Report on the achievements of the Forest Management and Community Support Project (FORCOM) Lao P.D.R.

Transcription

1 Report on the achievements of the Forest Management and Community Support Project (FORCOM) in Lao P.D.R. February 2009 Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry Lao P.D.R. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

2

3

4

5 Table of Contents Part I Outline of Forest Management and Community Support Project and Its Results from Five-year Activities Chapter 1 Outline of Forest Management and Community Support Project Background Target provinces Implementation structure Project purpose and strategies Project purpose Project strategies Principles in project implementation Basic principles Definitions of the two types of project activities Project outputs and activities Steps for enhancing extension activities Chapter 2 Summary of the Implementation Results Internal implementation structure Target areas and participants Production activities Project support for productive activities in target villages Support for the target provinces and districts Equipment provided to the target provinces and districts Support for the fuel and travel allowances Support for the fuel of motorbikes Support for travel allowances for field activities in Initial and Pilot Sites Part II Achievements of Forest Management and Community Support Project Chapter 1 Outline of the Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) Unique features of CSPT Approach to enhancing the ownership and initiative of villagers Revolving system Farmer-to-farmer extension Activities and techniques suited to villagers abilities Standardisation of extension work CSPT and the government policies iii

6 Chapter 2 Contribution to Shifting Cultivation Stabilization by the Project Activities Background and purpose Strategy of FORCOM for shifting cultivation stabilization FORCOM s strategy Definition of shifting cultivation by FORCOM Change in shifting cultivation in Initial Sites and 1 st Pilot Sites Participating households with decreasing shifting cultivation areas in Initial Sites and 1 st Pilot Sites Change in shifting cultivation areas in first participating households in Initial Sites and 1 st Pilot Sites Upland rice cultivation areas by project participants Case studies: land use change in shifting cultivation areas Land use change in shifting cultivation in Pongdong village Outline of Pongdong village Land use in Pongdong village and its change Land use change in shifting cultivation in Samton village Outline of Samton village Land use in Samton village and its change Intension of villagers of conducting shifting cultivation Contribution of project activities for shifting cultivation stabilization Conclusions and recommendations Land use changes in shifting cultivation in the northern Laos Contribution to shifting cultivation stabilization by the project activities Recommendations Chapter 3 Contribution to Livelihood Improvement and Poverty Reduction by the Project Activities Background Relationship between CSP and improvement of livelihood Factors needed for livelihood improvement and the contribution of CSP to livelihood improvement Contribution to income source diversification by CSP Expansion of livelihood improvement by extension of CSP through revolving system Contribution to the improvement of living environment by CSP Change of poor households in project area Definition on poverty in Lao P.D.R iv

7 3.2 Poor districts and poverty sites Change of poor household rate in 6 provinces Change of poor household rate in 9 districts Analysis of outcomes on poverty reduction by CSP in Initial Sites Analysis of the number of poor households Changes in the number of poor households Comparison of the number of poor households with neighboring villages st participants of CSP in Initial Sites Analysis of household income Method of analysis on the contribution of CSP activities to household income Contribution of CSP activities toward household income Project efficiency reviewed by using internal rate of return Added value of family labor Conclusions Chapter 4 Result of Capacity Building through the Project Activities Background and purpose of this chapter Stand point of capacity building in FORCOM structure Strategy of FORCOM for capacity building Definition of capacity building Approach of capacity building for the project What kind of capacities (or skills) do they need to gain? Extension staffs (C/Ps/ DAFO / PAFO) Participating farmers Approach of capacity building Implementation results of capacity building Evaluation of capacity building of extension staffs Attitude Communication/Facilitation/ Coordination Problem solving Planning Technical capacity Total capacity Evaluation of capacity building of participating villagers Attitude Management Problem solving Sharing skills and experiences Technical capacity Total capacity Conclusions v

8 Chapter 5 Efforts to Enhance the Sustainability of the Project Sustainability in the context of the project Strategies to enhance sustainability Basic strategy and its elements Three approaches to institutions Planning of specific measures to enhance sustainability Measures taken at three levels of institutions and the results Central government: internalization of CSPT into LEA through the Coordination Group (CG) Local authorities: Committee for Sustainability - development and implementation of Action Plan Communities and farmers: production activity planning and implementation by Implementation Committee and production groups Observations Central-government level Local-government level Community level Conclusions Part III Evaluation of Forest Management and Community Support Project Chapter 1 Outline of the Mid-term Evaluation Evaluation results based on the five evaluation criteria Relevance Effectiveness Efficiency Impact Sustainability Recommendations from the Lao-Japan Joint Mid-term Evaluation Team Others Chapter 2 Outline of the Terminal Evaluation Evaluation results based on the Five Evaluation Criteria Relevance Effectiveness Efficiency Impact Sustainability vi

9 2. Recommendations from the Lao-Japan Joint Terminal Evaluation Team Consolidation of CSP Expansion of CSP at the field level Land and forest use Lessons learned Conclusions of the evaluation Evaluation results Challenges ahead Chapter 3 Summary of the Seminar on the Achievements of FORCOM Project Chapter 4 Overall Conclusions Abbreviations and brief explanation Annexes Annex 1. Record of Discussions (R/D) Annex 2. Project Design Matrix Annex 3. Accomplishment of PDM indicators Annex 4. Joint announcement on enhanced cooperation in environment and climate change issues between Japan and the Lao People s Democratic Republic Annex 5. NAFES letter on Internalization of Community Support Programme (CSP) into the Lao Extension Approach (LEA), No. 3588/NAFES.08 Annex 6. Minutes of the Seminar on the Achievements of FORCOM Project Annex 7. Summary of Community Support Programme activities in project sites Annex 8. Summary of monitoring on the production activities in Initial and Pilot Sites Annex 9. List of main reports produced by FORCOM Annex 10. List of Japanese experts and Lao counterpart staff Annex 11. Chronological events vii

10 Preface This report is a summary of the five-year achievements of Forest Management and Community Support Project (FORCOM) funded by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). In Part I, the outline of FORCOM and its results from the five-year activities are introduced. Chapter 1 aims to familiarize readers with the project by introducing the project purpose, strategy and activities to achieve the purpose. Chapter 2 gives the readers the overview of the implementation results in the past five years, including target areas, participants and their activities, and the support FORCOM has provided to villages, districts and provinces. Part I was written by the project management team (Mr. Iwasa, Ms. Ishikawa, and Mr. Phousit). In Part II, FORCOM s project activities were analyzed by each of the five key issues that FORCOM has attempted to address in order to contribute to realizing Lao government policies. Those five key issues are i) establishment of Community Support Programme, ii) contribution to shifting cultivation stabilization; iii) contribution to livelihood improvement and poverty reduction; iv) capacity development of extension staff; and v) contribution to the sustainability of project outcomes in anticipation of the termination of FORCOM. Chapter 1 and 5 were written by the project management team; Chapter 2 by the participatory resource management team (Mr. Namura, Ms. Touy, Mr. Duangkham, Mr. Sonchanh, Ms. Bountom); Chapter 3 by the community development team (Mr. Miyoshi, Mr. Khamphai, Mr. Soulasack); and Chapter 4 by the training and extension team (Ms. Miyazaki, Mr. Chanthavong, Ms. Somchan, Mr. Thongphut). Part III summarises the evaluation of the overall project activities in the past five years. The chapters are based on the mid-term evaluation report and terminal evaluation report, which were prepared by a third-party evaluation team in July 2006 and July 2008 respectively. In addition to the evaluation results, the chapters present the challenges ahead and recommendations. Part III was written by the project management team. Some key information materials are annexed as a reference. Last but not least, we hope that this report would provide readers with a good understanding of FORCOM s achievements and be used by similar projects as a reference in the future. February 2009 Phousit Phoumavong Acting Project Manager Forest Management and Community Support Project Masayuki Iwasa Chief Advisor Forest Management and Community Support Project viii

11 Part I Outline of Forest Management and Community Support Project and Its Results from Five-year Activities - 1 -

12 - 2 -

13 Chapter 1 Outline of Forest Management and Community Support Project 1. Background The agriculture and forestry sector, which about 80% of the total population currently sustains their livelihood within, is the most important industry accounting for nearly a half of Gross Domestic Product in the Lao P.D.R. In particular, forestry plays a unique and important role in the national economy, the livelihoods of rural population and environment conservation. Shifting cultivation is the major agriculture production system in the northern Laos. The fallow lands of the shifting cultivation have rapidly increased, reaching more than 60% of the total land area in the north in Furthermore, in the northern Laos, the area in shifting cultivation is on the rise while it decreases at a national level. It is considered that this increase in shifting cultivation is the primary cause of deforestation and forest degradation in this region. To respond to this situation, the Forest Management and Community Support (FORCOM) Project was launched in February 2004 as a five-year project with the aim of improving forest management. The project promotes income generation activities to generate alternative livelihoods so that farmers in the northern Laos can reduce their reliance on shifting cultivation, hence contribute to shifting cultivation stabilization as well as reducing poverty. The extension workers in Provincial Agriculture and Forestry Office (PAFO) and District Agriculture and Forestry Office (DAFO) play a key role in implementing the project activities; therefore, the project attempts to develop an effective and easy-to-handle tool to facilitate their work. The Community Support Programme has been developed to meet the demands of extension work in Laos. Figure 1 Trend in land use and forest cover (Unit: Area in 1,000ha; Ratio in %) Whole country North* Land Use (in ratio) Area Ratio Area Ratio Current forest 11, , Potential Sub-total 8, , forest Bamboo 1, Unstocked 6, , Shifting cultivation Other wooded area 1, Agriculture land , Others 1, , Total 23, , Source: Land use and forest cover survey, MAF/SIDA, 1992 and 2002 Note: The northern region includes seven provinces of Ponsaly, Luang Namtha, Bokeo, Oudomxay, Luang Prabang, Houaphan and Sayaboury

