Approaches for Developing Collaboration in In-Cash Welfare Provision in Nan Province
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Research aims to study and develop an approach for collaborative local welfare provision among three sectors – local governments, regional offices and communities. It employs qualitative-dominant mixed methodology. For quantitative methodology, data are collected by questionnaires from 49 local governments in Nan Province and analyzed using descriptive statistical techniques. For qualitative methodology, data are collected by documentary research, interviews with 42 key informants, and observation are conducted in four local governments, specifically Fai Kaew Tambon Administration Organization (TAO), Sun Tha TAO, Nan Municipality, and Num Kian TAO. These qualitative data are then analyzed by content analysis and narrative analysis techniques. There are three key findings. Firstly, collaboration in local welfare is usually led by street-level bureaucrats (community development officers) in local governments. Secondly, collaborative local welfare essentially depends on the local government’s capacity and attitude. Thirdly, numerous policies are related to local welfare and become one of the primary obstacles for local welfare development. Accordingly, two approaches are suggested for the development of collaborative local welfare. The first approach suggests that local governments with sufficient management resources may act as a leading collaborative manager. The second approach suggests that local governments
with insufficient management resources but ample social and cultural capital may act as a supporting collaborative manager. Either way, local governments should apply ICT to develop a management information system and a civil advice system to enhance the efficiency of local welfare provision.
Article Details
@ 2020 King Prajadhipok's Institute The Government Complex Commemorating All Right Reserved.
References
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2003). Collaborative Public Management : New Strategies for Local Governments. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
Andreotti, A., Mingione, E., & Polizzi, E. (2012). Local Welfare Systems: A Challenge for Social Cohesion. Urban Studies, 49(9), pp. 1925-1940. doi:10.1177/0042098012444884.
Cochrane, A. (2004). Modernisation, Managerialism and the Culture Wars: Reshaping the Local Welfare State in England. Local Government Studies, 30(4), pp. 481-496. doi:10.1080/0300393042000318950.
Emerson, K., & Nabatchi, T. (2015). Collaborative Governance Regimes. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Fitzpatrick, T. (2001). Welfare Theory : an Introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Gough, I. (2002). Globalization and National Welfare Regimes: The East Asian Case. In R. Sigg, C. Behrendt, & International Social Security Association (Eds.), Social security in the global village (pp. 47-65). New Brunswick, N.J. ; London: Transaction Publishers.
Huxham, C. (1996). Creating collaborative advantage. London: Sage.
Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2013). Managing to Collaborate: the Theory and Practice of Collaborative Advantage: Routledge.
Kazepov, Y. (2010). Rescaling Social Policies: Towards Multilevel Governance in Europe (Vol. 38). Surray: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.
Kröger, T. (1997). Local Government in Scandinavia: Autonomous or Integrated into the Welfare State. Social Care Services: the Key to the Scandinavian Welfare Model. Aldershot: Avebury, Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Kutsar, D., & Kuronen, M. (2015). Local Welfare Policy Making in European Cities. Springer Link: Springer International Publishing.
McGuire, M. (2006). Collaborative Public Management: Assessing What We Know and How We Know It. Public Administration Review, (66), pp. 33-43. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00664.x.
Moreno, L. (2007). Europeanization, Territorial Subsidiarity and Welfare Reform. Regional & Federal Studies, 17(4), pp. 487-497. doi:10.1080/13597560701691938.
O‘Leary, R., Gerard, C., & Bingham, L. B. (2006). Introduction to the Symposium on Collaborative Public Management. Public Administration Review, 66, 6-9. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00661.x.
Oosterlynck, S., Kazepov, Y., Novy, A., Cools, P., Sarius, T., & Wokuvitsch, F. (2015). Local social innovation and welfare state restructuring: analysing their relationship. Retrieved from http://www.centrumvoorsociaalbeleid.be/ImPRovE/Working%20Papers/ImPRovE%20WP%201515_1.pdf
Ranci, C., Brandsen, T., & Sabatinelli, S. (2014). Social vulnerability in European cities: The role of local welfare in times of crisis. Hamshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
Thomson, A. M., & Perry, J. L. (2006). Collaboration Processes: Inside the Black Box. Public Administration Review, 66, 20-32. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00663.x.
Trydegard, G.-B., & Thorslund, M. (2001). Inequality in the welfare state? Local variation in care of the elderly – the case of Sweden. International Journal of Social Welfare, 10(3), 174-184. doi:10.1111/1468-2397.00170.
Trydegard, G.-B., & Thorslund, M. (2010). One Uniform State or a Multitude of Welfare Municipalities? The Evolution of Local Variation in Swedish Elder Care. Social Policy & Administration, 44(4), 495-511.
Vangen, S., & Huxham, C. (2010). Introducing the Theory of Collaborative Advantage. In S. Osborne (Ed.), New Public Governance: Emerging perspectives on theory and principle of public governance (pp. 163-184). New York: Routledge.