|ชื่อเรื่อง||:||วิจัยระบบประเมินผลแบบเสริมพลัง เพื่อการพัฒนางานพื้นที่ (ระยะที่ 2)|
|อ้างอิง||:||http://elibrary.trf.or.th/project_content.asp?PJID=RDG55A0012 , http://research.trf.or.th/node/8654|
The Area-Based Approach is a target and direction of development upon the empowering and strengthening of communities in Thailand, focusing on changes of individuals at grassroots level, the change of behaviors in family/community levels and then turning of upside-down with change of conventional mindset with more focusing on “Area-Based Approach” which is an important changing-point of process with mobilization for development of the Country. The development or supporting towards communities with strengthening, self-reliance with timely adjustment countering with changes, using of knowledge for solving problems of themselves, households, communities and the Country with sustainability. These all would be significant findings from operations of Office of the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) so far with prolonged cooperation from supporting units, covering academic institutions, both inside and outside the area, and all multi-leveled agencies. Thus the TRF has spent more efforts for maximizing and mainstreaming the Area-Based Approach with self-initiatives from entities in community level, particularly community-based organizations themselves, starting from self-identification on problems or needs of community, creation of tools acquiring information and knowledge, seeking and building of cooperation mechanism, and determination of ways or means for managing of or fulfilling for solutions or needs of a community. The pilot projects are initiated in 14 provinces, coping with problems and needs for development of communities in 2 main issues as: (1) the water and disaster management, comprising five provinces, i.e. Kamphaengphet, Phatalung, Songkla, Nakhonsithammarath and Satul; and (2) the agriculture, safe foods and community-enterprises, comprising nine provinces, i.e. Ubolratchatani, Uthaithani, Nakhonrachasima, Chaiyabhumi, Pitsanulok, Kalasin, Chainat and Nakhonpathom. And for monitoring with assessment on results of work carried-out in communities with such approach, the TRF has initiated the paralleling Project, namely “the Research Project on Development of Empowerment Evaluation System in Area-Based Approach (Phase II)” with objectives as: (1) to monitor and follow a progress of carrying-out of projects and activities in communities, including the development of empowerment evaluation system for projects and activities; (2) to do capacity-building activities from researchers in communities, farmers and target groups, including to support linkage and coordination of mechanisms and networks with cooperation for driving of activities in communities; (3) to study styles and forms of empowerment evaluation with provision of knowledge and initiatives of appropriate learning systems responding to the needs and potential of communities; and (4) to study the overall changes emerging in communities with implementation of the projects. For the carrying-out of the Project (Phase II), it is designed with implementation of five main steps as: (1) to introduce and create more understandings with providing of general information, conceptual framework and ways of implementation of the Project (Phase II) and to create and develop tools for implementation of activities with projects undertaking the Area-Based Approach in provinces; (2) to create more rooms with consultations and meetings of researchers in communities with key stakeholders, for monitoring and empowerment evaluation on projects undertaking the Area-Based Approach in provinces; (3) to set-up platforms on reviewing and assessment upon all projects undertaking the Area-Based Approach in provinces; (4) to develop and make a proposal for making of proposal on institutionalization with ensuring of sustainable development in communities on basis of utilization of data gathered from research methodologies; and (5) to carry-out monitoring and empowerment evaluation towards projects undertaking the Area-Based Approach in 14 provinces. For the carrying-out of the Project (Phase II), the research team has used two categories of supporting tools as: (1) tools for supporting researches and development of communities, comprising tools for gathering of data on mode of productions and analysis on potential of communities, e.g. household account and budget analysis, farm account, resource account and man-made mapping, etc.; and (2) tools for monitoring and empowerment evaluation, e.g. the two-way tracing-back form with appraisal tool on progress of projects that applied from the Outcome Mapping and Tri-SICKA tools. From the monitoring on results of implementation of research and development projects in communities, it shall be summarized with conclusion of achievements in each province as follows: •For the agriculture, safe foods and community-enterprise, results of implementation shall be grouped into 3 levels as: (1) to reduce spending on production with development of mode of production, in Chaiyabhumi and Yasotorn; (2) to increase gains and incomes from ways of transforming, preservation and development of value-added products, including to setting-up or strengthening of groups, networks and community-based organizations, especially community enterprises, in Ubolratchathani, Nakhonratchasima, Uthaithani, Pitsanulok and Nakhonpathom; and (3) to increase gains and incomes with extension and development of marketing with learning for additional activities for reducing of spending and increase of gains and incomes, e.g. logistics development, accreditation