14 Site preparation for shifting cultivation Shifting cultivation in northern Lao P.D.R

15 2. Target provinces The target area of FORCOM is the six northern provinces, namely, Luang Prabang, Sayaboury, Bokeo, Luang Namtha, Vientiane and Houaphan. The FORCOM project office (main office) and the project coordination office are located in Luang Prabang, and Vientiane, respectively. Figure 2 Target area of FORCOM China Myanmar Vietnam 1 Vientiane (VTE) 2 Phonsali 3 Luang Namtha (LNT) 4 Oudomsay 5 Bokeo (BKO) 6 Luang Prabang (LPB) 7 Houaphan (HPN) 8 Xiengkouang 9 Sayaboury (SYB) 10 Borikhamsay 11 Khamouane 12 Savannakhet 13 Salavan 14 Sekong 15 Champasak 16 Attapu 17 Xaysomboon Special Zone 18 Vientiane Municipality Thailand Target Provinces Mekong River Vientiane Luang Prabang Cambodia - 5 -

16 3. Implementation structure The project organization and implementing structure is as presented in the diagram below. The project is run under the jurisdiction of National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Service (NAFES), Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). The project activity will be implemented under the administrative/technical collaboration with related organizations such as PSO, DOP, NAFRI, DOA, DOF, DLF, NUOL and PAFTC. Figure 3 Implementation structure of FORCOM Note: Upon the reorganization of extension structure in October 2007, the work of PAFEC and DAFEO was transferred to PAFO and DAFO respectively. Abbreviations: JCC=Joint Coordinating Committee, PCC=Programme Coordinating Committee, PSO=Permanent Secretary Office(MAF), DOP=Department of Planning(MAF), NAFRI=National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute(MAF), DOA=Department of Agriculture(MAF), DOF=Department of Forestry(MAF), DLF=Department of Livestock and Fisheries(FAF), NUOL=National University of Laos(MAF), PAFTC=Paxsuang Agriculture and Forestry Technical College(MAF), AFTC=Agriculture and Forestry Training Center (MAF), PAFES=Provincial Agriculture & Forestry Extension Service, DAFO=District Agriculture & Forestry Office LPB=Luang Prabang, BKO=Bokeo, LNT=Luang Namtha, SYB=Sayaboury, HPN=Houaphan, VTE=Vientiane - 6 -

17 4. Project purpose and strategies 4.1. Project purpose The project purpose is that activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers Project strategies The project will take the following strategies in order to achieve the above purpose. Strategy 1: Strengthening of participatory extension and agents of extension such as DAFO staff and contact farmers Approach 1) Participatory extension service Approach 2) Village extension by contact farmers and villagers group Strategy 2: Support for villager s initiatives leading to sustainable use of land and forest Activity Type 1) Management and use of common property resources Activity Type 2) Alternative production and income generation Strategy 3: Expansion of activities by small-scale input for villagers (CSP) Box 1. Community Support Programme (CSP) CSP supports forest management and livelihood improvement activities (agriculture, forestry and fisheries etc.) through the provision of necessary materials, techniques and organizational capacity building. For more details, refer to the Chapter 1 of Part II. 5. Principles in project implementation 5.1. Basic principles Based on the project strategies mentioned in 4.2, FORCOM puts a special emphasis on activities leading to sustainable land and forest use in implementing the project activities. FORCOM sets five basic principles as follows: 1) to think together with villagers FORCOM promotes the initiative of villagers. Project staff serves as a facilitator for villagers in identifying what is needed for them to carry out activities leading to sustainable land and forest use, rather than telling them what to do. On the other hand, FORCOM experts help extension staff (counterpart staff) learn what role extension staff should play in guiding the villagers. 2) to support environmentally sound technologies In principle, FORCOM supports activities and technologies that are environmentally sound. FORCOM promotes planting right crops for right land and the use of local resources

18 3) to support techniques matching to the ability of villagers FORCOM supports activities that villagers are able to mange by themselves: activities that uses simple and easy-to-handle techniques; activities that do not require high initial costs (minimum input); diversified activities by combining activities with short-term and long-term returns. 4) to support production activities leading to reduced pressure on forest resources FORCOM s support is not limited to activities that have direct link to forest conservation and management. It supports a wide range of activities so long as they contribute to income generation for villagers, thereby reducing pressure on forest resources in the long run. activities directly linked to reduced pressure on forest resources: afforestation, industrial tree plantation etc. activities indirectly leading to reduced pressure: livestock husbandry (pig, goat), weaving etc. 5) to promote networking among relevant organizations FORCOM promotes networking among relevant organizations by sharing ideas, information, and techniques need for effective implementation of project activities. The interactions should be improved through the project activities among extension organizations (DAFO, PAFO and NAFES), and between extension organizations and other organizations (other MAF departments, private sector etc.) Definitions of the two types of project activities To ensure the activities leading to sustainable land and forest use, FORCOM supports two types of activities: one is the community-based activities that produce results directly leading to better forest management (Type 1) such as planting trees and forest management and so forth. The other type is the individual- or group-based activities that would increase productivity and generate individual income, thereby reducing the dependency on shifting cultivation (Type 2) such as agriculture, agroforestry, livestock husbandry and so forth. Examples of activities leading to sustainable land and forest use Type 1 Type 2 Management of NTFP, community forest establishment, watershed forest establishment, etc. Agriculture, agroforestry, livestock husbandry, aquaculture, handicrafts, fruit trees, NTFP production, etc

19 6. Project outputs and activities Output 1: Activities based on appropriate land and forest use are demonstrated in the Initial Sites. Activities: 1.1 Identify the Initial Sites. 1.2 Formulate Initial Site Implementation Plans together with the villagers, which include activities that directly lead to sustainable land and forest use. 1.3 Support implementation of activities based on the Initial Site Implementation Plans, and provide training to farmers. 1.4 Demonstrate activities at the Initial Sites. 1.5 Monitor and evaluate the Initial Site activities. Output 2: Extension staff (DAFO/PAFES) gain extension skills and techniques through training Activities: 2.1 Study and identify training needs and current level of extension skills and techniques of DAFO and PAFES staff. 2.2 Formulate training plans. 2.3 Prepare training texts, materials, and conducive training environment. 2.4 Conduct training courses based on training plans (theory, OJT, study tours). 2.5 Monitor and evaluate activities conducted by the trainees

20 Output 3: Under the framework of Community Support Programme (CSP), activities based on appropriate land and forest use are implemented at the Pilot Sites by villagers and extension staff. Activities: 3.1 Formulate Community Support Programme (CSP) based on the findings from Output Select proposals submitted for CSP. 3.3 Support villagers based on the proposals approved. 3.4 Support PAFES and DAFO to conduct training for farmers participating in CSP activities 3.5 Monitor and evaluate activities implemented under CSP. 3.6 Disseminate information and publicize CSP. Output 4: Recommendations are made on sustainable land and forest use practices and on extension systems and methods. Activities: 4.1 Assess the current conditions, and identify the scope of the recommendations to be made by the Project. 4.2 Coordinate and collaborate with other donors, aiming at the improvement of l and forest use, and extension systems/methods. 4.3 Develop guidelines and/or operation manuals that can be used by villagers and DAFO/PAFES. 4.4 Prepare recommendation reports to MAF at the time of mid-term and final evaluation. 4.5 Organize a workshop to present the Recommendation Report. 7. Steps for enhancing extension activities A series of training programme in this project is expected to cover a wide range of issues and levels, in technical and methodological terms, as a means to building up the capacities of extension staff and farmers to promote participatory extension at the grass-roots level. Extension staff is trained by the project through the activities for establishing the Initial Sites. These trained staff will in turn train their colleagues, facilitate villagers, and then replicate the activities in the Pilot Sites with the support from the project. Then

21 farmer-to-farmer extension is to expand with the use of small-scale input through CSP. As a final extension stage, farmer-to-farmer extension network is expected to be enhanced. Figure 4 Project activity flow chart Training by Project - Extension - Techniques - Management etc. PAFES staff DAFO staff Key farmers Intensive Training for key persons Initial Site Farmers Pilot Site Farmers Farmers Neighboring Farmers PAFES DAFO PAFES DAFO PAFES DAFO Initial Site 4 villages in Luang Prabang and Sayaboury province Pilot Site supported by Community Support Programme for 6 Provinces RECOMMENDATIONS Extension Spot self motivated or spontaneous expansion of project results with little or no support from the project Legend Sustainable Land and Forest Use & Extension Systems/Methods Extensionist Flow Information Exchange Experts Involvement Level Step for Sustainability Initial Site Pilot Site Extension Spot

