LAND USE PLANNING: AN APPROACH TO POVERTY REDUCTION AND STABILISATION OF SHIFTING CULTIVATION IN THE LAO UPLANDS TO IMPROVE UPLAND LIVELIHOODS

Transcription

1 Shifting Cultivation and Poverty Eradication in the Uplands of the Lao PDR 161 LAND USE PLANNING: AN APPROACH TO POVERTY REDUCTION AND STABILISATION OF SHIFTING CULTIVATION IN THE LAO UPLANDS TO IMPROVE UPLAND LIVELIHOODS Jens Kallabinski and Doris Lundgreen Abstract In 1995 the national Land Use Planning and Land Allocation (LUP/LA) programme was started in order to revise land use in villages in Luangnamtha Province. The GTZ. Integrated Rural Development Programme in Mountainous Areas (RDMA) has been working to improve this process, to secure and upgrade the upland livelihoods of villagers in the mountainous areas of Sing District. The predominant hilltribe in the district are the Akha people, who used to practice slash-and-burn cultivation in the uplands until it became restricted. It was found that in most villages people did not understand the reasons for the LUP/LA process and that in some cases the land that was allocated to them was not sufficient. Therefore GTZ looked to improve the process by supporting and training governmental staff. More participatory elements were brought into the process, which has been renamed Participatory Land Use Planning (PLUP). This new approach was evaluated in August 2003, and a variety of recommendations have been made on how to further improve the process in the future. Introduction The economy of the Lao PDR is facing a lot of challenges. While 80% of the population derive their livelihood from agriculture, including the usage of forest resources, Laos is confronted with a dramatic degradation and destruction of forests, leaving only 41% of originally forested areas still intact in 2003 (Xayvongsa 2003). In the northern provinces, particularly in mountainous areas, on average just 60% of people are rice sufficient, with ethnic minorities the worst affected. These people still use non-timber forest products (NTFPs) extensively, and are also highly reliant on fishing and hunting to compensate for their rice shortage. The traditional shifting cultivation generally practised to farm this mountainous topography was sustainable as long as large forest areas were available in relationship to the density of the population. Some Hmong groups have been identified as an exception to this though, because of their destruction of forested mountainous areas (ADB ). However, these traditional slash-and-burn methods have come under pressure due to population increase, transformation of forest areas into other productive land (e.g. rubber plantations), and logging activities (Rock 2003a). In order to face these challenges the Lao Government set up a comprehensive programme. Started in 1996, the programme consisted of various essential laws, policy statements, strategies, decrees, concepts and ac-

2 162 NAFRI Workshop Proceedings tion plans to create a framework for Land Use Planning (LUP) as an approach to improving the social and economic aspects of life in the Lao uplands. To find out about the effectiveness of LUP and its implications for the daily lives of villagers, GTZ performed an impact assessment which included an evaluation of the LUP process itself. The following chapters briefly outline the main aims of LUP and explain the methodology applied for the impact assessment. The results of the evaluation are presented, followed by the LUP methodology. Recommendations for an improvement of the LUP process are then listed and are followed by general conclusions. The aim of LUP Land Use Planning and Land Allocation (LUP/LA) were started in 1996 in order to promote decentralised and community based management of natural resources. The aim was to achieve the following national development goals: Social goals: poverty reduction, food security, village consolidation. Economic goals: stabilisation of shifting cultivation, increasing agricultural productivity combined with sustainability to secure long-term income, opium eradication, and community-based natural resource management to improve and protect forest areas and their biodiversity by transferring the responsibility to village level. The national LUP/LA programme has since covered 95% of villages in Bokeo and 40% of villages in Sing and Nalae and is to be finished by LUP impact assessment Aim In order to fully understand the impact of LUP/LA at village level, GTZ conducted an assessment of LUP that focused on the following points: LUP process Did the villagers understand the purpose of LUP? Is there a noticeable difference between the shorter methodology which was previously applied, and the improved methodological approaches enacted by GTZ? Socio-economic changes How does LUP contribute to poverty reduction? What are the implications and impacts on daily livelihoods? What changes are the villagers confronted with after LUP? What effects does the LUP have on environmental issues? The impact assessment was carried out between November 2003 and January 2004 by Udo Pawlowski, a student from Germany working in Sing District, Doris Lundgreen, a GTZ consultant from Germany in Sing and Nalae Districts and Jan Seven, DED staff, in Bokeo Province. Additionally, several villages were assessed by Florian Rock, a consultant on

