SIF

1
??????????????????????????????
???????????????????????????????????????????
(SIF)

• WB- NESDB Workshop
• ?????? 27, 2549
• Rob Chase (EAPVP)

2
??????????????????? ????????? ????????????????

• ??????? ?????????? ????????????
• ????????????????
• ??. ????? ??????????
• ??. ???????? ????????????? (?????????)
• Khun Vichol Manutausiri, MOI
• ?. ??????? ???????? (????????????????)
• ??????????? ???????? (??????????????????)

• ????????????????
• ??. ?. ??. ???????Assoc. Prof. Dr. Napaporn
  Havanon,
• Dr. Maniemai Thongyou
• Dr. Numchai Supererkchaisakul
• ?????????
• Gillian Brown
• Rob Chase
• Rikke Nording
• ???????? ???????????

3
??????

• CDD ????????????????
• ????????????????????
• ????????????????????????????
• ???????????????????????????
• ?????????????????????? propensity score matching
• ?????????????????????? ??????????????????????
  ?????
• ????????????
• ???????????????????????????????????????????????
• ?????????????????????????????????????????

4
??????????????????????????? ????????

• ???????????????????????????????????????
• ?????????????????????????????????????????????
  ??????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????

5
????????????????????

• ????????????????????
• ????????????????????????????????????????
• ????????? ??????????
• ???????????????????????????????
• ?????????????????????????
• ?????????????????????????????????????
• ????????????????????????
• ?????????????

• ??????????????
• - ??????????????????????????????????
• ????????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????
• 7 ????????????????????
• 24 ??????????
• 71 ???????????????????????

6
???????????????????? ???????
???????????????????
???
???????
???????
7
????????????????????????????

• ??????????????????????? (Selection)
  ?????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ????????????????????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????? (Impact)
• ????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ????????????????????????

Social Capital Yi
Impact
Selection
T0
T1
Time
8
????????????????????????

• ???????????????????????????????????????????
  ???????????????????
• Most likely case among development operations
• ????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ?? SIF ????? ???????????????????????
• Match treatment and control communities within
  provinces
• ???????????????????????????????????????
• ????????????????????
• Augment matching within provinces
• ????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????
• Explore how SIF may have changed community SK

9
Propensity Score Matching

• ??????????? ?????????????????????????????????????
  ??????????? 2541 ??? 2543
• ??????????????????????
• ???????? SIF ????? 201 ???? (10
  ???????????????????????)
• ???????? SIF ?????????????????
  ????????????????????????????? ????????????????????
  ????????
• ????????????????????? (???? ?????????? ????????
  ????????? ????????? ??????)
• ???????? SIF 164 ????Match 164 SIF villages with
  6 nearest neighbors within provinces
• ??????????????????? 72 ????????Thai research team
  selected 72 SIF treatment villages and 72 matched
  comparison villages

10
Propensity Score Matching
Figure 1. Pre-match Kernel Densities of
participation propensity
Figure 2. Post-match Kernel Densities of
participation propensity (6 nearest neighbor
within provinces)
Figure 2a. Post-match Kernel Densities of
participation propensity (Nearest neighbor)
O SIF Villages ? Matched control villages
O SIF Villages ? Matched control villages
O SIF Villages ? Non SIF Villages
O SIF Villages ? Matched control villages
11
Qualitative Field Work

• ????????? ???????????????????????????????????
  144 ??????????????????????????????????????????????
  ?????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????? 6
  ???????????????????????
• ???????? 3 ???????????????????????????????????????
  ??????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????? 12-15
  ??
• ????????????????????????????????
• ????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ???
• Anchoring vignettes
• ????????????????????????????????
  ????????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????
  6 ?????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????
  ????????????????????????????????????????????

12
??????? ??????????????????????

• ???????????????????? SIF ?????????????????????????
  ??????????????????????????????????????? 19 ??????
• ???????????????????????????????
• ????????????????????????????? ???????????????????
  ??????
• ????????????? ???????????????????????????????????
  ???
• ????????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????
• ??????????????????????? (??????)
• ??????????? ?????????????????????????????????????
  ????????
• ??????????????????????????????????????????????????

13
Results OLS Regressions

• YN a ß SES ? SIF e
• SES variables mean expenditure, variance
  expenditure, share of workers in agriculture, own
  farm land, years of education
• Robust differences from SIF participation
• Networks and linkages , self-sacrifice,
  organizational leadership and learning,
  collective action, villagers voice, multi-party
  activity, sustainability,
• Organizational capacity, information availability
• Interesting additional finding
• Positive effect of share of workers in
  agriculture
• Negative effect of share owning land
• ? Higher social capital among landless farm
  workers

14
ResultsField Researchers Debriefing

• Selection
• Long-standing characteristics
• Higher trust
• Cooperation collective action
• Norms of self-sacrifice

• Impact
• Evidence of recent change
• Build networks across villages
• Reinforce norm of collective action
• Build leadership

15
Implications Points to Take Away

• Consider social capital dimensions in Thai
  context
• Some long-standing trust, cooperation, norms
• Some open to policy innovation information flow,
  networking between groups, local leadership
• Value of mixing quantitative qualitative
  evaluative techniques
• Selection effect existing social capital
  characteristics can determine whether a village
  participates and benefits from a CDD operation
• Impact effect Involvement in the CDD operation
  changes social capital characteristics
• e.g., new networking and leadership opportunities
• Support for bottom-up efforts to improve local
  governance can reinforce top-down efforts