'-I ~ - t1 I;~ \') .-.',:: C'r-. ,. I;:' ]" I. \) \' .J :1 .'., ') ) "'I 'J " ';' ::~ "2 -:;. ! I A FRAMEWORK FOR STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF THAI COMMUNITIES AND AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES: A MEANS FOR UNDERSTANDING SYl'lCIiRONISM AND CONFLICT

by Robert Ii. Orr

This report examines an LDC situation in which a cen­ primary contacts with village headmen and residents, tral government extends its authority into the countryside district officers whose duties paraIlei that of a county sheriff in a development effort to organize small farmers into in the United States with additional populution registration agricultural cooperatives, The examination will be through and oversight responsibilities, an officer of th.! AID a comparison of commu:lity (viIlage) social structure with nllss[on, a program uirector of the YMCA in the structure of agricultu[t!l cooperatives in , focus, Chiangmai engaged in creating "model development ing OI~ areas of structural synchronism and conflict, Styles villages" and in training village leaders, and sociologists at and effectiveness of communiLltion efforts wiII be examin('\ ~ . Where possible these discussions as they relate to the structures of "change agencies" and to were supplemented by secondary data on organizations "community structures" in Tkli society, visited. The impressions gained during the four,week tour Information was obtained during a four,week tour of Thai were limited due to the brevity of the Thai exposure anu agricultural cooperatives in August, 1980, made at the in­ were contradictory because they were derived from in­ vitation of the Cooperatives Promotion Department (CPD) dividuals and group with varying interests. within the Royal Thai Ministry of , This repo:t is the product of data obtained from persona: interviews with individuals at all levels of the Thai cooperative effort, The Cooperative Movement including those residing in rural society and from secondary in Ag.dculture sources. Conversations were held with officials in the agricultural cooperative structure at all levels of the The develo~~ent of agr;cultural cooperatives in Thailand organization, ranging from primary cooperative members has been described as a movement. Intended to be social as (small farmers) to the Director General of the CPD, Data on well as economic in nature, the Thai cooperative movement the functioning of Thai agricultural cooperatives were ob­ represents a considerable departure in method of operation tained from (I) officials of the Bank of Agriculture and for the small farmer from his tradition,based form of Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) who were engaged in agriculture. The cooperative movement began in 1916 by making loans to cooperatives and cooperative members, (2) royal decree with the establishment of village credit a member of the National Economic and Social Develop, societies. In 1928 the functions of cooperatives were ex­ mept Board (NESDB) who was engaged in planning for a panded to include sales of input materials, medium and long­ reorganization of the cooperative management structure, (3) term loans, and grain processing and marketing. Other ma' a consultant for the Cooperative League of the U, S, A. jor programmatic alteratiGns in agricultural cooperatives oc' (working with the NESDB), and (4) faculty members of the curred in 1958 when limited liability production credit Department of Sociology and Anthropology at Kasetsart associations were created and again in 1968 when village­ University, the nation's largest agricultural university. level credit societies were amalgamated into amphur Data regarding viIlage life and structure were obtaineu from (district) level societies. These amphur credit societies per­ formed the same functior,. of the previolls village societies but gave them a larger and more economically viable base {CPD, 1979:7,8}. Associate Professor of Rural Sociology, Department of AgriCIIltural Ideally, the cooperative movement in'Jolves a shift from Economics and Rural Sociology, University of 'Tennessee, Knoxville. the family as the central point of orientation in agricultural 17 prdduction to that of a cooperating group of farmers whose structUrt: of agricultural cooperatives. This is not to imply melbbership would crosscut familial and friendship ties ex, that all villages in Thailand were the same and that all ten~ling to "strangers" from other villages. Although cooperatives had achieved an equal level of success or agri~ultural field wnrk would remain within the domain of failure. Murray {1977: 1,4} in his study of Thai villages the .family or village, the input of production capital and noted that there was considerable variation in a village's mat~rjals (grain, fertiliz;er, ; etc.) would s·hift away ability to absorb social and economic changes and to work froml, traditional sources as would the processing and effectively with government bureaucrats. The following mark~ting functions of agriculture. section of this paper will outline some of the structural Th:e cooperative advantages of nonusurous interest rates elements, including goals and styles of communication that for production credit loans, favorable pricing