Development of Risk Assurance Criteria to the Utilization of Natural Resources and Environment for Sustainable Development of Life Quality, Economy and Society in Rural Thai Communities
Veeravatnanond, Vinai, Nasa-arn, Som, Nithimongkonchai, Wannapa, Wongpho, Bunlert, Phookung, Kotcharat, Asian Social Science
The research aimed at developing model of the risk assurance indicators to the utilization of natural resources and environment for sustainable development of Thai communities and evaluation of risks indicators on natural recourses and environment for sustainability of life quality, economy, and society. Mixed research methodology-both quantitative and qualitative-was employed to collect data from the various sources, related documents experts, and indigenous group from three villages- namely, upper north (Nan), central north (Uttaradit), and lower north (Pijit) with 10 villages of each to construct and validate the hypothetical indicators. A multi-stage sample size was included 80 community experts, 140 general experts, 350 community leaders, and 407 family delegates in Northern Thailand to evaluate the practicality and appropriateness of the constructed risk assurance indicators. The data were collected by group discussion, deep interview, and questionnaires. The data were analyzed by using mean, percentage, median. LISREL Program version 8.30 was applied, to evaluate the practicality and appropriateness of the constructed risk assurance indicators.
The research yielded 3 main factors with associated risk indicators to the utilization of natural resources and the environment: first, natural resources and environmental revitalization with 4 sub-factors, namely, variety of plants, wildlife, forests, soil, and water; second, hazardous waste substance prevention with 4 sub-factors, namely, hazardous waste, rubbish, smoke and dust, and natural disasters; third, resource management in community, with 5 sub-factors, namely, forest, wildlife, and water animals, soil, water and energy, total 13 sub-factors 57 associated indicators in all. Also, 3 main factors with associated indicators to sustainable development are found: first, life quality with 6 sub-factors, namely, food, clothes, household equipments, health cares, housing, environment management; second, economy with 4 sub-factors, namely, raw material for productivity, distribution and transportation; third, society with 4 sub-factors, namely, cooperation, cares, safety, peace, luxury mitigation, moral ethical values, total 14 sub-factors 66 associated indicators in all.
The models of risk assurance indicators to the utilization of natural resources and environment for sustainable development of life quality were fitted the empirical data with c2 = 62.04, p = 0.06, GFI = 0.98, AGFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.03, CN = 401.96, to the utilization of natural resources and environment.
In evaluation of the risk assurance indicators, the data confirmed their practicality at a high level, the means were different of different part with statistical significance at the level of.05, the relation of risk assurance indicators to the utilization of natural resources and environment for sustainable development were significance. For the appropriate model and guidelines for developing there were 8 major activities, In conclusion, the developing model were appropriate.
Keywords: Sustainable development, Risk assurance indicators, Natural resources and the environment
The development of our nation from the past have always been placing more emphasis on economic growth rather than the happiness of man in society. Thus, it is the development that lack equilibrium. And it is evident that the environment and natural resources are being depleted with exerting a huge impact on life quality of Thai people. The Thai people are facing a number of diseases, the worst of which is cancer. As to economy, farmers are getting poorer, running into debts in social life and culture, and crimes are becoming threatening problem of Thai society.
Such impact indicates unsustainable development, the fact that economic growth is beyond the carrying capacity of our existing natural resources is confirmed. Through lack of evaluation criteria as to what indicators to use and how to use so as to assure the risk against damaging impact on life quality, economy, and society in the future-especially the utilization of natural resources in rural communities. …