Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008) �����������������~� ����� �

Investigation on Social Capital Charecteristics for Community-BasedWatershed and Environmental Management: A Case Study of Romphothong

Community Thatakieb District Chachoengsao Province

Unruan Leknoi1 Sirichet Sungkhaman1

Wicha Niyom2 Opas Punya3

1 Social Research Institute, Chulalongkorn University. Phatumwan, Bangkok,Thailand 10330 Tel. 022-187-390, 081-781-7857 Fax: 022-155-523 e-mail: unruan_t@yahoo.com2 Department of Conservation, Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University. Bangkok,Thailand 109003 Faculty of Environment and Resource Study, Mahidol University. Nakhon Pathom,Thailand 73170

Received: December 17, 2007 Accepted: April 23, 2008

ABSTRACT

The objectives of this research were to investigate the characteristics of social capitaltowards watershed and environmental management of Romphothong Community, which is thebest practice on community-based watershed and environmental management. This study isEx-post Facto Research in combination with qualitative research and quantitative research. Theusing Sampling scheme was divided into two parts, qualitative research using snowball sampling,and quantitative research using stratified sampling. The qualitative data was carried out by usingcontent analysis, and quantitative data was analyzed out by descriptive statistics.

The results of the study indicated that the characteristics of social capital towardswatershed and environmental management were divided into two categories: 1) cognitive socialcapital: trust, solidarity, norms of conservation, and reciprocity: human and nature, and 2) structuralsocial capital: civil society, engagement in public affairs, groups and networks, participation,empowerment, community organization, establishment of the administrative committee, andinformation/communication.

Keywords: Community-based watershed and environmental management (CBM), Social capital, Watershed,

Environment.

m<8F8C;=;<98?=@

INTRODUCTION

Social capital has been consideredcritical potential for the community to be ableto manage itself independently. Since theeconomic crisis in 1997, social capital hasstarted to get on the public agenda and beengreatly recognized in Thailand, which can beacknowledged by two factors. The first factor,the establishment of Social Investment Fundor SIF, is aimed at increasing social capitalin communities under the purposes of fos-

tering strength and learning process for self-independence. In addition, it is aimed to findsolutions and protections for problems of thepublic including with establishing new societythat possesses reciprocity, strength, stability,effectiveness, and quality. Moreover, theimportance of social capital has been statedfor its ability to aid grass-rooted communitiesand social residents. Secondly, social capitalplays a critical role as a key strategy for the

����������������~� ����� � 93

national development. This is determined by theNational Economic & Social DevelopmentBoard, which also pays attention to the develop-ment of strategies to promote social capital (TheNational Economic & Social DevelopmentBoard 2003). As having been previouslymentioned, this can be regarded as "reproduc-tion" which encourages the importance ofsocial capital as effective equipment for thenational development.

This research focused on the bestpractice community that received the GreenGlobe Award and other awards. The researchteam strongly believed that the best learningcould be employed as a guideline for encourag-ing other communities to learn by doing and todeeply understand the managing process ofdistinguished community. The objectives of thisresearch were to investigate the characteris-tics of social capital towards watershed andenvironmental management of RomphothongCommunity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SamplingPart 1 Qualitative research, snowball

sampling was used.Part 2 Quantitative research, stratified

sampling was applied. Stratums and samplingwere (1) Key informants (sampling 100%) and(2) Community member (sampling 10%).

Word DefinitionSocial capitalThe concept of social capital is currently

receiving a lot of attention from developmentagencies and research institutions. In thisresearch, Social capital is characterized by twocategories: (1) cognitive social capital: Trust,norms, trust and adherence to norm, reciprocity,and solidarity, and (2) structural social capital:Corporation, collective action, social cohesionand Inclusion, engagement in public affairs,civil society, Participation, empowermentand political action, informal sociability,groups and networks, local associations and

networks, community organization, communityvolunteerism, and information and communica-tion.

Community based watershed andenvironmental management is the concept thatwatershed can be function by managingheadwater forest of community.

Data CollectionThis phase is time consuming due to the

embedding to closely observe the characteristicsof social capital and watershed and environmentmanagement of the community, particularly inthe forest. The stages are stated below.

General study stage: The stageinvolves with investigating the communitysocio-economically, the process of watershedand environmental management on community-based, and characteristics of ecological systemof headwater forest of community. This stageusing the documentary, participatory mapping,in-dept interview, and forest survey.

Social capital characteristics studystage

Definition Searching: This is tofine the most suitable definition of social capitaland watershed and environmental managementto set a side shared meaning between theresearcher and the community. This stageusing focus group discussion.