22 Figure 5 Initial Sites Pilot Sites Definition of types of project sites (Initial Sites and Pilot Sites) Locations 4 villages in LPB province and Sayaboury province. Purpose On-the-Job training on extension for counterparts and trainees (i.e., DAFO/ PAFES staff from the 6 northern provinces). Implementation and demonstration of activities leading to appropriate land and forest use. Places from which replication/application of activities will be initiated. Locations Approx. 30 villages in the 6 northern provinces. (Includes the 4 villages among the 8 villages surveyed under the Basic Study, which were not selected as Initial Site villages). Purpose Practical training on extension by DAFO/ PAFES staff from the 6 northern provinces. Places from which replication/application of activities will be initiated. Involvement of experts and C/Ps Direct and intensive involvement is expected. Involvement of experts and C/Ps Direct involvement will be lower than in Initial Sites

23 Chapter 2 Summary of the Implementation Results 1. Internal implementation structure The internal implementing structure of FORCOM is shown in the Figure 6. FORCOM set up such a structure to clarify the roles for each team; because FORCOM covers large areas of the six northern provinces. Specifically, FORCOM set up four teams according to technical fields and demarcated six provinces to each team. Each expert takes a lead in the area of his/her expertise and collaborates with other teams. At the early stage of the project, the project management team was in charge of both overall project management and activities in Luang Namtha province and Nan district of Luang Prabang province. In the latter half of the project term, however, the project management team has focused specifically on the project management. The number of Japanese experts and counterpart staff involved in FORCOM is shown in the Figure 7. Figure 6 Internal implementation structure Project Management Team Project Manager Chief Advisor Coordinator/Extension promotion Community Development Team 2 counterpart staff Exert of C/D BKO province Pha Oudom district SYB province Sayaboury district Training/Extension Team (T/E) 3 counterpart staff Expert of T/E LPB province Pakseng district Nan district Participatory Resource Management Team (PRM) 4 counterpart staff Expert of PRM LPB province Viengkham district LNT province Long district VTE province Feuang district HPN province Viengthong district Houamuang district Note: LPB=Luang Prabang, BKO=Bokeo, LNT=Luang Namtha, SYB=Sayaboury, HPN=Houaphan, VTE=Vientiane Figure 7 Long-term and short-term experts, counterpart and national staff FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 FY 2008 Long-term experts Short-term experts Counterpart staff National staff Total Source: Implementation Results and Annual Work Plans submitted to the Joint Coordinating Committee Note 1: The number of counterpart staff includes Project Director, Deputy Project Director and Project Coordinator of NAFES. Note 2: Years are based on the Japanese fiscal year (from April to March of the following year)

24 2. Target areas and participants The target areas of FORCOM are the six provinces in the north, where deforestation and degradation have been increasing. Although Vientiane province belongs to the central region, the province was included in the target areas because it was the target area of the Forest Conservation and Afforestation Project (FORCAP), which is the preceding project of FORCOM. So far, FORCOM has operated in 34 villages in nine districts of the six provinces. Of the nine districts, eight districts are categorized in the poor or poorest districts. Figure 8 Target districts of FORCOM

25 Figure 9 and 10 show the number of target villages and participating households. The number of total households reached 1,394 as of October 2008; of which the first participating households account for 1,279 while the households who later received support through the revolving system account for 168. The increase in the number of the participants through the revolving system is seen in the activities such as pig and goat raising, which revolves in a shorter term (within 1 to 2 years) in Initial Sites (where production activities started in May 2005) and 1st Pilot Sites (production activities started in November 2006). Figure 9 The number of target villages and participating households Province District Village Total households (A) Total participating households(b) Ratio C=(B)/(A) Bokeo Luang Namtha Houaphan Luang Prabang Sayaboury Vientiane Total ,255 1, Note: Total participating households include both the initial participating households and the participating households who later received support from the revolving system Figure 10 The number of participating households by project sites Target villages Initial/Pilot Sites Initial participating households (A) Participating households by revolving system(b) Households dropping out of activities (C) Total (D)= (A)+(B)-(C) Ratio of increase %=D/A Initial Sites st Pilot Sites nd Pilot Sites rd Pilot Sites th Pilot Sites Total 34 1, ,394 9 Note 1: The initial participating households(a) are based on the production plan submitted by each province, as of May 2005 in Initial Sites, January 2006 in 1st Pilot Sites, November 2006 in 2 nd Pilot Sites, July 2007 in 3rd Pilot Sites, and June 2008 in 4 th Pilot Sites respectively. Note 2: The number of following participating households who received support from the revolving system is as of the end of October Production activities There are 2 types of activities as described in 5.2 of the Chapter 1; type 1 is community-based activities that produce results directly leading to forest management such as planting trees and forest management; type 2 is individual- or group-based activities that generate incomes and reduce the dependency on shifting cultivation, which is considered the main cause of decline in forest cover. The number of total activities reached 182. They include 7 kinds and 46 activities in the type 1, while 11 kinds and 136 activities in the type 2. Livestock husbandry is the most popular activity among the villagers because the production activity produces a shorter-term return with high profits expected. In the type 1, the activities related to forests, such as community forest, water source forest

26 and community nursery, account for around 57 %. The activities related to agriculture such as school orchard and cotton processing account for 39 %, with fish culture 2% and non-timber forest products 2%. In the type 2, livestock husbandry such as pigs, cows, goats and chickens account for 62 %. Agricultural activities such as paddy field expansion, orchards account for 17%, non-timber forest products and agroforestry (lac production and posa tree) 9% and weaving 5%. Figure 11 Types of productive activities and the participating villages Type 1 activities Number of participating villages (A) Ratio of participating villages =(A)/34 Ratio Type 2 Activities Number of participating villages (B) Ration of participating villages =(B)/34 1.School % 37 % 1.Pig % 19 % orchard 2.Community % 28 % 2.Cow % 19 % forest 3.Water-source % 26 % 3.Goat % 16 % forest 4.Cimmunity 1 3 % 2 % 4.Paddy % 12 % nursery field expansion 5.NTFPs 1 3 % 2 % 5.Fish % 9 % 6.Cotton 1 3 % 2 % 6.Chicken % 7 % processing 7.Fish 1 3 % 2 % 7.Fruit tree 7 21 % 5 % 8.Weaving 7 17 % 5 % 9.Agroforestry 7 18 % 4 % 10.Posa 3 9 % 2 % 11.Integ.rated 1 3 % 1 % agriculture % % Note: Integrated agriculture refers to a production activity which integrates fish culture, chicken raising and fruit tree planting at the same location. Ratio 4. Project support for productive activities in target villages FORCOM established rules on the amount of support per village. Villagers who receive support from the project assume the following responsibilities: i) each participant bears more than half of the total cost of his/her activity (as in-kind contribution), ii) in principal, the project supports approximately 100 dollars per household, and iii) the project supports up to 5,000 to 6,000 dollars per village. These rules were developed in consideration of annual income per household, labor force, ability for managing productive activity in order to avoid over-investment for villages. This amount, 100 dollars per household, is just enough for a participant to buy 2 female matured pigs. There are some villages where the project supported more than the standard amount. The total cost of activities per village amount to 16.4 thousand dollars, of which 6.8 thousand dollars was supported by the project and 9.8 thousand dollars by participating villagers. The amount born by villagers was estimated based on the villagers in-kind of contribution of labor forces, materials and so forth because most of the participating villagers do not have enough cash income to contribute in cash

27 Figure 12 Amount of support for project activities by project site (in mil. kip) Initial/Pilot Sites Total cost for activities Borne by villagers Borne by FORCOM Support by FORCOM per village Initial Sites (4 villages) st Pilot Sites (4 villages) 7 1, nd Pilot Sites (7 villages) 7 1, rd Pilot Sites (8 villages) 8 1, th Pilot Sites (8 villages) Total (34 villages) 34 5,588 3,290 2,298 Average investment per village Note 1: Amount of investment is the total of a necessary material cost (including animals) and labor cost to implement activities. Note 2: One million kip is equivalent to approximately US$ Support for the target provinces and districts 5.1. Equipment provided to the target provinces and districts FORCOM has provided the target provinces and the districts with motorcycles and equipment necessary for the project implementation. FORCOM has supported motorcycles, computer, printer, UPS, OHP and screen, digital camera and facsimile machine as one unit to the target six provinces and nine districts. Details are given in Figure 13. Total cost for purchase is around US$ 92,700. Cost per province (including districts in each province) is around US$ 15,500. Figure 13 Provision of motorcycles and equipment by target province/district Provinces Motorcycles and equipment Amount BKO province and Pha Oudom district Motorcycles(4), Computer set (2), OHP set (2), Digital cameras (2), facsimile US$ 12,900 LNT province and Long district HPN province and Viengthong district and Houamuang district LPB province and Nandistrict, Paxseng district and Viengkham district SYB province and Sayaboury district Vientiane province and Feuang district machine (2) Motorcycles(4), Computer set (2), OHP set (2), Digital cameras (2), facsimile machine (2) Motorcycles(6), Computer set (3), OHP set (2), Digital cameras (3), facsimile machine (3) Motorcycles(9), Computer set (4), OHP set (4), Digital cameras (4), facsimile machine (2) Motorcycles(4), Computer set (2), OHP set (2), Digital cameras (2), facsimile machine (2) Motorcycles(3), Computer set (2), OHP set (2), Digital cameras (2), facsimile machine (2) US$ 12,900 US$ 13,400 US$ 26,500 US$ 12,900 US$ 11,300 Reference NAFES Computer set (2) US$ 2,800 Total for 6 provinces and Motorcycles(30), Computer set (17), 9 districts OHP set (14), Digital cameras (15), US$ 92,700 facsimile machines (13) (Note 1) Numbers in brackets show the number of motorcycles and equipment supported by FORCOM

