resource management, career training and human resource development are absent. This situation has probably arisen for two reasons.

Construction projects open the door to corruption. The first cycle of Tambon council officials is heavily influenced by incumbent local leaders, with the tambon chief (Kamnan) and the village headman all automatically included upon the council. These are the people who have been responsible for local administration prior to the establishment of the TAO. Therefore policy has remained the same with the TAO supporting the same construction companies which are too often owned by family or friends of these local people. Secondly the omission of projects to develop local capacity and instruct villagers ensures that these same officials will be returned by subsequent elections. Therefore the same system endures due to the lack of public participation and scrutiny.

The TAOs were established in haste and the majority of the elected officials who became TAO councilors were unprepared to undertake their duties. In light of this situation the first cycle of TAO, which incidentally is due for re-election in 1999, where supplemented by incumbent local leaders. Thus DOLA recommended that the tambon chief and the village headmen be automatically included on the TAO, with the tambon chief automatically designated the chairman of both the council and the TAO committee. Thus what started out as an attempt to decentralize and promote local democracy failed. This public participation and decentralisation process is further under threat from DOLA latest recommendations.

Currently DOLA is proposing amendments to related laws to give power to local government authorities to closely monitor the TAOs work and to seek the establishment of Tambon communities. Under this idea DOLA would act as the coordinator forming a monitoring network comprising representatives from NGOs, the business sector and government officials. The establishment of such a tripartite committee has also been recommended to create a system of checks and balances. The reasoning behind these proposed revisions to TAO structure is because local people are currently thought to be incapable of the administrative and management tasks required. The DOLA proposal is to baby-sit TAOs until they are capable of managing themselves.

Mr. Niyom Rathamarit, of Ramkhamhaeng University’s Political Science Faculty, agrees to the setting up of Tambon communities to encourage public participation in the management of TAOs. But the lecturer is opposed to any amendment to the law to promote the role of the central and provincial authorities. "TAOs corrupt because they come from a corrupt system. Decentralisation of power is not about setting up a new agency to help spend the budget". He also lashed out at the Interior Ministry for its effort to retain power by appointing kamnan and village chiefs to TAOs. The Interior Ministry should minimise its role and let local communities choose their own course. "They will never be able to learn about self-governing if they don’t have a chance to do it." (Bangkok post 1999)

The current problems with the administration of the TAO is probably more related to the structure and supporting mechanism of the TAO itself rather than a lack of monitoring and control form outside. The TAO is responsible for the tambons economic social and cultural development. Its income comes from various local taxes and TAOs are empowered to generate income from the tambons natural resources.

The TAO executive committee is composed of the kamnan, two village chiefs and four other elected members of the TAO. It administers the TAO and is empowered to issue Tambon regulations and laws to facilitate its administration. It designs its own development plan and development projects coming from central government need its approval. Such an administrative structure is fine if handled by genuine honest people, but it is also a system where locally influential people can manipulate the process to their own benefit

Currently the Auditor-General’s Office is responsible to audit the accounts of the TAO, but due to insufficient staff the agency could audit only 300 of the countrywide TAO’s during 1998 (Bangkok post 1998). Therefore a large volume of public money is being unaccounted on an annual basis. TAOs oversee tens of billions of baht each year from collected local taxes in addition to their regular budgets from the DOLA, Community Development Department and Public Works Department. One recent suggestion to remove this backlog is to allow the district chief to audit the TAO’s accounts for the tambons under their jurisdiction. But unfortunately this would mean one interior ministry official auditing the accounts of other interior ministry appointed officials, thus the opportunities for favoritism are numerous.