advantages in may act as variables in understanding sources of conflict or the collective purchase of grain ;l.nd agricultural chemicals, inadequate acceptance of agricultural cooperatives and their as well as access to lower c05t processing and group policies for growth and development. marketing, should have made the movement a great success. However, after 64 years one CPO of~icial rderred to the ComrDunity Structure In cooperatives as being in a state of "infancy. ,. The CPO is R ural Thai Villages charged with helping farmers organiz;e into cooperatives, educating farmers in the goals and workings of cooperatives, and providing technical backup for operating tOoperatives. The term "community," as it is used in this paper, is an As of 1977, membership in agricultural cooperatives totaled ecological concept stressing the interrelationships of living )24,788 households in 644 cooperatives across the country. units with the soil they occupy. PenDle, territory and SOCI"\ This amounted to 8.2 percent of all Thai farmers {NESOB, organiz;ation are all seen as being bound up in a symbiotic 1979:193J. relationship of mutual interdependence. Within this One question ~hat arises when comparing agricultural perspective of social,territOi ial organiz;ation, community membership rates with the economic advantages of member, assemblages sharing similar conditions (man,land relation, ship is, why were not more farmers members of ships, cropping patterns, economies, etc.) are also likely to cooperatives? If the advantages of mt::mbership were as share other aspects of "ocial structure or at least are likely /;l.Vorable as they appeared to be, more farmers would have to be similarly influenced by their environs. Social structure been likely to have become members. Some of the relative generally refers to the total pattern of social organiz;ation advantages of cooperative membership may have been ob, produced by a cultural group's social practices. Elements of tained from other institutions. Loanf through the BAAC social structure include the mechanisms by which the socie, were available to an additional 17.0 percent of the farm ty's functional problems are solved or worked - t.he institu, population at 10w interest rates {NESOB, 1979: 193}. tions of a society. Institutions may often be further Private banks, moneylenders and grain dealer:., also made categoriz;ed in terms of the types of problems or functins in, production credit available, although with much higher volved. Religion and family tend to address problems of rates of interest, with minimal waiting periods anti virtually maintaining patterr<; of belief and values in society; legal no "red tape." In some c;~ses privately owned grain and structures serve to aid in integrating the different units of farm chemical sales firms provided more comprehensive ser, societ~'; policital structures engage in societal decision rr.,k, vices than did the cooperatives, such as delivery of goods to ing; and economies serve adaptive functions. In ~n·':;..:(Jes the farm and better instruction in application or usage. that are less developed or structurally differentiated there is Similarly, the milling and marketing federations (proVIn' a tendercy for the family and religious institutions to be cial cooperatives and the Agricultural Cooperative Federa, asc~cndent, carrying out other functions such as integration. tion of Thailand (ACFT» were reported to have difficulties decision making, and adaptation. More developed societies in efficiently processing and selling rice. Across the tend to create new institutions that are more specializ;ed in Kingdom, ~ice mills operated by provincial,level federations the kinds of tasks or functions they work toward fulfilling. have been operating on a loss basis {NESOB, One of the problems faced by LOCs as they go through 1977:294,206J. the throes of development is the imposition of new social Another reason for not participating in cooperatives bas' and economic institutions structures created by central ed on comparative advantage is the theme based on poor in, government!; upon traditional institutions in rural society. terpersonal and social structural relationships. This reason What may follow is a painful process of accommodations of was given by sociolog:sts at Kasetsart University, an AID the existent culture and the agents of change with each officer, and an official of the NESOB. The basis of this other. The best of intentioned changes may meet with theme was that village or community life involved a dif­ unexpected, perhaps insurmountable obstacles when it ferent form of social organiz;ation with, in many cases, dif, clashes with traditional modalities of behavior. ferent goals and different styles of communication from the Family,village based agriculture and cooperative 18 agriculture in Thailand have different origins and different (DAE). Consequently, they were the only villages visited goals. The family as an institution has developed which were organized into DAE farmers associations. mechanisms over generations to promote its survival. One other institutional area of connection with the cen, Changes arc incorporated gradually and cautiously with the tral government was present in e •• ch area