28 5.2. Support for the fuel and travel allowances Support for the fuel of motorbikes FORCOM has supported fuel for motorcycles provided by the project. FORCOM covered the actual cost of fuel from the project s launch to the end of April In May 2006, FORCOM announced that it would reduce the support after October This announcement intended that necessary budgets for fuel should be secured by province and district authorities. FORCOM shifted in May 2008 from actual cost to fixed-amount support, which was estimated based on a specific formula. The fixed amount is set to be less than the actual cost. Support per province ranges from 0.8 to 1.8 million kip Support for travel allowances for field activities in Initial and Pilot Sites FORCOM has also supported travel expenses to the counterpart staffs who are in charge of Initial Sites (2 provinces and 4 districts) because they are requested to visit the sites so often and are expected to arrange training in the fields for other counterpart staff from other provinces. This support continued from the project s launch until the end of March FORCOM stopped the support in April On the other hand, the counterpart staffs, who are in charge of Pilot Sites, do not receive travel allowances from the project in order to ensure sustainability and self-help from the beginning of the activities in Pilot Sites. References FORCOM Outline of Forest Management and Community Support Project (FORCOM). FORCOM Report on Implementation Result and Annual Work Plan, submitted to the 1 st -6 th Lao- Japan Joint Coordinating Committee

29 Part II Achievements of Forest Management and Community Support Project

30 - 20 -

31 Chapter 1 Outline of the Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) 1. Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) is a tool for rural development and outlines the process and actions for participatory planning, implementation and monitoring in agriculture and forestry extension work. As such, CSPT can be applied to rural development projects with various objectives such as poverty eradication, shifting cultivation stabilization and so forth. Box 2. Community Support Programme (CSP) and Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) Community Support Programme (CSP) was developed and tested by FORCOM from 2005 and 2008 as a tool for rural development as mentioned above. In December 2008, CSP was officially endorsed by NAFES as one of the effective extension tools in the Lao Extension Approach (LEA); thereafter it is called Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT). In some cases, it is also referred to as LEA+CSPT to specify that CSPT is one of the tools available in the LEA. 2. Unique features of CSPT 2.1. Approach to enhancing the ownership and initiative of villagers CSP is designed to enhance the ownership of villagers. In the planning stage, extension workers serve as a facilitator in assessing villagers real needs and help identify the scope of activities that villagers can manage by themselves. Through this participatory process, it is expected that villagers will gain knowledge, skills, and confidence in implementing project activities. Moreover, the project encourages cost sharing by villagers Revolving system The participants have a responsibility for returning the same or higher value of initial support to other farmers who wish to join the project. Thus, support from the project can revolve among the individuals or groups in the village. When a participant revolves the support, they transfer acquired production techniques as well. A well functioning revolving system enables minimum inputs to evolve into maximum benefits

32 Figure 14 Example of a revolving system in pig raising activity 1st participating farmer 1 year later 2nd participating farmer 1 year later 3rd participating farmer If there is no more room for revolving in the given village Village Fund Village Fund Move to other villages 2.3. Farmer-to-farmer extension Agriculture and forestry extension is not only the work of government personnel but also the work of villagers. The CSPT encourages villagers to build their ownership and implement activities with confidence in order to sustain the outcomes of their work. The CSPT facilitates the establishment of Village Development Committees and Production Groups for participatory planning and monitoring. Furthermore, key (model) farmers with sufficient experience and production skills play a key role in farmer-to-farmer extension Activities and techniques suited to villagers abilities Even if the project provided a large amount of input for rural development, it would not be of any use if villagers were not able to manage the resources in an effective way by themselves. In the selection of activities, the CSPT follows a set of principles as follows: not require high initial costs (minimum input) diversify the activities by combining activities with short-term and long-term returns use simple and easy-to-handle techniques avoid negative social and environmental impacts 2.5. Standardisation of extension work Figure 15 shows the process of participatory rural development and key points on extension work. Extension workers can carry out their work by using the standard forms in the CSPT guidelines and manual. The performance of extension staff will be improved as well

33 Figure 15 Flow chart for agriculture and forestry extension work based on CSPT Plan Activities Do See Villager s Initiative Minimum input Appropriate techniques Farmer to farmer Materials Revolving Materials Group meeting for monitoring Diversity Tech Tech Farmers Minimum negative impacts Techniques Farmers Extension Support (DAFO, PAFO, NAFES) Figure 16 Steps of implementing CSPT Step 1 Orientation of the CSPT to farmers by DAFO Planning Stage Step 2 Step 3 Setting up an implementation Committee at village level Formulation of implementation plans by villagers Step 4 Appraisal (feasibility, social environmental impact) and Approval of implementation plan by districts Implementation Stage Step 5 Step 6 Training for participating households by DAFO/PAFO Procurement of materials for activities by villagers/dafo Step 7 Revolving activities among villagers Monitoring Stage Step 8 Monitoring by the Implementation Committee and Production Groups Step 9 Monitoring and follow-up by extension workers

34 3. CSPT and the government policies CSPT is a tool applicable for various types of projects that target government goals such as: poverty alleviation food security cash crop production sustainable forest management References FORCOM Operational Guideline on Community Support Programme Tool (LEA+CSPT) FORCOM Operational Manual on Community Support Programme Tool (LEA+CSPT)

35 Chapter 2 Contribution to Shifting Cultivation Stabilization by the Project Activities <Abstract> In the northern part of Laos, the increase of shifting cultivation is the primary cause of the deforestation and forest degradation. FORCOM has promoted income generation activities in order to reduce pressure of shifting cultivation on forest land in the last 4 years. The results of a questionnaire survey and a GPS land use survey indicate that upland rice cultivation has reduced year by year, while cash crop production has been on the rise. Market incentives and poor productivity of upland rice have prompted changes in their land use pattern. Under such circumstances, participants of FORCOM project could reduce the upland rice cultivation areas much more than non-participants. Though there is room for improving project activities, FORCOM could contribute to shifting cultivation stabilization. Keywords: shifting cultivation, GPS, land use 1. Background and purpose According to the statistics of Lao government, the areas of shifting cultivation are on the rise in the northern part of Laos, while it decreases at the national level. It is considered that the increase of shifting cultivation is the primary cause of the deforestation and forest degradation in the north. On the other hand, the people engaged in small-scale agriculture in marginal mountainous areas of mainland Southeast Asia are now confronted with difficulties, since their conventional shifting cultivation is restricted by governments. Although government-initiated land forest allocation program has been promoted in Laos, intensification of agricultural land use for stabilizing shifting cultivation is not easily expanded. JICA s FORCOM project has promoted income generation activities in the northern provinces. Through the change of income generation patterns at the household level, it aims to reduce pressure of shifting cultivation on forest land. This paper aims to examine the current changes of shifting cultivation in the project area and evaluate the effectiveness of project activities for prompting the changes at the village level. 2. Strategy of FORCOM for shifting cultivation stabilization 2.1. FORCOM s strategy There are two types of activities supported by FORCOM. Type1 is community based natural resource management such as teak plantation and watershed forest management in their community forest. Type2 is the income generation activity at the household level in order to both diverse the way of income sources and reduce the dependency of shifting cultivation

36 Figure 17 Type1 and Type2 activities Type 1 Type 2 Characteristics of the activities Directly lead to sustainable land and forest use Activities conducted by village as a whole (or by groups) on management and use of common property resources Leading to sustainable land and forest use indirectly, or in medium to long-term Activities mainly targeted to improving individual households income and/or food security. Source: Operational Guidelines on Community Support Programme Examples of the activities Management and use of NTFPs Community forest management Watershed forest management Agroforestry Livestock Aquaculture Handicraft (Planting Posa, Natural dye) Fruit trees NTFP Production Plantation (Individual households) Regarding the type 2 activities, FORCOM has hypothesized that if incomes of participating households have been improved, shifting cultivation would be decreased and the rate of forest degradation would be lower. This paper examines this hypothesis carefully based on the several surveys carried out by FORCOM in the last four years Definition of shifting cultivation by FORCOM Definition of the Lao PDR (No.350/AF.2001, MAF) Hai is the area where traditional agriculture production takes place in a primitive way which originated from the destruction of forest with clearing, burning and slashing the vegetation in order to grow mainly rice and other crops. ( Definition of hai and upland area No.350/MAF.2001) Definition of hai in statistical data (draft) Hai is the area where traditional agriculture production takes place in a primitive way which originated from the destruction of forest with clearing, burning and slashing the vegetation Growing annual crops (mainly upland rice) except for cash crops in the allocated area. Definition of shifting cultivation by FORCOM Shifting cultivation area in FORCOM s context means the total area of both upland rice and other upland crops by the method of slashing and burning. However, separate data for upland rice in allocated and unallocated area are not available due to the constraints of the survey

