Abstract:
|
This research had the objective to study measures and procedures in addressing
alcohol abuse through a network of provinces which high prevalence of alcohol abuse.
As well as to study the success and failure of management of such programs. The
researcher applied mixed methods for data collection, including both qualitative and
quantitative methods. The methods include in-depth interviews with 55 key informants,
focus group discussions with 13 persons from two groups, review of existing
documents, and survey research with interviews of 1,600 samples from 784 households
in four provinces: Lampang, Sisaket, Kamphaengphet, and Chaiyaphum. Data were
processed using analytic induction and descriptive statistics. The data were verified
using data triangulation.
This study found that all four study provinces implemented public campaigns
as their principal intervention. Measures that are considered best practices were only
implemented as secondary approaches. The public campaigns themselves were not very
effective or efficient and, thus, the goals were not achieved. Plus, the program did not
fully address the context of the problem
This study of the process of networking of four provinces to address alcohol
abuse found that Sisaket had the highest capacity to respond, followed by Lampang,
Kamphaengphet and Chaiyaphum. The most important factor behind successful action
of the network was having a lead agency. This had a reinforcing effect on other
components. Conversely, lack of leadership led to poor performance of the network.
Also, lack of network unity was also a factor behind lack of success. That said, there
were limitations of participation, exchange and sharing of resources, institutional
support, and external environment factors which impeded achievement of the network.
When looking at success or failure of the network to reduce risk of alcohol
abuse, none of the four provinces was able to have clear impact on this variable. Thus,
overall, as a network, it has to be concluded that the program was not successful as
envisioned. Part of this shortfall may be that the network implementers have a limited
view of what success means, or they focused too much on process and outputs, rather
than outcomes and impact.
The findings of this study are consistent with the concept of the Logic Model.
The four provinces in the network chose to emphasize interventions that were less
efficient and effective than what has been the experience of best practice efforts
elsewhere. The provinces did not take full advantage of the potential of the network to
achieve synergies of collaboration. Thus, the risk environment for alcohol abuse in the
four provinces as a whole was not significantly reduced.
Based on the findings of this study, it is recommended that provinces with
higher prevalence of alcohol abuse should implement best practice interventions as their
principal strategy. Public campaigns can be used as reinforcing or support measures.
The Sisaket model of an Alcohol Dependence Rehabilitation Center should be
replicated in other provinces. There should be a network of volunteers and campaigners
to monitor dangers from alcohol abuse, as implemented in Kamphaengphet. There
should be replication of the “Prasat Model” of Surin Province which involves setting
up community-based check points. Ultimately, there should be more advocacy to
increase the priority of the province to address alcohol abuse and invite civil society to
play a more significant role in the response. There needs to be increased trust and shared
values in the network which are regularly reinforced. There also needs to be a uniform
definition of success which focuses more on outcomes and impact to reduce and
eliminate alcohol abuse.
|