visited. Although goal of maintaining the family as the unit of production. Its schools were not physically located in the villages, village patterns and traditions are derived from the people childrzn were participants in a system of mandatory educa, themselves and are adapted to their ecological environment. tion. Until recently this national program involved an As such they tend to resist threatening departures that may elementary prugram of four years. Although the program be viewed as potentially disruptive to their patterns of life. has been upgraded to a seven,year program, it was unclear Production goals are oriented toward "having enough," or in the villages visited if the seven,year program had actually perhaps having a "little extra," rather than to a highly com, been implemented. Schools. were also usually located prox, merciali;:ed, cash, agriculture. The emphasis would be imate to the wat because the priests have been the tradi, more toward a subsistence end of a scale of production tional sources of instruction in Thai society [Kaufman, rather than toward surplus. In the face of developing 1977:84,89}. Ligricultural technologies being disseminated to these people There was so:ne indication that the role of religion in they may selectively choose or adopt change, weighting this village life has weakened over the past 20 years. An AID change wIthin the perspective of their own form of social officer discussed this trend in relation to the Buddhist and economic rationality. High economic or technological priesthood and, to one of the more prevalent village institu, risk would not likely be a direction they would be willing to tions, the wat committee. In the past, with limited occupa; take. tional alternatives to farmmg, fuJi,time pursuit of the Bud, Several villages in the northeast near Nakorn Rajsima dhist priesthood was a more viable role in village life. This (Korat), in the north near Chieng Mai, and in the central was particularly the case for young men whose families did plains near Cha Chaeng Sao weie visited. The villages con' not have enough land to subdivide for their entry into farm, tained from 20 to 125 households. In terms of the amount of ing. With increasing industrialization of the Kingdom'f, ur, lar.d farmed, these villages would be considered represen, ban areas, many of these men have been moving to cities ~ative with landholdings averaging eight rai or slightly over rather than remaining in the villages. Accompanying this three acres (2.4 rai is the equivalent of one acre). The domi, trend, the AID officer saw the village wat committee as also nant institutions within these villages were the family and losing some of its traditional place in the community life. religion. In fact, many villages were too small to support With an increasing division of labor in village life, espp.cially their own "wat" or Buddhist temple. Similarly, they were in state supported , the active support of the wat too small to have government offices. None of the farmers' with funds diminished. villages visited had police stdtions or substations, public This view of village structure would indicatr that there health clinics, or community development offices located have been some alterations in social structure with a slowly dIrectly within them, although in Korat a public health increasing division of labor and with the central government clinic was within five kilometers of a village. Similarly, in a attaching its own functions onto traditional sources of small village near Chieng Mai, a police substation was authority such as the buddhist temple in education or the located relatively near one village that was visited. The headman in village level governance. However, the villages main connecti('n with the central government was through visited still maintained much of their traditional character the village headman and his assistant who had respon, with a relatively low internal institutional division of labor sibilities of tax collection and repor!ing of population when compared to a modern, urbanized society. Relation, changes to the district officer. While rhe headman was ships within the villages would be characterized more as reported to have heen an elective position, in most cases the primary (gemeinschaftliche) rather than secondary headman had held his position for several year~. Althour~h (gesellschaftliche) in nature. Sociologists at Kasetsart his position was technically not an inherited one, question, University corroborated thi~ impression, commenting that ing on this point often yidded a response that his father or villagers tended to interact among themselves in a per, another close relative had held this position prior to his sonalistic style. While their style of interaction might pro, assuming the office. This would be a good example of syn­ duce binding agreements among themselves, those chronism of "democratic structure" (i.e., elective office with agreemwts would definitely not be labeled formal, hereditary position) with traditional authority. In addition contractual. Relationships with authority figures, such as to the headman,government relationship, the villages were the village headman or other government officials, have nominally ti

