Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia

World Association for Triple Helix and Future Strategy Studies (세계트리플헬릭스미래전략학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Decolonized Participatory Communication: A Study of Community Business in Rural Thai Community

  • Kittima Chanvichai (Department of Communications, Faculty of Business Economics and Communications, Naresuan University)
  • Published : 2024.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Participatory communication is a Western concept that emphasizes equal participation among stakeholders. However, in the context of rural Thai communities, where hierarchy and respect for social status are deeply ingrained, equal participation in communication is not the norm. This article examines the implementation of participatory communication in rural Thai communities through interviews and observations of local banana processing entrepreneurs in Phitsanulok province, Thailand. The findings indicate that within a culture characterized by high-context communication, high power distance, and high uncertainty avoidance - elements fundamentally at odds with the concept of equal participation in 'participatory communication'-Thai local entrepreneurs successfully operate their businesses in harmony and peace. This article, therefore, calls for the decolonization of the Western concept of participatory communication by promoting a deeper understanding of local contexts that reflect cultural and value systems distinct from those in which the concept originated. This approach aims to foster genuine equal opportunities in knowledge creation within the communication discipline, benefiting both scholars and practitioners.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research has received funding support from the Faculty of Business Economics and Communications, Naresuan University (Grant number 003/2566).

References

  1. Berlo, D. K. (1960). The Process of Communication: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  2. Chouykerd, P. (2022). National Strategy for 20 Years and Driving Creative Economy with Soft Power. Research Institute for Social Development. https://rsdi.kku.ac.th/?p=2894 
  3. Department of Intellectual Property. (2018). Announcement on the registration of the Department of Intellectual Property, regarding the registration of geographical indications, Klwai Tak Bang Krathum, Phitsanulok. https://www.ipthailand.go.th/images/2284/Sorcho61100107.pdf 
  4. Freire Institute. (2024, August 19). About Paolo Freire: Transformational educator, pedagogical thinker and radical practitioner. https://freire.org/paulo-freire 
  5. Gobena, E., B., Hean, S., Heaslip, V., & Studsrod, I. (2023). The challenge of western-influenced notions of knowledge and research training: Lessons for decolonizing the research process and researcher education. Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work. https://doi.org/10.1080/15313204.2023.2197272 
  6. Hall, E.T. (1976). Beyond culture. Doubleday. 
  7. HCR, (2020). Communication for development. https://www.h-c-r.org/communication-for-development 
  8. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organisations Across Nations (2nd ed.). Sage Pubications. 
  9. JayMauy. (n.d.). Home [Facebook page]. Facebook. Retrieved January 30, 2024, from https://www.facebook.com/jaymauy/?locale=th_TH 
  10. Jouet, A. (1977, October). Community media and development. In Self-Management, Access and Participation in Communication, Belgrade (pp. 3-5). [Unpublished working paper]. UNESCO. 
  11. Kaewthep, K., et al. (2000). Participatory Management of Local Culture with Research Innovation. Parbpim Limited Partnership. 
  12. Kim, H. J., (2018). Multi-stakeholders in public and cultural diplomacies as seen through the lens of public-private partnerships: A comparative case study of Germany and South Korea. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 17(1), 68-94. https://doi.org/10.17477/jcea.2018.17.1.068 
  13. Knutson, T. J., Komolsevin, R., Chatiketu, P., & Smith, V. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of Thai and US American rhetorical sensitivity: Implications for intercultural communication effectiveness. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(1), 63-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0147-1767(02)00060-3 
  14. Langmia, K. (2024). Decolonizing communication theories. Howard Journal of Communications, 35(3), 277-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646175.2024.2306815 
  15. Levitt, S. R., (2022). Intercultural competence in international teamwork: Understanding high- and low-context communication styles. Communication and Media in Asia Pacific, 5(1), 1-13. http://doi.org/10.14456/cmap.2022.1 
  16. Limsiriwong, S. (2014). Critical Success Factors of Bankgathum's Dried Banana Production Groups, Phitsanulok Province. The Golden Teak: Humanities and Social Sciences, 20(2.1), 44-59. 
  17. Musakophas, R. & Polnikonkij, W. (2017). Current and future studies on participatory communication in Thailand. Kasetsart Journal of Social Science, 8(3), 68-73. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2016.01.011 
  18. Sangrungruengroj, P. S. (2013). Participatory Communication Management: A Mechanism for The Implementation of The Alternative Development Paradigm. Humanities & Social Sciences, 30(2), 23-42. 
  19. Sathapitanon, P. (2006). Participatory communication and community development: from concept to research practice in Thai society. The Thailand Research Fund. 
  20. Servaes, J. & Malikhao, P. (2005). Participatory communication: The new paradigm. In O. Hemer and T. Tufte (Eds.) Media & glocal change. Rethinking communication for development. 91-103. 
  21. Teng, H. C. & Chung, J. K. (2024). Goryeoin village in Gwangju, South Korea, and its socio-cultural-historical significance. Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia, 23(1), 1-17. http://doi.org/10.17477/jcea.2024.23.1.001 
  22. The Culture Factor. (n.d.) Country comparison tool. Retrieved February 11, 2024, from https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison-tool?countries=thailand 
  23. Tufte, T. & Mefaloputlos, P. (2009). Participatory Communication, A Practical Guide. U.S.: The world bank. 
  24. United Nations. (2022). Statistical annex: Countries classification. World Economic Situation and Prospects. https://www.un.org/development/desa/dpad/publication/worldeconomic-situation-and-prospects-2022/