3 Shifting Cultivation and Poverty Eradication in the Uplands of the Lao PDR 163 Natural Resource Management (NRM) and Rural Development, within an evaluation assessment of LUP. These results have also been analysed and used (for more details see Rock 2000b). A further two villages in Sing District were assessed in September 2003 by Benjamin Mohr, a student from Germany. These villages experienced a revised GTZ LUP/ LA approach in May The assessment was supported by DAFO project staff: Mr. Bounthan, Mr. Sommy and Mr. Bounthien for Sing District and Mr. Kuab for Nalae District. The impact assessments were carried out in seven villages of Sing District and four villages in Nalae. Two villages in Bokeo Province were covered by the assessment of Florian Rock. Methodology The impact assessment is based on two questionnaires: a structured questionnaire developed by the Lao-Swedish Forestry Project (LSFP) in 1999 and a semi-structured questionnaire by Florian Rock in The actual questionnaire used for the assessment was a mixture of semi-structured and structured interviews designed for interviewers with little training in interviewing. It Table 1: Villages included in impact assessment Village LUP/LA Carried out Protection and Conservation Forest Production and Use Forest Agricultural Land Use Area (including paddy) Sing District B.Seanane 2003 B.Nanoy ha (55%) 200 ha (26%) 149 ha (19%) B.Lo Meu ha (39%) 1367 ha (40%) 690 ha (20%) B.Yan Luang ha (52%) 37 ha (5%) 286 ha (42%) B.Sopeemay ha (63%) 31 ha (10%) 97 ha (28%)* B.Tinthat 180 ha (23%) 123 ha (16%) 381 ha (48%) B.Namlek 71 ha (22%) 51 ha (16%) 195 ha (61%) B.Laokhao 156 ha (39%) 35 ha (9%) 206 ha (52%) Houayna Kang 478 ha (52%) 113 ha (12%) 324 ha (35%)* Nalae District B. Lao ha (79%) 156 ha (11%) 148 ha (10%) B. Hadloi ha (13%) 60.5 ha (6.5%) 471 ha (47%) B. Hadchome 214 ha (43%) 12 ha (2%) 266 ha (54%) B. Puchalae ha (62%) 345 ha (26%) 129 ha (10%) Bokeo Province B.Namai ha (72%) 21.5 ha (3%) 187 ha (25%) B.Thongkang 1996 * without paddy

4 164 NAFRI Workshop Proceedings was translated into Lao language to minimise misunderstandings due to language differences and to facilitate the process of questioning the villagers. However, the importance of training the interviewers should be emphasised. When staff do not fully comprehend the purpose of a questionnaire, the results of interviews might not reflect the whole truth. While conducting the interviews the following constraints were met: Valuable information was lost during the translation process. Time available for interviews was restricted, meaning that it was impossible to do any actual field study (e.g. checking plots or crops). The presence of a DAFO official might have influenced the validity of the answers (e.g. through a fear of voicing criticism). Some difficulties were encountered when trying to locate legal documents (either within the village or at the DAFO). Results of the LUP impact assessment Even though the villages which were surveyed differed greatly in their economic status and history (e.g. date of settlement), the results of the assessment showed some similarities which can be summarised as follows. Positive aspects: All villages seemed to highly approve of the clear village boundaries, which reduce quarrels with adjacent villages. Most villages mentioned a considerable improvement in forest regeneration. Some villages claimed that their living condition has generally improved. Negative aspects: Land zoning within the village boundary was drawn arbitrarily, neglecting actual topography, soil conditions, etc. A high percentage of land within the village boundary was designated for conservation and protection purposes, leaving only small areas for agriculture and production forest. Very often this does not amount to enough land to cover the village s daily needs. Sometimes pressure has also increased on NTFPs, leading to a noticeable decrease in certain NTFPs (e.g. green bamboo). LUP induces a higher pressure on arable land by excluding plots which were used as fallow land for shifting cultivation. Increasing pressure on agriculture leads to less yield and thus to more poverty. Some families are trying to improve their livelihoods by opening up land which has not been allocated and often lies within protected and conservation forest areas. LUP/LA methodology The initial results of LUP/LA seemed not to be meeting the goals set by the government. In recognition of the importance that villagers knowledge be integrated into the

5 Shifting Cultivation and Poverty Eradication in the Uplands of the Lao PDR 165 LUP process in order to achieve sustainable land use, in 2002 GTZ started to support a revised LUP/LA approach in Sing District. To improve livelihoods in the longer term, GTZ worked on strengthening villagers participation in land use planning. To do this it was important to spend more time in the villages gathering data, making a needs assessment, and understanding the problems of the villagers (including both sexes). In 2003, GTZ technical advisor Mr. Bounyong Thongmalayvong trained three LUP/LA teams to conduct LUP in this more participatory fashion. Two villages in Sing District where the revised LUP has since taken place have been assessed to try and provide a comparison with the old LUP process. However, it is difficult to express any conclusions yet since the time span since the LUP is too short for any noticeable impact on livelihoods to have occurred. Recommendations for the improvement of LUP The results of LUP/LA impact monitoring showed that some adaptations and improvements are still needed if the LUP/LA approach is to achieve the aim of sustainability and improved livelihoods in the uplands. Table 2: Overview of LUP/LA procedures Main Activities Stages Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Eight-stage procedure Preparation for implementation of LUP and LA activities (training of staff, preparation of materials, villager consultations) Village boundary survey, land use zoning, forest surveys and land use mapping Data collection and analysis concerning land tenure, socio-economic conditions and needs Village land use planning and land allocation meeting Agricultural field measurements Modified eight-stage procedure 1 LUP and LA preparation Introduction to LUP, gender exercise, PARM 2 Village boundary delineation and agreement Land Use and forest survey, village profile Village zoning. Forest and agricultural land allocation decisions. Stage 6 Stage 7 Stage 8 Preparation of forest and agricultural agreements and transferring rights to villagers Land use management extension. Monitoring and evaluation Signing of contracts and land tenure Promotion, extension, support Monitoring and evaluation 1 Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Procedures and Method (GTZ 2003) 2 PARM: Participatory Analytic Resource Map