Figure 1. Structural Rclationohip Between Co.operative Movement and Government

Thc Co·operallvc League C(I.operatlvcS National Lcv~1 of Thaol.nd Promotion Depanment ,,,,.,, : ...... -- ...... --/.. .,. t-...., -",,'fill" ...... -er .... , ./ , ...... ~ : 'lilt r------~~~--~ I r-----~~----~ I Thllf! and Crcdlt Co.operativc I Consumers' Co.operatlve I Federation ofTh.dand I I Feder.llon 01 Thaoland ------,! The Agricultural Co.operatlve Federallon ofThallanJ

Provincial Level

Primary Co.operatlves

Coordination ______SuperV1510n _ • _. _ • _ Dlrcct Control ____

Su,,,,< CPD (J 979 IOJ The stn'ctural relatiunship of nlemher involvement in the Many farmers view cooperatives as little more than govern, cooperative organization is also omitted in Figure 1. The ment welfare agencies which provide: "hand,outs" masquerading primary cooperatives were created in 1968 through the as "loans" as inducement to join them [N,ESDB. 1979:31. amalgamation d village credit societies. The village, level in, volvement remained, however, in the form of village farmer Similarly, one CPO offkial indicated that a major problem in organizations or farmer groups. large villages with over 125 establishing cooperatives was that farmers tended to "use" households had their own farmer organization, while the cooperatives in order to "get the loan" with little inten, several small villages were combined into a single organiza' tion of repaying that loan. Sociologists at j(asetsart Univer, tiun. Questioning by the author on the role of the farmer sity also indicated that the farmers' attitudes toward organization in the cooperative structure did not yield clear cooperatives were generally quite negative (although not responses. However, the impression was given that the toward ail cooperatives in all places) and that loan repay­ local head ()f the organization was a board member of the ment and enforcement procedures to encourage repayment primary cooperative. On the basis of the ir.formation obtain, were rather lax throllghout the country. Seemingly, there is ed from the NESDB, the board in most cases was unsuc, a contradiction within this discussion of poor loan repay· cessful in locating and hiring adequately skill~d managers. ment and low farmer participation fates. If the loans were The remaining area of involvement of primary cooperatives available with a low expectation of repayment, why would was in the governing boards of provincial federations. not more farmers take advantage of the situation? Accor. Member cooperatives of a federation or provincial ding to one CPO official, the major reason for joining th~ cooperative might nominate individuals to run for election cooperatives was to obtain "the loan." With poor repay· to the provincial board. However, the actual process by ment rates, little money was availab"~ to be loaned out. which an individual was declared a candidate was not This served as a limiting factor on membership. The govern· specified. ment did, however, subsidize the cooperatives to a large ex· tent but not to a degree sufficient to allow dramatic in· creases in membership with low loan repayment rate&. The Conflict Between Agricultural picture that has been painted here is one of conflict between Cooperatives and Villagers different forms of social organization - bureaucracy and traditional life. This structure of agricultural cooperatives provides a Oamron Thandee {1979a: 34,35}, writing on the collision basis for locating several points where problt:ms may arise of change agencies and rural Thai villagers, has described as the cooperative intersects with the culture and with the situatIOn in this way: Lommunity organizations. Across the country, local level in, The fact is that a great number of villagers are stillliv· volvement in the authority structure appeared quite ing in a very traditionally close,~nitud social system, ge· limited. In i!lost cases it did not include the hiring of a meinschaft. 'fhe relationshiP among themselves is per. cooperative manager. Those cooperatives were then likely sonal and this is also applied to civil officuw who are to have been managed by the district,level official of the wor~ing with them . .. The cor.cept of bureaucracy, under CPO. This in itself did not mean that the cooperative was the cOtlSideration of officials, is unwor~able in the poorly managed - the district officer by virtue of the CPO patrimonial .