37 3. Change in shifting cultivation in Initial Sites and 1st Pilot Sites 3.1. Participating households with decreasing shifting cultivation areas in Initial Sites and 1st Pilot Sites 1 According to the Project Design Matrix of FORCOM (Annex-2), there are two indicators to evaluate the achievement level of the project. One is more than 30% of the first participating households in all project sites have reduced shifting cultivation area within the project term and the other is more than 50% of the first participating households in all project sites have reduced shifting cultivation area after the project termination. Based on the annual household surveys conducted in , 54.5% of participating households have decreased their shifting cultivation areas by 2007 compared to the first year of project participation. In particular, in the 1st Pilot Sites, more than 70% of participants have reduced shifting cultivation areas. Therefore, these indicators are considered to have been achieved. Figure 18 Ratio of project participating households (HH) with decreasing shifting cultivation areas in Initial Sites and 1st Pilot Sites from the first year Village District Province participating households participating HH practicing shifting cultivation HH with decreasing shifting cultivation area Rate of HH with decreasing shifting cultivation areas IS Hat Houay Pakseng LPB 43HH 41HH 11HH 26.8% IS Samton Viengkham LPB 19HH 19HH 9HH 47.4% IS Pongdong Nan LPB 28HH 23HH 15HH 65.2% IS Namon Sayaboury SYB 44HH 33HH 16HH 48.5% Subtotal (Initial Sites) 134HH 116HH 51HH 44.0% 1PS Pangthong Pha Oudom BKO 28HH 27HH 19HH 70.4% 1PS Pakha Long LNT 24HH 20HH 14HH 70.0% 1PS Namsat Viengthong HPN 24HH 24HH 18HH 75.0% 1PS Phonthon Feuang VTE 48HH 2HH 1HH -* Subtotal (1st Pilot Sites) 124HH 73HH 52HH 71.2% Grand total 258HH 189HH 103HH 54.5% Source: Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM * In Phonthon, most of the participating households do not practicing shifting cultivation and thus percentage data are not applicable for this indicator Change in shifting cultivation areas in first participating households in Initial Sites and 1st Pilot Sites Regarding the shifting cultivation areas of first participating households in Initial Sites (IS) and four 1st Pilot Sites (PS), participating households have a tendency to reduce the shifting cultivation areas since the first year of the project participation, although shifting cultivation areas have not always kept decreasing year by year. 1 Although both indicators require the data of shifting cultivation in all the project sites, the data on 2nd and 3rd Pilot Sites are be available due to the constrains of budget and time for survey

38 Figure 19 Change of shifting cultivation areas in first participating households in IS and 1st PS Areas of shifting cultivation (ha) village Change % Hat Houay Samton Pongdong Namon Pangthong Pakha Namsat Phonthon * Total Source: Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM *In Phonthon, most of the participating households do not practicing shifting cultivation and thus percentage data are not applicable for this indicator. Figure 20 Change of shifting cultivation areas in the first participating households in Initial Sites Hat Houay Samton Pongdong Namon Figure 21 Change of shifting cultivation areas in the first participating households in 1st Pilot Sites ha Year Pangthong Pakha Namsat Phonthon

39 3.3. Upland rice cultivation areas by project participants 2 From 2004 to 2007, average upland rice cultivation areas of participating and non-participating households have decreased in all the four Initial Sites with an exception of those of non-participating households in Hat Houay. During the same period, average upland rice cultivation areas of participating households decreased at the almost same or faster pace than those of non-participating households in all the four Initial Sites. MAF data show that upland rice area in Laos decreased by 4.3 percent per year from 2004 to 2006 or 4.5 percent per year from 1995 to Reduction rates of upland rice areas of Initial Sites are significantly faster than that of the national average with a few exceptions like Hat Houay. According to the village head of Hat Houay, rapid growth of village population kept upland rice production at a certain level. In Samton, upland rice cultivation areas have been kept at a relatively high level due to a lack of paddy rice field. In Pongdong, average upland rice cultivation areas in both participating and non-participating households decreased steadily from 2004 to In Pongdong, rubber tree plantation area has expanded rapidly for the last two years and villagers planted upland rice between young rubber trees in Upland rice area in rubber plantation was excluded from the data of upland rice area because rubber plantation is not categorized as shifting cultivation. In Namon, reduction of upland rice area among participating households was achieved with the assistance of the FORCOM. In 1st and 2nd Pilot Sites, upland rice areas have been kept at a certain level with a few exceptions. Participating households in 1st Pilot Sites have just started receiving benefits from their project activities like livestock raising; therefore, upland rice reduction is expected to be observed in the coming years. In Pangthong, rapid expansion of hybrid corn production has transformed their paddy rice field into corn field. In order to secure rice as their stable crop, some households expanded their upland rice production while others purchase rice with the income from selling cash crops. 2 This section is cited from FORCOM th Household income and expenditure survey for FORCOM, pp

40 Figure 22 Hat Houay Upland Rice Cultivation Area in Initial Sites Samton Pongdong Namon

41 Figure 23 Upland rice cultivation areas in 1 st Pilot Sites Pangthong Pakha Namsat Phonthon

42 Figure 24 Upland rice cultivation areas in 2 nd Pilot Sites Figure 25 Upland rice harvested areas and production in Lao PDR Source: Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 4. Case studies: land use change in shifting cultivation areas In the previous section, general change of shifting cultivation areas has been introduced based on the results of annual household surveys. However, it is quite difficult to know accurate change of shifting cultivation only through interviews. The reasons are that i) villagers are reluctant to declare actual areas in fear of paying land tax and; ii) villagers do not know actual figure of the areas. In addition, spatial distribution of shifting cultivation cannot be identified by interviews

43 To overcome these constraints, FORCOM has carried out monitoring on shifting cultivation through GPS survey, interviews and participatory observation every year during the five-year project term (February February 2009) in Samton village, Viengkham district in Luang Prabang. For additional information, we carried out the same survey in Pongdong village and other villages in some years. FORCOM used handy GPS for land use surveys. Handy GPS is an effective tool to illustrate the spatial distribution of shifting cultivation areas with easy handling and low cost. In this section, two case studies are introduced about village land use in Pongdong village and Samton village, which are Initial Sites of FORCOM. Each village has some specific characteristics. Pongdong village has paddy fields but cash crop production including rubber plantation is expanding in surrounding areas, which has affected village land use. On the other hand, Samton village has no paddy fields and all the villagers practice shifting cultivation. Figure 26 Location map of Pongdong village and Samton village Samton village Pongdong village

44 4.1. Land use change in shifting cultivation in Pongdong village Outline of Pongdong village Pongdong village in Nan district is located 66 km away from Luang Prabang town. A total of 566 people, or 116 households, live in the village. They are all Lao Loum. FORCOM selected this village as an Initial Site in 2005 and supported type1 and type 2 activities as shown below: Figure 27 Type 1 Type 2 List of FORCOM activities in Pongdong village Activities Input from Remarks participants FORCOM Community forest all villagers 1800 seedlings Tree plantation (0.6ha) School orchard all villagers 110 seedlings 0.33 ha Pig raising 10 HH 20 heads Goat raising 6 HH 18 heads Orchard 10HH 1384 seedlings 2.5 ha Paddy field expansion 3 HH 0.85 ha Fish raising 2 HH 3350 fries Lac production 6 HH 273kg (seed lac) 4.3 ha Cattle raising 9 HH 9 heads Land use in Pongdong village and its change Village area of Pongdong covers 1,458 ha, which was decided by land forest allocation implemented by DAFO in collaboration with SIDA in As mentioned above, rubber plantation expanded in Nan district in the resent years and in particular, a rubber concession authorized in 2006 has affected the land use of Pongdong village. This concession area covers ha within the village boundary and villagers were restricted to practice shifting cultivation in this area. Specific features on land use in Pongdong are summarized as follows. Villagers produce cash crops near the residential area and upland rice is cultivated far from the residential area. In comparison with Samton village, shifting cultivation area per plot in Pongdong is smaller. Though the number of households in Pongdong is one and half times larger than that of Samton, total area of shifting cultivation is smaller. Further research is required to clarify the reason behind this. Leakage attributable to the rubber concession has occurred toward the outside of village boundary (see Figure 29). In the area outside the southern boundary, shifting cultivation area has increased from 8.96 ha (9 plots) to ha (34 plots). Although land dispute over this leakage area has not been observed so far, villagers have to reclaim the new forest area for shifting cultivation. Further research on this issue is required as well

45 Figure 28 Land use map in Pongdong village 2006 Residential area Village boundary 1,458 ha Figure 29 Land use map in Pongdong village

46 Figure 30 Leakage in the area outside of southern boundary of Pongdong village SC area 8.96 ha ha Plots 9 34 Change in shifting cultivation area between 2006 and 2008 including upland rice and other crops, which are calculated by Arc GIS software, are shown in Figure below. Figure 31 Changes in upland rice and cash crops in Samton village Total area of shifting cultivation (ha) Upland rice (ha) Other crops (ha) Total plot of shifting cultivation Upland rice Other crop Average shifting cultivation area per plot (ha) Upland rice (ha) Other crops (ha) Figure 32 Changes in shifting cultivation areas in Pongdong village Figure 33 Changes in shifting cultivation plots in Pongdong village