Characteristics: This stageconcerns with the characteristic informationunderpinning the watershed and environmentin the community and investigate the characteris-tics of social capital towards watershed andenvironmental management. This stage usingthe in-dept interview, focus group discussion andquestionnaire.

Social Capital Organization:This part is resulted from the previous stage, whichthe researcher has identified the preliminary keyworks according to the framework to investigatetwo categories of (1) cognitive social capitaland (2) structural social capital.

Verifying stage: this stage using theworkshop technique to considered that socialcapital characteristics be accepted by community.

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)94

Data AnalysisThe qualitative data collected through the

field study was analyzed and verified accordinglywith shared meaning and interpretation of thecommunity. This was to prevent the researcher'sbias. This research was analyzed by usingcontent analysis technique, and concludedinductively. The data collected from fieldstudies was not considered as empirical data,therefore, the analysis was interpreted andrelated to the meaning of the existing behavior.(Chantawanich, 1993) Data analysis operatedin five steps: 1) Theoretical framework; 2)Verification; 3) Note taking and indexing; 4)Working hypothesis and reduction; 5) Conclusionand verification. The quantitative data wasanalyzed with descriptive statistic: percentagemethod.

RESULT AND AND DISCUSSION

Community Topography, Location andSocio-economic Data

Romphothong community, Klongtakrawsub-district, Tathakieb district, Chachoengsaoprovince located at the South of Pracheenburiwatershed. The community was establishedas forest villages in 1991 under the projectto restore the national reserved forestKwairabob-Seeyad.

Geographical characteristic of Klong-takraw Watershed: area 201.72 km2 with UTMsection at the standard WGS 84, horizontalstandard No. 789500 E to 808500 E and verticalstandard No. 1458500 N to 1477500 N. Thewatershed represented as various anglesshapes. The elevation is between 65-750meters above the sea level with the averageslope angle of 14.63%. Most areas slope towardsthe North. The water flow path starts from theSouth to the North having one major water flowe.g. Klongtakraw.

Most of Klongtakraw Watershed istropical evergreen forest of 167.53 km2 (or83.05% of total area), located in the South ofwatershed area. Agricultural area were 22.32km2 (or 11.06% of total area), located in the

north of watershed area. The National Park,Wildlife and Plant Conservation Department hasreported that most of Klontakraw Watershedarea is reserved forest of 179.15 km2 (or88.81% of total area) In addition, there waseconomic forest area. The quality of watershedwas appointed by the Office of Policy and Planof National Resources and Environment, reportedthat most of Klongtakraw Watershed area,having 13.88 km2 (or 61.42% of total area), wasclassified as watershed class 4 suitable foragricultural convention. However, it is necessaryfor the area to establish the policy on soil andwater conservation.

At present, the total population is 324household or 1,269 people comprised of 655males and 614 females. The majority migratedfrom the Northeast of Thailand and some fromthe North and East. Major culture practical aretherefore northeastern. Most of populations areBuddhist. Their major occupation is agriculture(90%) and daily wage laboring. (Figure 1, 2, 3and 4).Watershed and Environmental ManagementHistory

Watershed and environmental manage-ment history was divided into 3 periods:

Period 1 - “Before” forest villageallocation taken place (1973-1981)

During 1973, after the area hadcompleted the forest concession, there wereapproximately 4 families relocated to thissettlement through the concession area. At thatmoment, this area was rainforest with a varietyof plants and animals and with great difficultiesto connect to the outside area. Throughout thisarea was a habitat of former residents who livedin Koh-Kae as they lived before the forestconcession taken place. Main occupation wasmaking rubber fluid and trading to the newpeople who were relocated to this habitat. Thisnew people were known as “Forest On Sale”,which was done by horizontal section of land.Hence settlement located along Klongtakrawwatershed (the South of residential area), whichrecognized as little group of housing on forestnamely "Bann-Soi-Si".

����������������~� ����� � 95

Figure 1. Boundary of Klongtakraw Watershed.

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)96

Figure 2. Geographical map of Klongtakraw Watershed.

����������������~� ����� � 97

Figure 3. Land use map of Klongtakraw Watershed.

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)98

Figure 4. Watershed classification map of Klongtakraw Watershed.

����������������~� ����� � 99

Most people who were relocated to thisnew habitat came from the Northeastern region,formerly working in upland field crops area inChonburi and Rayong province. At the sametime, these people also extended their habitatsby creating their new settlement in forest area.The cultivated cash crops were rice, corn,vegetables mostly practiced by householdconsumption. Most food were collectedfrom natural forest including wild animal,fruits and vegetables. Some foods need tobe purchased outside community such as salt,sugar, medicine. Most of their income wasearned from hunting wildlife for sale e.g.Indian pig, wild deer, Tragulus and porcupine.