6 166 NAFRI Workshop Proceedings The following points are suggested guidelines for methodological adaptations to the LUP/LA process: Law, policies, regulations To facilitate comprehension of the legal policy, it would be advisable to prepare a summary of the relevant law documents, including a brief explanatory handout in Lao. Village regulations should be drafted by the villagers themselves (and also include their traditional rules). Data collection and storage Improve cooperation between community development workers and other teams in order to avoid double data collection. Focus only on land and natural resource issues. Analyse the collected data more clearly for use in the LUP process. Boundary Agreement and Land Use In order to define boundaries, aerial photography can be used to specify zones and land use. Boundary agreements should be standardised and need to be signed by neighbouring villages to achieve full consent. Villages which depend upon shifting cultivation need agricultural use areas that allow a sustainable rotational cultivation system (including fallow periods). Extra time should be spent identifying additional potential paddy land, which could be set aside as reserve land for future land allocation. In case future resettlement of villages is required, enlarged topographic maps can be used to identify potential areas for new settlements (including new paddy fields, water supply, topography etc.). Land Allocation Ideally all land within the village boundary should be allocated for permanent crops only. It is advisable that criteria for new land be developed together with villagers. This might help to minimise social conflicts among villagers and improve the livelihoods of the poorest villagers. Migrating families should be integrated into the process. LUP needs to be reviewed in the cases of relocated householders who migrated to the new village after LUP had taken place. Extension In order to offer villagers alternatives to their traditional land use (shifting cultivation and opium) it is important to give them technical advice. Therefore land capability and development potential need to be analysed in parallel with the LUP process.

7 Shifting Cultivation and Poverty Eradication in the Uplands of the Lao PDR 167 To prevent a new form of land-misuse/exploitation, it is essential that neutral advice be provided to villagers. Consultancy and project staff attendance are necessary on a long-term basis in order to teach villagers new agricultural methods. Financial support is needed to help poor villages start new crops. Monitoring, evaluation and future prospects The LUP/LA process should be regularly followed up through assessment visits, impact monitoring and evaluation of the understanding of LUP. In this way, new problems and conflicts that arise can be identified at an early stage and managed more quickly. It is recommended that visits initially start on a monthly basis and gradually decrease over time. A successful LUP/LA process is the starting point for the development of an improved community-based mechanism for NRM such as NTFP, firewood and timber production. Simple management plans need to be adopted for the future usage of forests, including the protection of land, water supply etc. (for more detailed information see Rock 2003b). The suggested improvements could be implemented on a step-by-step basis that also makes use of existing cooperation with national or NGO partners. This would ensure a bottom-up approach, which helps villagers to understand the LUP process. Participation will lead to higher satisfaction with and improved acceptance of LUP. Most important however, is that the daily needs and requirements of villagers are satisfied, thus making LUP more beneficial for villagers. Conclusion LUP is one step towards poverty reduction and stabilisation of shifting cultivation in the uplands of the Lao PDR. The overall opinions gathered in the survey indicated the benefits of clearly defined boundaries, which minimise conflicts among villages. However, the impact assessment also showed some weak points, which need to be improved in order to achieve a successful and sustainable LUP for the villagers. GTZ is trying to improve the process of LUP by providing training for CD staff and by working closely together with the DAFO. Joint financing between GTZ and DAFO could lead to a successful LUP/LA in the future that will improve the livelihoods of villagers. Authors Dr. Jens Kallabinski and Ms. Doris Lundgreen work with the Lao-German Rural Development Programme in Luangnamtha, PO Box 100 Muang Sing, Luangnamtha Province, Lao PDR. rdnamtha@laotel.com

8 168 NAFRI Workshop Proceedings Bibliography ADB.. Participatory Poverty Assessment Lao People s Democratic Republic. Manila. ADB GTZ Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Procedures and Methods. GTZ. Rock, F. 2003a. Technical Appraisal Report on the Spatial Planning and NRM Component within the Integrated Rural Development Programme in Mountainous Areas. Vientiane. Rock, F. 2003b. Rural Development in Mountainous Areas of Northern Laos: Improvement and Adaptation of the Land Use Planning/Land Allocation Process in the RDEM Programme of Luang Namtha and Bokeo. Report on a Consultancy Mission (10/11/ /12/2003). Vientiane. CPC/GTZ. Xayvongsa, L Organisation on Human Resources in the Forestry Sector. Vientiane.