The official record shows that between January 1997 and December 1998, there were 386 complaints involving TAOs. Observers believe that these complaints are the tip of the iceberg of corruption and most corrupt practices are kept secret. This current situation is volatile and will be further exacerbated by the forthcoming elections. With many TAO chiefs requesting an extension of term or cancellation of elections due to potential conflict. The term of the first batch of some 600 TAOs is due to expire in March and the upcoming elections are welcomed as well as despised. Many people feel this will lead to deep conflict in communities. There will be a clear division between two groups in local administration. One is the TAO council and the other is the state-appointed authorities, which include the tambon chief and village heads. Although the laws define their respective roles and duties they often do not work in harmony and are likely to struggle to control each other. One unfortunate incident occurred in 1997 when the chairman of a TAO went on a shooting rampage and killed six and injured two tambon officials because they had relieved him of his duties. He was found to have embezzled funds from local development projects and sold public land to investors (Bangkok post 1997).

5. Conclusions

A strong village community contains active people who take responsibility for caring and managing their own resources, including their social and cultural environment. Until recently such communities had no mechanism to support such self-reliance. This understanding led to the development of the TAO, but unfortunately to date the TAO structure has not functioned as expected. Although the first cycle of TAOs identifies various problems these should be used as invaluable experience in developing stronger local community organisations. The principle lesson learned from the TAOs, is that the provision of an organisational structure is inadequate if the structure is not supported by appropriate training, and awareness raising. Therefore five key lessons result form the experience in Thailand regarding the tambon administrative organisations;

1. All members of the TAO should be elected. They must be residents of the area, open and cooperate freely with all stakeholder groups in the tambon and therefore cultivate enough support to be elected. They are natural leaders of the tambon, well liked and respected by the majority of residents. This will promote election of representatives who are active members of their community and not because they are the wealthiest or related to powerful or influential people. But this will only operate effectively if local empowerment of the whole community is achieved.
2. Human resource development, all members of the community must become involved in the learning process. A key aspect of which should be the promotion of public hearings and other meetings in which villagers have the opportunity to discuss problems together and jointly find solutions. The use of informal as well as formal meetings should be facilitated as much as possible. Villagers often feel intimidated to speak if the meeting is too large and managed in a formal manner.
3. The extension work of the TAO should include additional forum for the exchange of ideas including; other representative bodies; local temples, schools, village committees, etc. The TAO should involve other organisations as advisors when necessary and should forge links with other community groups, NGOs, businesses as well as the public sector.
4. Democracy must exist in the community. All activities should be directed by consensus decisions and undertaken with transparency and open for inspection.
5. Activities initiated must benefit not only participating members but also society in general.

A key requirement for the above process to be successful is knowledge and understanding. Knowledge of what is possible and understanding of what people’s rights and responsibilities are. One method that can speed up this learning process is by facilitating study tours where people learn by seeing. Interested villagers should be given the opportunity to visit successful managed villages to observe how success has been achieved. This will also provide villagers with knowledge and experience in fields not taught at school.

This method is also the most suitable medium for exchange of ideas for relatively poorly educated rural villagers. In most rural northeastern villagers the education of farmers is only to compulsory secondary education, age 12. The average for villagers in Kasetsomboon district of Chaiyaphum province is only to grade four, age 10, due to a high drop out rate (TEI 1999). Such people feel awkward and uncomfortable sat in lecture halls listening to administrators and lecturers. Given the opportunity to visit projects and given the opportunity to talk to other farmers, the process of learning can be more profitable.

The support role for such a learning process should involve both the public sector and the private sector. The public sector as represented by local government must adapt its role from "caretaker" who does everything for the communities to that of a "helper". The objective of support organisations should be to promote true participation of the people in their development.

Such support must look ahead for potential problems especially in communities not strong enough to help themselves. This process must be done in collaboration with the community so that they learn the process, and see for themselves what they can do. This should encourage maximum participation so that as many people as possible learn from the process. Such a collaborative system would only strengthen such local organisations that wish to cooperate, if a TAO refused to compromise or cooperate with other organisations, it would only develop slowly, if at all.