47 The results show that the total shifting cultivation area has increased by only 5.15 ha to ha in Although upland rice is reduced from ha in 2006 to ha, cash crops, mainly job s tears, have increased by ha. It shows that upland rice was replaced by cash crops in their land use. Based on the interviews from villagers and DAFO staff, increased price of job s tears prompted cash crop expansion in recent years (see Figure 34); it can be said that market opportunities have strong influence on village land use. Figure 34 Price of Job s tears and crop production areas in Pongdong village Year Price of Job s tears Crop area kip/kg ha (Year2006) ,000kip/kg ha (Year 2008) Source: interviews with DAFO staff and middleman 4.2. Land use change in shifting cultivation in Samton village Outline of Samton village Samton is located in Viengkham district of Luang Prabang province, 204 km away from Luang Prabang town. A total of 491 people, or 77 households, lives in this village. They are all Khamu ethnic group. Village is located in the mountainous area and no flat land is available. As there are no paddy fields, all villagers heavily depend on shifting cultivation. FORCOM selected this village as an Initial Site in 2005 and supported type1 and type 2 activities as shown below: Figure 35 List of FORCOM activities in Samton village Activities Input from Remarks participants FORCOM Watershed Forest all villagers 187 seedlings Tree plantation (0.1ha) Type 1 Water supply system all villagers 2 set of water tank and pipeline School Orchard all villagers 233 seedlings 1.1 ha Pig raising 8 HH 20 heads Goat raising 8 HH 24 heads Type 2 Posa plantation 5 HH 3.6 ha Poultry raising 4 HH 200 heads Cattle raising 7 HH 7heads Lac Production 10 HH 10.2 ha Land use in Samton village and its change Based on the GPS survey, a map of shifting cultivation areas in Samton village was drawn as shown in Figure 36 below

48 Figure 36 Land use map in Samton village Village boundary 1,796 ha Conservation forest ha Residential area Main road Examining the land use of shifting cultivation, some specific features are summarized as follows: There is a community forest near the residential area. It is observed that the village has always prohibited the practices of shifting cultivation in the community forest. Some villagers have to rent a land for shifting cultivation from the neighboring villages. Clusters of faming land and grazing land have shifted around within the village boundary. However, plots of shifting cultivation in the past hardly overlap with each other. It means that most villagers use more than four plots and sedentary agricultural land (hai khon thi) is quite limited. According to the interview with village leaders, land distribution in shifting cultivation area and grazing land are determined at a village meeting every year. A cluster of faming land is allocated to groups of households (called sanam group), mainly consisted of relatives. Each group opens their field through labor exchange. Change in shifting cultivation areas in including upland rice and other crops, which are calculated by Arc GIS software, are shown in Figures below

49 Figure 37 Change in upland rice areas and cash crops in Samton village Total area of shifting cultivation (ha) Upland rice (ha) Other crops (ha) Average shifting cultivation area per household (ha) Total plot of shifting cultivation Figure 38 Change in shifting cultivation area in Samton village Area (ha) Total Area Upland Rice Other Crops Year A total shifting cultivation area has decreased until 2007 but is on the rise in Expansion of cash crop production, mainly hybrid maize, pushes up the total shifting cultivation area, although upland rice decreased from ha in 2005 to 97.5 ha in Contract farming of hybrid maize has affected this land use change. In 2008, a Vietnamese company made a contract with more than 40 farmers to plant hybrid maize in the village. The company contracts with the farmers, typically giving them the seeds in return for the right to buy the crop at a certain price. The cost of the seeds are collected from the sales. Figure 39 Ratio of upland rice and other cash crops in Samton village Upland rice Maize Cassava Pigeon Pea Others Figure 40 Ratio of upland rice and other cash crops in Samton village

50 Looking at the change of fallow periods of shifting cultivation, average fallow period has shortened from 4.69 years in 2005 to 3.15 years in Shortening fallow periods could contribute to the reduction of total shifting cultivation areas; however, in reality, villagers suffer from the shortage of available shifting cultivation land. Intensive land use without enough fallow periods or any proper remedial measures has caused poor harvest of upland rice resulting from soil degradation and weed competition. Figure 41 Fallow periods in Samton village Figure 42 Average fallow periods in Samton village Average fallow periods Intention of the villagers of conducting shifting cultivation Along with the land use survey, structured interviews with all households were carried out by DAFO staff about the intention of practicing shifting cultivation. The results clearly illustrate that farmers intend to increase cash crops and livestock production instead of upland rice. Regarding the intention of producing upland rice, 69 households (69.7%) answered that the area of upland rice has decreased, 25 households (25.3%) answered no change, and only 5 households (5.1%) answered increased. Out of the 69 households with the decreased upland rice area, 45 households said they would intend to change their livelihood pattern by increasing cash crops such as maize, cassava, ginger and livestock. Poor harvest of upland rice drives their interest in cash crops in the village. Four (80%) of those households with an increased upland rice area describe that rice shortage and less harvest of rice is the main reason for increasing upland rice area. On the other hand, the intention of producing cash crops such as maize, cassava, ginger and livestock varies among farmers. 79 households (88.8%) replied that area of cash crops was increasing; 10 households (11.2%) replied no change ; and no household replied decreasing. Many households mentioned that cash crops could bring better incomes than upland rice Contribution of project activities for shifting cultivation stabilization In order to verify the effectiveness of the project activities in shifting cultivation stabilization, a comparative study between the participants of project activities and non-participants is introduced in this section. Figures below show the annual average rate of increase in shifting cultivation area of both

51 participants and non-participants in Comparing the data between 2005 and 2008, the rate of decrease in upland rice area of the participants is larger than that of non-participants. As a result, a total area of shifting cultivation of the participants remains the same level as that in 2005 despite the increase in cash crop production. Figure 43 Average change in shifting cultivation areas per household st Participating HH Non-participant Total SC area % % Upland rice % % Other crops % % Figure 44 Change in shifting cultivation areas of 1st participating households and non-participating households in Samton village st Participating HH Area per HH (ha) Total SC Area Upland Rice Other Crops Non Participating HH Area per HH (ha) Total SC Area Upland Rice Other Crops 5. Conclusions and recommendations 5.1. Land use changes in shifting cultivation in the northern Laos Shifting cultivation in Pongdong and Samton villages is in transition from upland rice into market-oriented cash crops. There are some reasons to prompt this change. Villagers have faced poor harvests of upland rice caused by soil degradation and weed competition in recent years. To cope with such a difficulty, several villagers have started to rent a land in the neighboring village and more than 10 villagers in Samton village have migrated to other province. Given such a difficulty in upland rice production, transition from upland rice to other agricultural activities has been prompted. The market

52 opportunities for cash crops such as job s tears and hybrid maize have driven the expansion of the plantation of these crops. In addition, some villagers started livestock raising and NTFP planting such as posa (paper mulberry) and stick lac to adapt to its natural and social environment. Under these circumstances, FORCOM project activities followed this trend; FORCOM currently promotes income generation activities in target villages and the number of livestock of the participating farmers is increasing steadily. Figure 45 Current change of shifting cultivation in Samton village Population pressure Limitation of available land Migration to other villages Samton village Limitation of upland rice Rent a land at adjacent village Livestock Posa Lac Cash crops External factors Road access Market opportunities Support DAFO Nayobai Bank Funding Company FORCOM 5.2. Contribution to shifting cultivation stabilization by the project activities The result of household survey in Initial Sites and 1st Pilot Sites showed that the participants have been able to reduce shifting cultivation area. Based on the case study of Samton village, the participants could achieve the decreased dependency on upland rice compared with non-participants and change their livelihood pattern. In other words, transition from upland rice into market-oriented agriculture is expanded in the target area and the project activities could enhance this momentum Recommendations Though market-oriented agriculture could bring more benefits for upland farmers, some problems are observed. In the case of rubber plantation in Pongdong village, land dispute has occurred over the concession area and farmers had to open up their shifting cultivation area

53 beyond their village boundary. Regarding forest management, excessive expansion of cash crops or rubber plantation could cause deforestation and forest degradation. In Samton village, poor harvests of crops due to soil degradation and weed competition are the key problem for their livelihood. To cope with an emerging situation and to resolve these problems, following points should be considered. Participatory land use planning and land forest allocation In order to control excessive cash crop expansion and prevent the encroachment to community forest, participatory land forest allocation and land use planning for community based forest management should be promoted. Diversification of agricultural activities Diversification of the livelihood options is essential to reduce the dependency on shifting cultivation and prevent excessive land use. Modification of shifting cultivation Mix cropping and effective use of fallow periods (productive fallow) can avoid the impacts of mono-cropping shifting cultivation. For example, mix cropping with legume species, demonstrated by PRONAE in Sayaboury province, improves soil fertility. Box 3 : Case activity of productive fallow: pigeon pea and Lac production Responding to an increasing demand for lac in the Chinese market, host tree plantations are increasing in Luang Prabang province. This can be seen as an intensification of agricultural land use in marginal mountainous areas of northern Laos. The merit of pigeon pea and lac production is as follows: -Indigenous and traditional knowledge and experience -Effective use of fallow land -Improve soil fertility by pigeon pea (legume family) 1st year: rice and pigeon pea 2nd year: pigeon pea and lac -Easy technique and low labor force -High market demand in the region 3rd Year: pigeon pea and lac <References> FORCOM th Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM

54 Chapter 3 Contribution to Livelihood Improvement and Poverty Reduction by the Project Activities <Abstract> This chapter examines how CSP has contributed to the improvement of livelihood of participants from 3 view points of income stability, income generation and improvement of the environment. FORCOM supports production activities of sustainable land and forest use in villages. It seems that CSP has contributed to income stability by supporting activities whose price is stable and by maintaining a flow of stable income through the diversification of productive activities throughout the year. Household income improvement is one of the most important objectives of CSP activities because they lead to poverty reduction, which the Lao government puts strong emphasis on as a national policy. Comparing poverty reduction trends of 4 Initial Sites with those of provinces and nearby villages, it seems that poverty reduction in Initial Sites proceeded at a faster pace than those of provinces and nearby villages during the project period. Review on contribution of CSP activities to a high growth rate of average total household income in 4 Initial Sites confirmed that the revenue from CSP activities have pushed up household incomes to a certain extent. In order to measure the performance of the project itself, internal rate of returns (IRR) is calculated by CSP activities in each Initial Site. Calculated IRRs reveal significantly good performance of CSP activities with exceptions like posa and some livestock raising activities, which experienced breakout of transmitted diseases. In addition, FORCOM supports the activities to improve living environment through setting up water supply system etc. It was concluded that CSP activities have contributed to household income improvement and poverty reduction. Keywords: improvement of livelihood, income generation, income stability, improvement of living environment, poverty reduction, internal rate of return (IRR) 1. Background FORCOM has developed and extended Community Support Program (CSP) in project target areas of 34 villages in 9 districts in 6 northern provinces of Laos for the purpose of stabilization of shifting cultivation and supporting activities that lead to sustainable land and forest use. However, stabilization of shifting cultivation could bring difficulties to local people because one of the most important income generation activities in northern Laos is upland rice cultivation. Therefore, the project has supported production activities through CSP and various production activities have been implemented in the project sites. This chapter attempts to review the effectiveness of CSP activities to household income improvement and their contribution to poverty reduction policy of the Lao government. 2. Relationship between CSP and improvement of livelihood 2.1. Factors needed for livelihood improvement and the contribution of CSP to livelihood improvement In order to improve livelihood, it is need for individual villagers to increase and stabilize annual income as well as improve their living environment. Figure 46 shows the relation between CSP and improvement of livelihood through the implementation of project activities. The relation between CSP and three factors needed for the improvement of livelihood, namely income stability, income increase, improvement of living environment, are examined in detail in the next section

55 Figure 46 Relation between CSP and improvement of livelihood through 3 factors Income stability Income Increases Environment improvement Poverty H/H Ordinary Household Freeing themselves from poverty Improvement of livelihood Contribution to income source diversification by CSP (1) Price stability At present, villagers increasingly grow maize, job s tears, soybean instead of upland rice in Laos. Prices of these cash crops can fluctuate sharply year by year. If they grow a relatively limited number of crops, their annual income tends to be unstable, and their livelihood may suffer as a consequence. FORCOM supports productive activities whose prices are relatively stable such as livestock husbandry, aiming at contributing to income stability target villages. Figure 47 shows the average price of cash crops and livestock in Luang Prabang province from 2004 to Coefficient of the variation of beef and pork meat prices are 0.12 and 0.16 respectively for the past five years, while those of corn, soybean and job s tear are 0.26, 0.31 and Prices of livestock are more stable than those of cash crops. Figure 47 Price and coefficient of variation on meat and cash crops in Luang Prabang (kip/kg) standard deviation mean coefficient of variation Beef 24,000 28,000 28,000 30,000 35,000 3,578 29, Pork 22,000 25,000 25,000 28,000 35,000 4,427 27, standard deviation mean Corn 1,500 1,335 1, , , Soybeans 3,000 1,731 4,500 4,500 4,500 1,120 3, Job s tears 1,676 1,731 1,730 2,000 2, , Source: Fact-finding survey by Department of Commerce in Luang Prabang province Note: US$1 = kip 8,500-10,000 coefficient of variation

56 (2) Income stability through the year After the introduction of CSP, villagers are engaged in CSP activities in addition to upland rice and cash crops cultivation. CSP has helped diversify their production activities. As cash crops bring incomes only at harvest season, household income is not stable through the year. Newly introduced CSP activities bring additional incomes in seasons with less income from cash crops. CSP activities contribute to the stabilization of household incomes by diversifying production activities. (3) Reduction of risk on production activities by CSP activities FORCOM supports risk reduction activities as well as production activities in CSP. FORCOM set up Village Veterinary System (VVS) for the purpose of preventing and curing diseases of livestock, which are major activities in CSP. VVS contributes to awareness rising about vaccination, reduction of mortality rate and income generation in target villages. At first, FORCOM tested VVS in Hat Houay village and Namon village, and spread this system to other target villages. Through the trial, VVS activity has become a part of CSP activities; the cost of VVS kit and vaccines are paid by CSP fund in 4th Pilot Sites. At present, 16 target villages implement VVS activity. In the planning stage of CSP when villagers select their CSP activities, FORCOM encourages villagers to consider the risks suggested activities may entail Expansion of livelihood improvement by extension of CSP through revolving system Villagers in target villages implemented new production activities supported by technical and material support from CSP. In fact, the number of villagers supported by CSP at the first stage is limited, but CSP introduced a revolving system in order to transfer and extend outcomes of CSP to the entire village. By adopting a revolving system, techniques and materials supported by CSP are transferred from 1st participants to other villagers. As the number of CSP participants increases, livelihood in whole village is expected to improve Contribution to the improvement of living environment by CSP Improvement of living environment is one of the important issues in poverty reduction. CSP supports not only villagers production activities but also improvement of living environment in village. The details are as follows: (1) Water security CSP activity contributes to water security in the village through setting up water source forest management rules, tree planting at water forest areas, and building small water-supply system. (2) Increase of common property resources CSP activity contributes to increasing the common property through setting up school orchard and common forest and encouraging NTFP management. These whole village activities, which secure forests and water sources, contribute to the improvement of livelihood

57 Figure 48 Number of Type1 activities in project sites Water source forest Community forest School Orchard NTFP Management Source: Monthly monitoring data of FORCOM Number of village 3. Change of poor households in project area 3.1. Definition on poverty in Lao P.D.R. Definition on poverty in Laos is as follows: Prime Ministerial Instruction No. 10 on poverty reduction states that poverty can be defined as the lack of ability to fulfill basic human needs, such as not having enough food (i.e. less than 2,100 calories per day/capita), lack of adequate clothing, not having permanent housing, not capable of meeting expenses for health care, not capable of meeting educational expenses for one's self and other family members, and lack of access to transport routes. There are two types of poverty lines: 1) the food poverty line and 2) an overall poverty line. These are equivalent in the first instance to a lack of food security, and in the second to lacking a combination of food and non-food necessities. These officially used criteria set in National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy are divided into three levels as follows: 1) Household level: rural households considered poor have an income of less than 82,000 kip (100,000 kip for urban households) per person per month (at 2001 prices). This sum allows for about 16 kg of milled rice per person per month; the balance is insufficient to cover other necessities, such as clothing, shelter, schooling and medical costs. 2) Village level: villages considered poor are those: Where at least 51% of households are poor. Without nearby and accessible schools. Without dispensaries or traditional medical practitioners, or over six hours of travel away from a hospital. Without safe water supply. Without access to roads (at least trails accessible by cart during the dry season). 3) District level: poor districts are those: Where over 51% of the villages are poor. Where over 40% of villages do not have local or nearby schools

58 Where over 40% of villages do not have a dispensary or pharmacy. Where over 60% of villages have no access road. Where over 40% of villages do not have safe water. On the other hand, the criteria for poor households defined in the Order of Prime Minister on the establishment of village development cluster (No.09/PM, 07 May 2007) are as follows: 1) Mountainous ethnicity: poor household is household that has monthly income lower than kip 250,000. 2) Lowland and suburbs: poor household is household that has monthly income lower than kip 450,000. 3) Apart from the said income, a poor household is also the one that lacks basic needs as follows: lack of rice and basic food items impermanent dwelling place: living in hut, main house pillars not stable, thatched roof, use bamboo and reeds for floor and walls. lack of production area or inefficiency of marking a living because no experiences, no inputs and equipment necessary for production such as harrow, plough, draft animal and others, no occupation or activity that can generate income for the family. lack of basic household items: i.e. clothing, kitchen utensils, lack of hygiene and sanitation, illiterate and/or low educated Poor districts and poverty sites 72 districts are designated as poor districts in National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy (NGPES). Among 72 poor districts, 47 districts are designed as poorest districts where efforts in poverty eradication are put in the highest priority. Nine target districts of FORCOM include 1 poor district and 7 poorest districts. To support the poverty eradication policy of the Lao government, the project selects target areas in line with officially admitted poor and poorest districts. Figure 49 Project sites and poor districts Province District Poor district Poorest district Luang Prabang Pakseng Nan Viengkham Sayaboury Sayaboury Bokeo Pha Oudom Luang Namtha Long Houaphan Viengthong Houamuang Vientiane Feuang Reference: National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy Note: =assigned, = no assigned

59 Figure 50 Map of 72 districts identified as poor Source: Map of 72 districts identified as poor in National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy 3.3. Change of poor household rate in 6 provinces Figure 51 and 52 show poor household rate (PHR) 3 of 6 provinces from 2004 to The provinces with high PHR at the initial year (Hoaphan, Luang Namtha) observed a sharp decline of the rate, but the provinces with relatively low PHR (Luang Prabang, Sayaboury, Bokeo, Vientiane) improved the figures at a low pace. 3 Poor household rate=the number of poor households / the number of total households x