From the year 1975-1981, the governmentreinforced on economic plantation such aspotato, sugar cane, corn for export purpose.Consequently, many people were highly interestedto reserve their land for trading and moreagricultural area was expanded into forestryterritory.

Period 2 - “During” forest villageallocation (1982-1992)

In 1982, the 1st Army Region announcedthis forest land to be restricted and prohibitedfor residential settlement by claiming that it wasthe area base of communist alliance. Later inthe year 1987, Ministry of Agriculture andCooperatives established the task force toprotect and preserve the forest border line of 5provinces in the East (Chachoengsao, Sakaew,Chonburi, Rayong, Chonburi).

In 1982, there was legal announcementpermitting the project to preserve natural re-sources and wildlife in the area of 5 provinces. In1991, the 1st Army Region assigned both mili-tary force and vehicle for the Royal ForestDepartment to relocated people from the areathat will be settles as wildlife preservationterritory to the forest village allocation. In 1992,Kao Angleunai was announced to be wildlifepreservation area.

Romphothong residence was estab-lished under the project to restore the nationalforest reserve to be forest village Kaew-Seeyad by resettlement 94 families consitsted

of 33 Puthai families, 12 Bann Nong Ka Yangfamilies, 13 families from Bann More Sai, BannTabag and Bann Soi Hok, 30 families fromother residentces. It was rainy season duringresettled period caused great difficulties fortransportation. There was no public facilitiesand some people were unable to start their ownliving in the alloted land because of gangsterswho mostly were the former land ownersrequesting damage land fees. It was notcultivating season, therefore, people could notstart any cropping activities. When people wereresettled to this new habitat, there wereseriously quarrel among communities becausethey came from different settlements and didnot have many relatives residing in the samecommunity.

Period 3 - Restoring communityand forest resources (1983-2006)

During the period, the Governmentassembled the public facilition which weremore convenience than the past. Unfortunately,the standard of living of many families was notso good as most of them were on debt. Someof them had to sell all their lands and migratedto other settlements. However most peoplewere still resided in this community, theyrecognized that it was too risky to move to thenew habitat. Fortunately, the Government hadthe policies to develop communities that settlednear the forest border especially the Project ofNatural Resources and Wildlife Conservationin 1994 under the Royal-initiated project ofQueen Sirikit, that strongly emphasized onmixing plantation method, building local pondand supporting on soya bean cropping.

Until the year of 1996, the communityreceived many sustainable development policiesfrom various studies including taking a trip toTa-Wang-Sai temple in Nakornrajchasemaprovince. The topics were included community-based natural resources management. Afterthis concept had been widely accepted bythe community, the leader created allies withthe government sector to initiate on the projectof forest management, which considered to begreatly success until these days.

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)100

Community- Based Watershed and Envi-ronmental Management Practices

In 1996, Regional Community ForestTraining Center For Asia and The Pacific(RECOFTC) conducted the research oncommunity-based forest management aimed tostudy on the involving factor of Thempratancommunity, Chachoengsao province, whichlocated in the South of Khoangleunai. The studystarted by taking people to learn on communitydevelopment. At that time, representatives fromRomphothong community also participated inthis trip. The studied topic was concentratedon the forest of Tawangsai community,Nakornrajchasrima province. As a result, manylocal people from Romphothong communitywere highly interested in this study becausemany of their forest territory were damaged.This was the beginning of how Romphothongcommunity started off its forest management.

In the beginning of headwater forestcommunity-based activities, it was the timefor community to share tremendous experiencesbecause they were new residents who hadbeen resettled from the forest. They weremany different group of people that lead tonumerous controversies among the former andnew land owners. The most important thing wasto build better understanding among local peopleregarding on the community-based forestrymanagement, starting from the leader of individualfamilies. Even though most people were afraidof having argument in the beginning, they werelater created a good team work due to the factthat this activity encouraged each leader to shareideas and experiences with trustful manner.Consequently, this gave the signal to the othersin community to have faith and to hold positiveattitudes towards this activity.

The first activity was to restoreheadwater forest condition and earn back thenatural balance. The activity focused on forestfire management, which cooperated with theForest Fire Control Station. As a result, thecommunity managed to control damages causedby the forest fire by decreasing 40% of totalarea. The forest started to restore in better

condition. (Rawee and Sarinya, 2001).The community defined the term of

"Community-based Watershed and Environmen-tal Management" to be organizing community-based water production sources managementto reach the optimum level. Forest resourcesare recognized as the major production becauseit is an excellent source for water and foodsupply, which are necessary for all living.The policy of watershed and environmentalmanagement were of (1) no destroy, (2) toincrease number of plants in forest, (3) tocreate awareness maintain the natural balanceof forestry, and (4) to create positive conscious-ness on forest conservation from generation togeneration.

