Discourse dialogue : grassroots' perspective on sustainable development

Abstract

The concept of sustainable development has been discussed, debated and defined at the global level since the 1960's. This dialogue has created questions on whether or not the definitions promoted at the global level are appropriate in the context of rural development in developing countries, and, furthermore, how grassroots people in the developing world define the concept of sustainable development. This disseltation considers the "dialogue" on sustainable development from a number of key sources at the global level and compares this with the perspective of grassroots farmers of Mae Tha community in northern Thailand towards sustainable development. Discourse analysis approach is used as the method for the analysis of sustainable development discourses at the global level, and qualitative research through participant observation was conducted in order to gather information from Mae Tha farmers. Global sustainable development discourse is different from that of Mae Tha farmers. The global discourse comprises two sub-discourses; the Earth and Equity. It argues that sustainability on Earth will be attained when equity between human beings and the environment, and between developed and developing countries, take place. Economic development is seen as a means to accomplishing these two concepts of equity. Grassroots farmers of Mae Tha community in northern Thailand define sustainability as "having rice to eat and having land on which to stay". However, as the farmers have experienced developmental problems introduced to the community by outsiders, namely government development policies, they view that in order to attain sustainability, the villagers themselves have to have control over development direction. This control consists of control over agricultural production and food supply, land and forest management, and knowledge used in development processes. To have control, power to negotiate with the state development direction is required. They view that this power will be gained through strengthened people's organisations and networks. Although the villagers view power to control as a means to attaining sustainability, they, however, view that this power needs to be controlled by the concept of "knowing when to stop, knowing what sufficiency means". The perspective on sustainability and sustainable development of Mae Tha farmers results from decades of experience. Situated in different contexts, global and grassroots' sustainable development discourses are therefore different. This difference will not cause any problems in terms of rural development if the Thai government, an institution standing between grassroots and global development directions, can serve the needs of grassroots people. However, the Thai state cannot ignore the flow of the global economy, and has adopted global ideology to be the country's development direction, which is not appropriate for rural development in the Thai context. To be sustainable in the rural development context, therefore, local communities must be politically autonomous. To be autonomous, a "genuine" decentralisation of power is needed. In sum, decentralisation, as well as strengthened people's organisations, are the very keys to aniving at sustainability at rural level.