~ocial system . . . The consequence is that of tiaining program would have been properly qualified for the misunderstanding by the two sides which brings on a position. However, the lack of local involvement may have negative attitude toward each other with suspicioT' and had other negative impacts. According to the NESOB: mistrust of the officials, and accusations that peasants are ignorant, i1/itertlu and resistant in adopting innovations. The pervasive influence of government in the develop, Thandee's comments have succinctly encapsulated the main ment and day,to,day operations of agricultural cooperatives has stunted their growth as efficient business theme of this paper - that traditional and bureaucratic forms of organization often clash in the process of develop­ enterprises. Farmers do not consider cooperatives as ment with the potential of undennining even weU designed, organizations serving their interests. but rather as ineffec, tive and cOllfusing instruments of government policy. planned change. In another work Thandee {1979b} has pro­ [N,ESDB. 1979:3]. vided an ameliorative mechanism for resolving the high levels of mistrust and negativism that currently exist bet, If the contention that farmers uo not view the cooperatives ween viUagers and change agencies such as the cooperatives as serving their own interest~ is correct, it might be ex, and the CPD. This essentiaUy would involve a change in pected that farmers' view of cooperative tJolicies, particular, the pattern of interaction of bureaucratic orgarmatioll8 with Iy in the area of loan repayment, might suffer some loss of peasants and peasant groups. A classical model of respect. bureaucratic organization involves a downward flow of 21 bureaucratic organiz;ation involves a downward flow of was that the client group would not act solely as a }Jassive delegated authority with decision makers applying rules in recipient of development activities, but rather would in, their specific domain to concrete situations. Information or itiate their own requests of government. These requests communications are expected to move down the chain of would be conveyed to both field workers and to regional command. However, for this authority structure to be suc, orga:1iz;ational centers in the organiz;ation. Ideally this struc, cessful it would also depend upon an information feedback tural change would alter the role of officials from "master, as a babis for corre.:ting the regulatory process. According like" to thilt of ccodinators. The social distance between to Thandee, little teed back has occurred in government clients and officials in the bureaucr.. cy would be reduced deaiings with rural villagers in an ongoing sllccessful and the relationship between these groups accordingly developm~nt process. Communications have been one,way altered. and not reciprocal. Misunderstandings have arisen with no Although Thande stated that some time would be required mechanism for them to be resolved. In essence, a one,way to alter traditional attitudes held by peasants toward of, model of communications involves information moving ficials, he felt that this structural change would eventually downward progressively to a client group at the bottom C'f serve to reduce the negative feelings and distrust between the organiz;ational pyramid. peasant and governme!lt worker. It would be a mechanism for avoiding the harsh clash of traditional and bureaucratic, modern (or of gemeinschaftliche and gesellshcaftliche) Cor flict Resolution Through societies [Thandec, 1979b}. However, the model did not a Two~Way Model of Communications take into account the resistance of bureaucratic structures to change with their accompanying loss of ... uthority. The flow of authority essentially has been reversed at the bot, A two,way model of communications allows suggested tom levels and hos been directed back up the organizational change or policy to originate at either the top of the ladder. That aspect would remain at best problematic. organiz;ational structure or from the client group. This In spite of organizational resistance, alterations in the model of communication has also been referred to an a "self, organizational structure of cooperatives and their relation, help" approach in U. S. community development circles and ship to the CPD, similar to those suggested by Thandee, is currently used as a model for community development ef, might provide certain positive benefits if adopted by forts in the Cooperative Extemlion Service. As a process, it agricultural cooperatives. A number of negative feelings emphasiz;es teaching self,help skills in problem identification toward cooperatives have beell attributed to Thai farmers. and participatory decision making, no small task for a Among these are the feelings that meaningful involvement population unfamiliar with being formally involved in these in the cooperatives is not possible and that cooperatives ex, activities {Littrel, 1980:64,72}. Thandee's model is il, ist for the benefit of the government agencies adminstering lustrated in Figure 1. The rationale behind Thandee's model them. These hostile attitudes might be reduced if farmers