Additional thought should be undertaken to identify suitable indicators used to measure the relevant success of local community organisations. At present there are no clear measures for monitoring the success of local communities striving to become self-reliant. Success should not be measured by wealth. The use of wealth to measure success can be very misleading, especially if the increase in wealth is not equally distributed amongst the community. Such an exercise would result in an increase in average income for the whole community but the situation for the poorest members would be the same as before or maybe worse.

In several self-dependent communities, it is often found that members do not have more income but neither had they become poorer. However a community should be considered successful if the greater majority of resident villagers feel they have a say in the running village and community affairs. The community can be deemed successful if social problems are reduced for example arrests for drug offenses or illegal practices. Finally and perhaps most importantly a good indicator would be the nutrition rate of the eldest and youngest members of the community. They may not be wealthier but if everyone is better fed the community organisation should be accredited as successful, with the success linked to better management.

With the implementation of capacity building to increase villagers; knowledge, awareness and responsibility, and the TAO providing a developed structure for this greater awareness to be translated into management and responsibility in daily life. The opportunities for sustainable development in rural Thailand are great. This system would ensure that the natural resources and the quality of the local environment would be properly managed in a sustainable manner for the benefit of future generations. The TAO would be based upon a political system which is democratic and supported by an efficient public sector. This would result in local politicians and government officers being imbued with strong moral and ethical standards. Therefore everyone from the village level upwards would be capable of carrying out their duties to serve the real need of the population.

Such local development would go a long way to ensure the concluding remarks of the Eighth plan to become reality. "As the country is moving into a new era, it is hoped that the inception of the Eighth Plan will signal the beginning of an age of unprecedented national unity and harmony, shown by the initiation of collaborative and cooperative efforts of many kinds. It is believed that the Eighth Plan will set in motion a process by which all sectors of the society march together toward common goals and themselves share mutual responsibility for the monitoring and evaluation of development implementation on an annual basis. Most important of all, this undertaking is to be a process by which all people learn to live together in an enlightened way, with mutual care for each other, in harmony, peace, justice and freedom; in other words, as Thais".

References

1. Royal Forest Department, 1996, Forestry Statistics of Thailand, Data centre Information office, Royal Forest Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives.
2. Bangkok Post 1998, Logging in Korat out of control, finger is pointed at influential people. Saturday 28^th June 1997.
3. Teerasaswat and Deesuancoke, 1993; Economic, Social and Cultural changes of northern and central Esan villages before and after the commencement of national economic development planning. Department of History and Archaeology, Khon Kaen University. (in Thai).
4. Parnwell M.J.G, 1994, Rural industrialisation and sustainable development in Thailand. TEI quarterly environment journal Vol. 2, No. 1 Jan-March 1994, Thailand Environment Institute.
5. Statistical yearbook of Thailand No. 43 (1996) National statistical office, Office of the Prime Minister.
6. TEI 1995, Thailand: The environment and the Law. Thailand Environment Directory’ 95, Thailand Environment Institute.
7. NESDP 1997, The Eighth National Economic and Social Development Plan 1997-2001, National Economic and Social Development Board, Office of the Prime Minister, Bangkok, Thailand.
8. Bangkok post 1999, Tambon administration organisation. Local rule proves to be a flop, corruption found to be the main culprit. Sunday January 10^th 1999.
9. Thai Post 1997, Research study of administrative problems facing the Tambon Administrative Organisation (TAO). 3^rd May 1997.
10. Bangkok Post 1998, District chiefs may have to audit budget. Saturday November 21^st 1998.
11. Bangkok Post 1997, Kamnan runs amok, kills six, and, My Victims deserved to die, says ex-kamnan. 28^th and 29^th October 1997.
12. TEI 1999, Community and buffer zones; for the future of Thai forests. A paper to be presented at " Thailand’s environmental challenges in a time of crisis." Thailand Environment Institute’s annual conference, Queen Sirikit convention centre, Bangkok, Thailand, 36 pages.