Characteristics of Social Capital forWatershed and Environmental Management

Romphothong community is the newcommunity, which people removed to this newresettlement site and grouping from differentsocial and culture backgrounds. However,they were able to adjust themselves and able tocontend with numerous controversies amongdifferent group of people. Additional problemsinclude environmental degradation, debt andpublic utility issues. One interesting thing on thiscommunity is that all people devoted themselvesto share ideas and experiences with trustfulmanner to successfully cooperate on headwaterforest community management.

The community explained the term of“Social capital for community-based watershedand environmental management” means “thethings that can be used for community to manageon water sources.” So, The characteristicsof social capital for watershed and environ-mental management are shown below.

1) Trust: Community's leaders stronglycreated positive awareness and better understand-ing on organizing forest community management.Since leaders were the most trustworthy repre-sentatives whom chosen by each group, therefore,there were no suspicious nor mistrust amongdifferent groups in the community. 92.7 % ofsample indicated that trust can be used as a tool

����������������~� ����� � 101

to managing headwater forest of community.2) Norm of conservation: After the

community had been given the full support fromexternal organization to take an on-site trip tostudy on the ecological system of Wat Ta-Wang-Sai, Nakornrajchaseema province, manypeople had ideas to preserve and to reforest itscommunity for sustainable development. Afterdiscussion forum took place among leaders andlocal people in the community, all agreed tocooperate in organizing forest communitymanagement program because they were usedto live in the forest which encouraged them todeeply understand the philosophy of reforesta-tion project. 98.7 % of sample indicated thatnorm of conservation can be used as a tool tomanaging headwater forest of community.

3) Reciprocity: Expectation on theused of water sources of the community. Thecommunity had adapted their understandingof how to live in the new settlement that relatedto the natural resources by focused on "Humanand nature" must live in harmony as this presentedthe mutual benefit. This concept led to thephilosophy on organizing forestry communitymanagement. 88.7 % of sample indicated thatreciprocity can be used as a tool to managingheadwater forest of community.

4) Engagement in Public Affairs:Community's leaders strongly organizing forestcommunity management without hiddenagenda. Objective to reforest. This activityled to local people participated on organizingforestry community management. 91.9% ofsample indicated that engagement in publicaffairs can be used as a tool to managingheadwater forest of community.

5) Solidarity: The beginning ofRomphothong community derived frommany people having different backgrounds andcultures, which were the main obstacles ofcommunity development. There were twotemples located in the community; one was"Wat Paenimit" and "Wat Romphothong BannPa Sai Kham". These temples were highlyimportant for the community as they were thespiritual centre where people were encouraged

to exchange ideas and finally harmonized toreach the mutual benefit. 89.5% of sampleindicated that solidarity can be used as a tool tomanage headwater forest of community.

6) Information and communication:After all agreed to cooperate in organizing forestcommunity management program, they werediscussion widely, which led to Information flow.89.5% of sample indicated that informationand communication can be used as a tool tomanaging headwater forest of community.

7) Civil society: The community hadorganized various forum discussions regularlyfor people to exchange their ideas and sharingexperiences among different group members.In addition, many authorities and officers fromthe Royal Forest Department and schoolsrepresented as consultant and support thisactivity. Forum discussion were taken placein schools on the 5th of every month. Thisactivity led to create a knowledge centre amongcommunity, which led to develop action plansefficiently. 96.8% of sample indicated that civilsociety can be used as a tool to managingheadwater forest of community.

8) Empowerment: The Royal ForestDepartment empowered the community toorganizing forest community management,which led to develop the forest communitymanagement program efficiently. 91.9% ofsample indicated that empowerment can beused as a tool to managing headwater forestof community.

9) Community Organization: After thelocal community had established the forestrycommunity scheme, namely "AdministrativeCommittee of Forestry Community ofRomphothong. There were many seminars andmeeting among group leaders and communitymembers as each individual to exchange ideason how to successfully collaborate on refores-tation project. 96.0% of sample indicated thatcommunity organization can be used as a toolto managing headwater forest of community.

10) Participation /Collective Action:After having a final resolution to organizeforestry community management, the community

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)102

performed religious activities to encourage allfamilies to participate including authorities ofthe Royal Forest Department, scouts, schoolsand other environmental groups. However, allthe action must be accomplished by localpeople in the community as other authoritieswere represented as consultant only. 97.2% ofsample indicated that participation can be usedas a tool to managing headwater forest ofcommunity.