Program Planning and Management I I Ministry Concerned J Regional Center I International Agencies I 1 L J J I

I r• lCommunication Support I

ical l ITrainir.g Supply Inputs ance 1 I I

I Clientele} J _I . I I Field Workers 1 t I Research and Evaluation I

Figure 2. New Direction for Planning Rural Development Program

22 Soura: '11wnJee {1979b:IBJ. felt that the cooperatives were their own, and hence that stitutes and (the equivalent of) junior colleges rather than they were resronsible to themselves as a collective group from the more prestigious institutions in Bangkok and in rather than to a distant bureaucracy. Primarily, this would other regional universities. involve a change in the role of the CPD as advisors to the Finally, it was this author's feelings that not all com, agricultural cooperatives - th:lt they would not actually munications difficulties emanated solely from differences in manage those cooperatives but would limit their role to the social structure, communications modeling, or linguistic dif, provision of orgunizational and technical support. In fact, ferences, and social distance. The most frequently voiced the role of support is the one defined for the CPD in their difficulty concerning the relative success or failure of own organizational chart. In order to accomplish this, a cooperatives was that of the poor rate of loan repayment. massive upgrading of cooperative management would be Such statements were frequently accompanied by an asser, necessary, with requirements that cooperatives have tion that production credit loans through the cooperatives manageis and appropriate clerical personnel and that those were viewe,j by farmers as being a form of "largesse," that managers and staff receive appropriate training toward car, farmers often felt free to ignore their responsibilities toward rying out their jobs. This has already been proposed and is loan repayment, and that frequently inadequate attempts one of the key points in A Five, Year Comprehensive Plan for were made by the cooperatives to recapture the loans. Development of Agricultural Cooperatives sponsored uy the While this situ:!tion undoubtedly existed for many NESDB [1979}. cooperatives, there were exceptions. Depending upon the data source, many cooperatives were in good fiscal standing. Other Means of Correcting It was suggested that they were the ones that followed up Communications Difficulties on outstanding loans and established a stable, predictable pattern of account:lbility with members. They com, municated with action, as well as with words. A pfClvincial Not all communications difficulties were the result of an CPD officer in Korat indicated that this action was only inappropriate "model of development" for cooperatives. A rarely as severe as taking court action, but usually took the multiple cropping 13pecialist at Kasetsart University discuss, form of timely callbacks to the farmer with an overdue pay' ed another factor dealing with language and social origin. ment, and that such action was usually sufficient to produce According to this source, a significant error was often made the payment. This may be an oversimplified solution to a in the process of organizing cooperatives and recruiting new difficult problem which, regardless of what organi~ational members. The district field officer of the CPD approached changes might take place in the structure of agricultural farmers using an "urban" explanation of cooperatives and cooperatives, is likely to persist unless farmers see hard their collective bellefits. Terms would be used that had lit, evidence that their roles of participation and responsibility tie meaning in local language patterns, thereby possibly have also changed. alienating farmers. The social distance of the officer engaged in promoting the cooperative was increased from the farmer and his creditability suffered. The pattern of distrust and Summary misunderstanding characteristic of one,way models of com' munication was furthered and carried over in later dealings, Thailand's program of developing agricultural once a cooperative became organi~ed. The remedy for this cooperatives to serve the needs ofthe Kingdom's poor rural problem was not seen as being a simple revision of promo, majority has met with a number of obstacles in gaining local, tions matenals appropriate to each locale, but extended into level acceptance. Although a number of the benefits of the recruitment of field personnel with rural backgrounds. cooperative