Deliberative Participation Innovation: A Pathway to Decentralization and Sustainable Local Development
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article is a conceptual paper employing an integrative literature review to examine deliberative participation innovation as a mechanism linking decentralization and local governance in the Thai context. Despite more than two decades of decentralization reforms, participatory practices in Thailand remain largely quantitative and weakly connected to substantive policy decision-making. The objective of this paper is to synthesize conceptual frameworks that support participation centered on the quality of deliberation, grounded in information, reason-giving, and equality of voice.
The study integrates three strands of theory: (1) deliberative democracy, (2) decentralization and governance, and (3) digital participatory innovation, in order to develop a Deliberative–Innovative Governance framework applicable at the local level. The synthesis identifies five interrelated dimensions: (1) horizontal collaborative structures among state, private, and civic actors; (2) deliberative processes based on reason and information that mitigate domination; (3) the use of e-Participation technologies to broaden and sustain access; (4) mechanisms that foster social capital and institutional trust; and (5) policy outcomes that are transparent, auditable, and aligned with Sustainable Development Goal 16.
Based on these findings, the article proposes five policy-oriented recommendations, including the establishment of local deliberation innovation hubs, the integration of e-Participation with participatory budgeting, and the incorporation of quality of deliberation indicators into ITA/PA assessment frameworks. The paper concludes by presenting a Deliberative Governance Innovation Model as a conceptual prototype for strengthening local governance in Thailand.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
บทความที่ปรากฏในวารสารนี้ เป็นความรับผิดชอบของผู้เขียน ซึ่งสมาคมนักวิจัยไม่จำเป็นต้องเห็นด้วยเสมอไป การนำเสนอผลงานวิจัยและบทความในวารสารนี้ไปเผยแพร่สามารถกระทำได้ โดยระบุแหล่งอ้างอิงจาก "วารสารสมาคมนักวิจัย"
References
กมลวรรณ กาญจนประดิษฐ์. (2565). เวทีประชาคมกับการมีส่วนร่วมของประชาชนท้องถิ่น. เชียงใหม่: มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่.
พนม คลี่ฉายา. (2564). การบริหารงานท้องถิ่นในยุคกระจายอำนาจ. กรุงเทพฯ: วิทยาลัยการปกครอง, มหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา.
พีรเดช ศรีชัย. (2563). การมีส่วนร่วมของประชาชนในกระบวนการนโยบายท้องถิ่น. วารสารรัฐประศาสนศาสตร์, 20(3), 78–89.
สถาบันพระปกเกล้า. (2565). รายงานสรุปเวที Policy Dialogue Forum ด้านธรรมาภิบาลท้องถิ่น. กรุงเทพฯ: สถาบันพระปกเกล้า.
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการพัฒนาระบบราชการ. (2566). รายงานผลการประเมินคุณธรรมและความโปร่งใสในการดำเนินงานของหน่วยงานภาครัฐ (ITA) ประจำปีงบประมาณ พ.ศ. 2566. กรุงเทพฯ: สำนักงานคณะกรรมการพัฒนาระบบราชการ.
Borwornsak, U., & Burns, W. D. (1999). The Thai Constitution of 1997: Sources and process. Amsterdam: International Institute for Asian Studies.
Cabannes, Y. (2004). Participatory budgeting: A significant contribution to participatory democracy. Environment and Urbanization, 16(1), 27–46.
Dryzek, J. S. (2010). Foundations and frontiers of deliberative governance. Oxford University.
Dufhues, T., Theesfeld, I., & Buchenrieder, G. (2015). The political economy of decentralization in Thailand: How past and present decentralization affects rural actors’ participation. European Journal of Development Research, 27(5), 793–810.
Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Collaborative governance regimes. Georgetown University.
Faguet, J. P. (2014). Decentralization and governance. World Development, 53, 2–13.
Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the people speak: Deliberative democracy and public consultation. Oxford University.
Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2005). Experimenting with a democratic ideal: Deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40(3), 284–298.
Fox, J. A. (2015). Social accountability: What does the evidence really say?. World Development, 72, 346–361.
Fung, A. (2006). Varieties of participation in complex governance. Public Administration Review, 66(S1), 66–75.
Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (Eds.). (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the 21st century. Jossey-Bass.
Gonçalves, S. (2014). The effects of participatory budgeting on municipal expenditures and infant mortality in Brazil. World Development, 53, 94–110.
Graham, J., Amos, B., & Plumptre, T. (2003). Principles for good governance in the 21st century. Institute on Governance.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2004). Why deliberative democracy. Princeton University.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy (W. Rehg, Trans.). MIT.
Harrison, T. M., & Sayogo, D. S. (2014). Transparency, participation, and accountability practices in open government: A comparative study. Government Information Quarterly, 31(4), 513–525.
Janssen, M., & Helbig, N. (2018). Innovating and changing the policy-cycle: Policy-makers be prepared!. Government Information Quarterly, 35(2), 402–409.
Macintosh, A. (2004). Characterizing e-participation in policy-making. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 1–10). IEEE.
Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Føllesdal, A., Fung, A., Lafont, C., Manin, B., & Martí, J. L. (2012). A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In J. Parkinson & J. Mansbridge (Eds.), Deliberative systems: Deliberative democracy at
the large scale (pp. 1–26). Cambridge University.
Manor, J. (1999). The political economy of democratic decentralization. World Bank.
Medaglia, R. (2012). eParticipation research: Moving beyond ‘e’ and ‘government’. Government Information Quarterly, 29(3), 346–352.
Oates, W. E. (1999). An essay on fiscal federalism. Journal of Economic Literature, 37(3), 1120–1149.
OECD. (2021). Government at a glance 2021. OECD.
Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University.
Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton University.
Parkinson, J. (2006). Deliberating in the real world: Problems of legitimacy in deliberative democracy. Oxford University.
Phang, C. W., & Kankanhalli, A. (2008). A framework of ICT exploitation for e-participation initiatives. Communications of the ACM, 51(12), 128–132.
United Nations Development Programme. (1997). Governance for sustainable human development. UNDP.
Unger, D., & Mahakanjana, C. (2016). Decentralizing Thailand: The challenges of citizen participation. ISEAS.
United Nations. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development. United Nations.
Translated Thai References
Kanchanapradit, K. (2022). Community forums and the participation of local people. Chiang Mai: Chiang Mai University Press. (In Thai)
Khlichaya, P. (2021). Local Administration in the Era of Decentralization. Bangkok: College of Administration, Burapha University. (In Thai)
King Prajadhipok Institute. (2022). Summary Report of the Policy Dialogue Forum on Local Governance. Bangkok: King Prajadhipok Institute. (In Thai)
Office of the Public Sector Development Commission. (2023). Report on the Integrity and Transparency Assessment (ITA) of Government Agencies, Fiscal Year 2023. Bangkok: Office of the Public Sector Development Commission. (In Thai)
Srichai, P. (2020). Public participation in the local policy process. Journal of Public Administration, 20(3), 78–89. (In Thai)