11) Group and Network: The commu-nity was given the full learning support andknowledge from other communities network-ing which focused on reforestation. Authoritieswere included Royal Forest Department, avillage headman - Mr. Wiboon Kaemchaloemand Regional Community Forest Training CenterFor Asia and The Pacific (RECOFTC). 97.6%of sample indicated that group and network canbe used as a tool to managing headwater forestof community.

Table 1. Average wood volume classified by tree quality

Table 2. Density of trees, saplings, seedlings and bamboos

The saplings and seedlings showedhigher density than larger trees. It was indicatedthat there were small amount of large trees as in

Result of the Watershed and Environmen-tal Management by Using Social Capital

The results from watershed andenvironmental management by using socialcapital can be explained by the characteristicof ecological system of "Headwater Forest ofCommunity".

Before 1997, the headwater forest wascharacterized as degraded from the concession.It was damaged by forest fire which occurredannually. They were no any shrubs, not evenperennial plants. But at present, by conductingon-site survey of 240 hectares found that therewere more than 73 species of plants. Theforest is characterized as "Mixed DeciduousForest" (Table 1).

Most of woods found in Romphothongforest community were considered to havemedium to low quality, mostly used for fuels.None of them were used for constructionpurpose (Table 2).

the past. The area was degraded forest creatingenvironmental degradation (Table 3).

����������������~� ����� � 103

Table 3. Relative density, relative frequency, relative dominance and importance value index of trees

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)104

Table 3. (Cont.)

����������������~� ����� � 105

Figure 5. Characteristics of social capitals for watershed and environmental management.

Thai J. For. 27 : 92-106 (2008)106

Romphothong forest community ischaracterized as "Mixed Deciduous Forest" ofwhich 73 species of plants were found, It wasconsidered to be diverse forest resources. Asa result, the study concluded that the areahad the ecological system in the middle to highlevel. Most trees were the same species andsimilar ecological characteristics, which werea positive sign for good emission. Trees thathad the highest uniqueness value considered tohave low quality with less benefit such asErythrina subumbrans (Hassk.) Merr,Streblus asper Lour. Trees that had the highestImportance value index (IVI) was Erythrinasubumbrans (Hassk.) Merr with 26.22%After considering the analytical factors, head-water forest of community had the ecologicalsystem in the middle to high level.

At present, the community largelydepends on the forest particular for water andfood supply. Major benefit from headwaterforest is water production source, which isnecessary for all community members living.According to RECOFTC (2007) survey, 70%of income of the villagers came from agriculture,and 90% of agriculture areas depend on water.Food supply: the headwater forest supplies foodfor household consumption and for trade suchas wild sweet vegetables, wild fruits, medicinalplants, wild animals, varieties of bamboo shoots,gum and resin. This is characterized as "The GreenSupermarket" If the area can be controlledand preserved continuously, the ecologicalsystem in this area would have positivemeasurement. With highly quality of naturalresources, the forest could be the major waterand food production source for community in asustainable manner.

According to the characteristicsidentified by community, social capital can beused as a tool for the watershed and environ-mental management process of RomphothongCommunity as follows (Figure 5).

CONCLUSION

The social capitals can be utilized as atool to build the process of carrying out thewatershed and environmental management inthe community level. Beginning with socialcapitals in terms of thinking system and thepractices related to the principles of watershedand environmental management, these capitalscan be applied as proceeding tools.

The characteristics of social capital inwatershed and environmental management onthinking system of watershed and environmentalmanagement are trust, solidarity, norms ofconservation, reciprocity: human and environment,and engagement in watershed and environmentalmanagement. The characteristics of socialcapital in watershed and environmentalmanagement on practices of watershed andenvironmental management are participation/collective action, civil society, empowerment,community organization: establish the adminis-trative committee, groups and networks, andinformation and communication.

REFERENCES

Chuntarwanich, S. 1993. Data Analysis inQuality Research. Textbook Projectof Politic. Faculty of ChulalongkornUniversity. (Copied Document)

Regional Community Forestry Training Centerfor Asia and the Pacific (RECOFTC).2007. Rom Pho Thong CommunityForest. M&N Design Printing. Bangkok.

Rawee, T. and K. Sarinya, 2001. The Strategiesof Buffer Zone Development. Chai-yabhumi: Phupha Farmer Network

The National Economic & Social DevelopmentBoard. 2003. The Conclusion of theOperational Conference: TheConcept of Developing of SocialCapital Indicators. August 1, 2003,Lanlueng Room, Royal Princess HotelBangkok. (Copied Document)