membership have been available to a relatively A major difficulty in recruiting rural personnel was felt to small number of farmers through alternative sources, the be the dispa:-ity in the quality of educational facilities bet, majority of farmers have not chosen or have not been able to ween urban areas ar,d rural areas. With education in most participate in the cooperatives. Similarly many cooperatives rural areas being quite limited and, hence the opportunities have faced difficulties in obtaining proper membership par, for rural youth to '.Lchieve sufficient educational skills to ticipation in fulfilling contractual obligations, particular!y in become likely cand'.dates for CPD career also the area of loan repayment. being limited, the tendency was to hire staff with urban This paper has focused on a comparison of organization in backgrounds. The result of this tendency was seen by the the social structure of village life and the organizational specialist as the creation of a staff or urbanites, well trained structure of agricultural cooperatives as a means of locating perhaps, but still essentially different from the people they areas of agreement and potential conflict between farmers ser'!ed. His proposed solution to the problem was in the in, and cooperatives. Emphasis was placeu on the differences in tensive recruitment of candidates with rural backgrounds goals and division of labor in village life and on the largely from the country's smaller agricultural technical in, bureaucratic structure of cooperatives as a source of 23 misunderstanding. A significant source of farmer disaffec, [2} Kaufman, Howard Keva, Bang~huad: A Community tion was seen as resulting from a shift in the farmers' tradi, Study in 'Thailand. Rutland, Utah: Charles E. Tuttle tional relationships to leaders, referred to as a patrimonial Company (1977). relationship, to a bureaucratic relationship with officers in the cooperative structure. {3} Littrell, Donald W., "The Self,Help Approach." In Communication between farmers and cooperative of, James A. Christenson and Jerry W. Robinson, Jr. ficials, acting as agents of change, has been characterized as (eds.), Community Development in America. Ames, a one,way model of communication, paralleling the Iowa: Iowa State University Press, pp. 64,72 (1980). bureaucratic structure's downward flow of information and delegation of authority. A two,way model of communica, [4} Murray, Charles A., A Behavioral Study of Rural tions was introduced in which the farmer,official relation, Modernization: Social and EcotlOmic Changes in 'Thai ship was altered by placing cooperative field staff more in Villages. New York: Praeger Publishers (1977). the role of coordinators than superiors as a means of increas, ing farmer involvement and confidence in the operation of [5} National Economic an~ Social Development Board, the cooperative. Subcommittee on Agricultural Cooperatives, A Five, A.rlditional communications difficulties linked to dif, Year Comprehensive Plan for the Development of ferences of social origin between farmers and CPD dititrict Agricultural Cooperatives. Bangkok (1979). field officers were discussed as adding to the problems of misunderstanding and alienation between the two groups. [6} Thandee, Damrong, "Communication Strategy in One source indicated that the problem centered on the dif, Rural Development by Government Agencies in ferences of language and background between the more ur, Thailand." Sociology ICommunication Research ban bureaucrat~ and the less well educated farmers. Report No.2. Ramkhamhaeng University, Bangkok Finally, this paper suggests that in addition to the (1979a). previous considerations of organizational and social stuc, ture, a historical pattern of farmers' perceptions of [7} Thandee, Damrong, "Communication and Rural cooperative activities as a form of government largesse may Development in Thailand." Department of Sociology be more difficult to overcome. This pattern may require and Communication, Rankhamhaeng University, .':hanges of communication,in,action, as well as in words and Bangkok. Paper presented to the International Con, organization in order to elicit farmers' support. ference on Development on the Peasantry and Development in the A.S.E.A.N. Region, May 26,29, References 1980, held at the Univeriti Kabangsoan Malaysia, Bangi in Selangar, Malaysia (1979b).

[~} Co,operatives Promotions Department, "Co,operatives in 'Thailand." Bangkok: Ministry of Agriculture and Co,operatives. (1979)