POWER RELATIONS OF THE ELDERLY IN THE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTION PROCESS RELATED TO QUALITY OF LIFE: A CASE STUDY OF MAI BANG BUA THONG MUNICIPALITY, NONTHABURI PROVINCE

Abstract

This research article has two objectives: 1) To examine the power structure and positionality of the elderly in the local development direction process related to quality of life, and 2) To analyze social capital and the mechanisms determining the elderly’s access to spaces of power, in the area of Mai Bang Bua Thong Municipality, Nonthaburi Province. A qualitative research methodology was employed, collecting data through in-depth interviews with 20 key informants and focus group discussions, supplemented by documentary analysis. Data were analyzed using content analysis and interpretive analysis. The findings revealed that: 1) The power to determine local development directions was concentrated among local administrators and municipal officials. The elderly's positionality within the power structure was predominantly that of policy “recipients” rather than policy “co-determinants,” despite genuinely benefiting from such policies. This positionality was shaped by overlapping mechanisms at three levels: institutional mechanisms with inadequate channels, cultural mechanisms that positioned the elderly as care recipients, and individual-level constraints regarding health and access to information-not due to intentional exclusion, but rather gaps arising from a system not yet designed to accommodate the elderly inclusively. and 2) Social capital served as a determining variable for access to spaces of power. Elderly individuals with strong networks, such as former community leaders or residents of established communities, occupied more favorable positions than those lacking such capital. Furthermore, the power structure, mechanisms, and social values operated as a reinforcing cycle that reproduced the elderly’s recipient status without any party’s deliberate intention. Key recommendations include developing diverse channels for listening, such as village-level sub-forums, home visits to homebound elderly, volunteer home-visit systems, and promoting a shift in local government organizations’ mindset from “welfare for the elderly” to “development in which the elderly play an active role.”