12.3 Proposed Activities
Table 70. Percent distribution of perceived impact of project activities mentioned.
Among proposed activities were proposals for forming various small
groups. These differed somewhat from village to village; hence,
villagers were presented with the list of types of proposed small
groups and asked to evaluate them in terms of whether or not they
would participate and their perceptions of the value of such
groups. Types of groups posed for each village are listed below.
No Little A lot Recovery Activity impact better Better Better
soap making 3 6 24 67 Thai sweets 7 38 17 38
furniture making 9 61 30 0 reforestationplanting trees 0 3 17 79
sewing 4 4 23 69 making snackssweets 3 21 28 48
aquaculture 3 13 23 60 Aquaculture includes shellfish, fish, and frog
culture.
Village 1 Thai sweet making, livestock raising, cashew nut processing Village 2 goat raising, steamed mackerel, net making
Village 3 shrimp net making, fish cage culture, shrimp paste making Village 4 womens occupations, Thai sweets, dress making
Village 7 fish sauce, Thai sweets, curry paste
Percent distribution of evaluation responses and willingness to participate are in table 71. Proposed group types were all evaluated quite favorably;
nevertheless, there is inter-village variation in willingness to join, ranging from 30 percent in
Village 7 to 86 percent in Village 1.
Table 71. Frequency distribution of evaluation of and willingness to participate in proposed
groups.
Evaluation Village 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Join
a
Four other proposed activities were evaluated: 1 collecting mangrove seedlings, 2 catfish culture
training, 3 sewing bags, and 4 catering. Percent distribution of evaluation responses and
willingness to participate in these activities are in table 72. Once again, the proposed activities
were evaluated quite favorably. Catering Village 1 only had the lowest evaluation with
almost one-half the responses suggesting that it could make things
only a little better or result in no change at all. At the time of the
survey, the catering project was already implemented. Nevertheless,
97 percent of respondents from Village 1 said they would participate
in such a project. Sewing bags Village 7 only manifested the
lowest level of potential participants 38 percent.
1 1 0 0 4 12 41 42 86 2 0 1 0 1 6 32 60 45
3 0 0 0 0 0 38 62 50 4 0 0 0 3 9 44 43 49
7 2 0 1 0 11 33 53 38
Evaluation: 0=lot worse, 1=worse, 2=little worse, 3=no impact, 4=little better, 5=better, 6=lot better.
a
percent willing to join group type.
Table 72. Frequency distribution of evaluation of and willingness to participate in proposed activities.
Evaluation Activity 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Part
a
Mangrove seed 0 0 0 1 4 26 69 75 Catfish culture 1 1 0 1 5 35 58 53
Sewing bags 2 0 1 0 13 41 42 38 Catering 0 0 0 3 46 23 29 97
Evaluation: 0=lot worse, 1=worse, 2=little worse, 3=no impact, 4=little better, 5=better, 6=lot better. Village 7 only. Village 1 only.
a
Percent willing to participate.
12.4 Predictors of variability in project activities knowledge and participation
Kategori