The Northeast is still the poorest region in Thailand, but over the past two decades it has experienced underappreciated major economic growth. This growth has not been confined to urban areas, and living conditions in rural villages have improved. Using Thai Government data and other sources, this report describes and analyzes changes that have occurred. More people now work in non-agricultural jobs, both permanently and part-time with agriculture, and remittances from emigrants working outside the region have been of great help. But in farming households agricultural income has so far remained a very major part of overall income, a principal reason why the majority of the population has stayed in agriculture and rural villages became better off. We argue that this occurred primarily because of agricultural breakthroughs after the adoption of the glutinous rice variety RD6, with the non-glutinous variety KDML105 playing a complementary commercial role. Increased agricultural income helped make the villages more attractive settings for residence, joint investments and remittances, all of which ramified beyond the villages to help lift the economy of the region, and of the nation.

View full abstract

This paper examines the social and cultural meanings of the subsistence consumption of game animals among mountain villagers in Seram Island, Eastern Indonesia. The community under study is highly dependent on sago (starch extracted from sago palm) as staple food. Sago is rich in carbohydrate but contains little protein. Game animals therefore provide an essential protein complement. Field research was carried out in a remote mountain village located in Manusela valley in central Seram where Cuscus (Phalanger orientalis, Spilocuscus maculates), Celebes wild boar (Sus celebensis) and Timor deer (Cervus timorensis) account for almost 90% of the protein resources consumed by villagers.
 The meat of these wild mammals is usually shared by close relatives and adjoining villages. The field data suggests that about 30% of cuscus and 60% of large mammals (Celebes wild boar and Timor deer) are often distributed to others. An “ethics of sharing” encourages villages to distribute wild meat since it enhances the enjoyment of consumption and brings about feelings of satisfaction and pleasure. This sense of contentment over having intimate and good inter-relationships is regarded by villagers as the ideal and desirable way of life. Moreover wild meat sharing also strengthens their collective identity as a mountain people that distinguishes them from those living in coastal areas. Failure to share leads to apprehensions of sorcery arising from jealousy and the fear of malahau, a kind of sanction given by ancestor spirits.

View full abstract

This paper analyzes moral conflicts between the middle class and the poor in Philippine politics through a discursive construction of the “we/they” consciousness. These moral conflicts have not been explored in earlier studies, which either regard the middle class and civil society as democratic factors or examine class conflicts solely in terms of interest distribution. This paper provides an analytical framework that explains the construction of a “we/they” consciousness in a class-divided “dual public sphere.” I analyze these discourses in relation to several political issues and conclude by arguing that the moral conflicts between the collective consciousnesses of “we/they” relations have undermined popular support for democracy.
 The middle class generally associates “we” with “citizen,” and regards itself as a purveyor and defender of democracy. It views the “poor” (“them”) as lacking the appropriate morals and education to make similar claims. In fact, for the middle class, the poor are often responsible for undermining democracy. On the other hand, the poor associate “we” with “the masses,” who despite their upright morality, have been marginalized, despised or ignored by the selfish and cold-hearted “rich” (“them”). For the poor, the culprits behind democratic deterioration are the rich.
 This moral conflict denies the legitimacy of others and is undermining popular trust in democracy, which inherently demands the acceptance of “them” as legitimate adversaries.

View full abstract

The Community Forest Bill was finally passed by the Thai legislative assembly 17 years after it was introduced. This article examines what transpired during those 17 controversial years by analyzing the notions and behaviors of the actors and how they led to changes in the draft bill. The bill provides for 1) conditions and procedures for the establishment and abolition of community forests; 2) regulations on the resource use and management of these forests; and 3) organizational procedures for implementation. The bill aims to achieve sustainable forest management by local people with the assistance of NGOs and the government. It institutionalizes its own decision-making system based on this tri-sectoral collaboration, not through existing administration organizations.
 Among the bill’s provisions, the conditions and regulation of community forests in protected areas was the most controversial issue. The question was whether community forests could be established even within protected areas. The forest department has accepted the idea of community forests in protected areas since 1996, but nature conservationist NGOs have opposed the policy. During the whole 17 years, there have been only a few occasions when nature conservationists and social activists supporting local peoples directly discussed the draft bill. Activist groups and their local partners negotiated with party politicians, while conservationists issued public statements and utilized connections with and/or influence over relatively conservative senators who did not belong to political parties. Since the Senate resolution of 2002, which disallowed community forests in the protected areas, there have been more occasions to discuss the bill directly. But the various political actors could not reach an agreement, prompting them to resolve the issue by voting. This resulted in a bill accepting community forests in protected areas under certain conditions.
 This politically plural decision-making process led to drastic changes to the draft bill, foremost of which was the total denial of community forests in the protected area by the Senate in 2002. Moreover, the role played by informal political influence and under-the-table negotiation in reaching a resolution caused a strain in the otherwise good relations between local communities, NGOs and the government. If this bill moves to the implementation phase, more transparency is needed in order to reach a common understanding about the principles of the bill in society as a whole.

View full abstract