of standards, development of activities in the Supply/Value Chain, relevant laws and regulations, etc., in Kalasin and Chainat. •For the water and disaster management, results of implementation shall be grouped into 3 levels as: (1) to prepare readiness of communities with providing of understandings and awareness on problems with studying on information systems and other relevant tools, in Satul; (2) to co-manage with study on analysis of linkage with sub-eco systems and overall frame of means with integration of information systems for decision-making, in Kampaengphet and Pattalung; and (3) to make proposals and give recommendations on policies with institutionalization that shall be studied in addition from 2 levels, pertaining to relevant laws and regulations, stakeholders analysis, multi-disciplinary knowledge and stakeholders consultation, in Nakhonsithammarat and Songkla. For the change of communities where the research team has assessed with presentation into 3 aspects on the cooperation, the management system and the knowledge in 14 provinces with significant changes as: (1) on the cooperation, i.e. in Nakhonratchasima, Kalasin, Chainat, Phitsanulok and Pattalung, they can build and strengthen cooperation between partners in provinces better than those before carrying-out projects, with ability to integrate a research and development project of community with existing projects and activities being implemented by other relevant government agencies, including to coordinate with supporting partners with driving of some activities in common ground;(2) on the management system, i.e. in Nakhonratchasima, it can lay down a driving system in levels of sub-districts, districts and province with government agencies under the Order of Provincial Governor; and (3) on the knowledge in all provinces, there are changes on planning of data gatherings, utilization of data for analysis and planning of management of households, agricultures and water management in provinces. The findings from the Project (Phase II) shall be grouped as: (1) on issues selected to be used in research projects of 14 provinces; they all are common issues with sharing of interests and benefits of all relevant partners, so they all are willing to giving more information, acquiring of knowledge, providing of cooperation and seeking of support; (2) on the building of learning process, it finds that community researchers have willingness to collect data nevertheless some of them still lack of understandings on significance of data, so this causes distortion and misleading of data-gathering with error. This data needs to be scrutinized at the end, anyhow from the process of conducting a research by community researchers, it finds that a mindset of community researchers needs to be adjusted with gradual change; and (3) on the building of cooperation, it finds that community researchers including target groups are not acquainted with working on holistic approach with integration of resources and implementation, this needs to be conducted under cooperation and supports from other sectors, especially government agencies holding systematic protocols with laws and regulations and high rigidity. At the first stage, this affects to cooperation too. Moreover, there are gaps of perceptions and understandings of government agencies, community researchers, farmers and target audiences. These gaps are resulted from the lack of internal coordinator and linkages with inappropriate communications, minor dissemination of information and inequity. From the results found in carrying-out of the Project (Phase II), the research team has proposed appropriate formats and designs for empowerment evaluation in 9 steps as: (1) to study and make understandings on contexts of community, significant components in aspects of physic, society, culture, potential and relationship between mechanisms and partners in all levels; (2) to build good relationship, understandings and trusts among the research team and community researchers; (3) to nurture foods of though with attitude for the research team with delicate discretion with censorship for prejudice and bias and belief on potential of communities with self-development from enhancing of learning process with acquiring of facts and information from communities; (4) to study on and make understandings to appropriate tools with adjustment for application in the area; (5) to carry-out activities with empowerment for development in areas from all relevant partners, e.g. academicians, government agencies or private sectors for those exceeding capacity of target audiences, either in technique and technical supports; (6) to monitor both formal and informal results; (7) to communicate, perceive and make understandings towards movement and development in areas with continuity ; (8) to develop user-friendly indicators measuring community participation and to encourage communities using them for self-evaluation; and (9) to drive progress and development of issues upon indications.
จิริกา นุตาลัย . (2557). วิจัยระบบประเมินผลแบบเสริมพลัง เพื่อการพัฒนางานพื้นที่ (ระยะที่ 2).
กรุงเทพมหานคร : สำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการวิจัย.
จิริกา นุตาลัย . 2557. "วิจัยระบบประเมินผลแบบเสริมพลัง เพื่อการพัฒนางานพื้นที่ (ระยะที่ 2)".
กรุงเทพมหานคร : สำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการวิจัย.
จิริกา นุตาลัย . "วิจัยระบบประเมินผลแบบเสริมพลัง เพื่อการพัฒนางานพื้นที่ (ระยะที่ 2)."
กรุงเทพมหานคร : สำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการวิจัย, 2557. Print.
จิริกา นุตาลัย . วิจัยระบบประเมินผลแบบเสริมพลัง เพื่อการพัฒนางานพื้นที่ (ระยะที่ 2). กรุงเทพมหานคร : สำนักงานกองทุนสนับสนุนการวิจัย; 2557.