60 Figure 51 Poor household rate (PHR) of 6 provinces ( ) Province Average Luangprabang NA. 21.6% 20.2% 16.6% 10.8% -20.7% Sayaboury NA. 19.1% 16.8% 15.1% NA % Bokeo 21.0% 14.9% 15.4% 13.6% 13.6% -10.3% Luangnamtha 63.7% 56.7% 51.1% 49.1% 38.2% -12.0% Houaphan 55.6% 57.7% 53.2% 50.8% 46.9% -4.1% Vientiane 9.5% 5.7% 8.8% 8.8% 10.6% 2.8% Total 37.0% 26.8% 25.2% 23.0% 22.1% -12.1% Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM Figure 52 Poor household rate of 6 provinces ( ) Poor household rate (6 provinces) 70.0% 60.0% Poor household rate 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% Luangprabang Sayaboury Luangnamtha Houaphan Vientiane Bokeo 10.0% 0.0% Year Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM 3.4. Change of poor household rate in 9 districts The change of poor household rate (PHR) in 9 districts is as follows. All districts have reduced the PHR except Houamuang district (FORCOM started supporting Houamuang district in 2008). Specifically, Pakseng, Viengkham, Long districts have reduced the PHR sharply. Nan and Feuang districts have already been at the low level since 2004, but the number of poor households decreased by more than 20% per year. The PHR of Pha Oudom district in 2007 is higher than previous year because the number of poor households increased as a result of immigration into the village, which increased the number of total households by the average annual rate of 5% in the last two years

61 Figure 53 Poor household rate (PHR) of 9 districts ( ) Province District Luangprabang Viengkham NA. 50% 50% 58% 24% Nan 27% 16% 12% 7% 4% Pakseng 91% 55% 43% 30% 17% Sayaboury Sayaboury NA. 37% 36% 32% NA. Bokeo Pha oudom 35% 23% 23% 30% 29% Luangnamtha Long 80% 76% 72% 68% 26% Houaphan Viengthong 76% 74% 59% 63% 60% Huameuang 53% 64% 42% 60% 54% Vientiane Feuang 16% 5% 10% 10% 7% TOTAL 48% 39% 35% 36% 26% Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM Figure 54 Poor household rate (PHR) of 9 districts ( ) Poor household rate (Target district of project) 100% Poor household rate 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Luangprabang Viengkham Luangprabang Nan Luangprabang Pakseng Sayaboury Sayaboury Bokeo Pha oudom Luangnamtha Long Houaphan Viengthong Huameuang Vientiane Feuang 0% Year Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM 4. Analysis of outcomes on poverty reduction by CSP in Initial Sites In the nine target districts, FORCOM selected 4 districts for setting up Initial Sites and started implementing production activities in May As mentioned earlier, 4 Initial Sites are located in Luang Prabang province (Hat Houay village, Pongdong village, Samton village) and Sayaboury province (Namon village). In the analysis in this section, 4 Initial Sites are selected as samples because the CSP activities in those villages started at the early stage of the project and therefore there are sufficient data for analysis. The method of analysis is the comparison of poor household rates with i) the average in Luang Prabang province, ii) the average of districts where Initial Sites are located and iii) the average of neighboring villages which received no support from any donors

62 4.1. Analysis of the number of poor households Change in the number of poor households (1) Luang Prabang province Figure 55 shows that the number of total households is constant during 2005 and 2008; on the other hand, the number of poor households decreased sharply (20.7% per year). The poor household rate decreased by 20.7% annually. (2) 3 Initial sites in Luang Prabang Figure 55 shows that the number of total households is rather stable (the average change ranges from -3.9% to 5.7%), but the poor household rate decreased more sharply than that of Luang Prabang (Hat Houay village 25.2%, Samton village 21%). Pongdong village has eradicated poverty completely. Figure 55 Number of poverty households and the poor household rate (PHR) in Luang Prabang province and 3 Initial Sites in Luang Prabang Average Luang Prabang province Total H/H NA. 69,781 69,522 68,676 69,783 -% Poor H/H NA. 15,068 14,011 11,380 7, % PHR NA. 21.6% 20.2% 16.6% 10.8% -20.7% Hat Houay Total H/H % Poor H/H % PHR 20.0% 19.4% 19.4% 9.6% 6.3% -25.2% Pongdong Total H/H % Poor H/H % PHR 6.3% 6.3% 3.9% 1.7% 0.0% % Samton Total H/H % Poor H/H % PHR 29.3% 26.3% 20.8% 18.2% 11.4% -21.0% Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM Note: The data on the total and poor households in 2004 were only available in 2 districts of Luang Prabang Comparison of the number of poor households with neighbouring villages Figure 56 shows the number of poor households and the poor household rate (PHR) in Initial Sites and neighboring villages where there is no support from donors. Four Initial Sites reduced PHR more sharply than neighboring villages except Sayaboury district. Comparing Initial Sites with neighboring villages, in Hat Sang village of Pakseng district and Houay Kong village of Viengkham district have reduced the PHR by 9.3% and 28.7% per year respectively. On the other hand, the two of FORCOM s Initial Sites, namely Hat Houay village and Samton village, have reduced the PHR by 25.2% and 21% per year. In Nan district, Pondong village (Initial Site) eradicated poverty completely by

63 Figure 56 Number of poverty households and poor household rate (PHR) in 3 Initial Sites and neighboring villages in Luang Prabang District Village Average Total H/H % Hat Houay Poor H/H % Pakseng PHR 20.0% 19.4% 19.4% 9.6% 6.3% -25.2% Total H/H % Hat Sang Poor H/H % PHR 8.3% 18.8% 18.0% 20.5% 11.9% 9.3% Total H/H % Pongdong Poor H/H % Nan PHR 6.3% 6.3% 3.9% 1.7% 0.0% % Total H/H % Phanip Poor H/H % PHR 15.3% 14.8% 8.0% 3.2% 2.1% -39.1% Total H/H % Viengkham Samton Houay Kong Poor H/H % PHR 29.3% 26.3% 20.8% 18.2% 11.4% -21.0% Total H/H % Poor H/H NA % PHR 14.6% 16.3% 17.5% NA. 40.0% 28.7% Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM st participants of CSP in Initial Sites Figure 57 Number of poor households among the participants in Initial Sites (HH) Total Poor households District Village households (2005) Pakseng Hat Houay Whole village st Participants Nan Pongdong Whole village st Participants Viengkham Samton Whole village st Participants Sayaboury Namon Whole village NA. NA. NA. 1st Participants Source: Fact-finding survey from 6 provinces by FORCOM Note: Figure 57 shows the number of poor households of CSP 1 st participants from 2005 to Pongdong village could eradicate poverty household. Other Initial Sites reduced the number of poor households after CSP activity start Analysis of household income Method of analysis on the contribution of CSP activities to household income In order to grasp contribution of CSP activities to household income in Initial Sites, the change in the total household income and the ratio of income from CSP activities to total household income are reviewed. Then, for the purpose of assessing the efficiency of the

64 CSP activities, the internal rate of returns (IRR) 4 is calculated and the implications analyzed. Finally, added values per person days (PD) are calculated by CSP activities in each village. The figures show that most of the CSP activities had advantages over shifting cultivation in terms of added values per PD Contribution of CSP activities toward household income (1) Rapid growth of Lao economy during the project period Initial Sites are the villages where the FORCOM introduced the CSP activities first. Among the four Initial Site villages, 3 villages are located in Luang Prabang province and 1 village in Sayaboury province. From 2004 to 2007, Lao economy grew rapidly and the average economic growth rate was 7.9 percent per year during the period. Average growth rate of total household income in 4 Initial Sites during the same period reached 25.2 percent per year. It should be noted that CSP activities of FORCOM have been conducted under such a rapid economic growth. Figure 58 Average GDP growth and household income of 4 Initial Sites ( ) Average GDP Growth from 2004 to 2007 (% per year) Change ( ) Lao PDR 7.9% Average Growth of Household Income in 4 Initial Sites from 2004 to 2007 (% per year) Change ( ) 4 Initial Sites 25.2% Hat Houay 20.5% Samton 14.6% Pongdong 28.2% Namon 30.3% Source: GDP Growth of Lao PDR = Calculation is based on data of Asian Development Outlook 2008, ADB Change of Household Income = Calculated from Household Income and Expenditure Surveys (2) Revenues from CSP activities in total household income In this section, the revenue from CSP activities in 4 Initial Sites are analyzed. Compared with cattle raising activities, households participating in both pig raising and goat raising activities generated revenues from the activities within one year after the project provided the initial inputs as these relatively small animals bear many babies at a time and babies grow faster. Revenue from pig sales (flow) and stock data on pig raising activities by villages, the data shows a correlation between flow and stock in pig raising activities. For example, sales value is high while stock at the end of the project is relatively low as observed in Hat Houay village. On the other hand, sales value is not so high but the number of stock is steadily increasing in 4 Internal rate of return (IRR) is the way to calculate performance or forecast of annual average rate of yield generated by investment activities. IRR is widely used as an indicator to review efficiency of a project itself

65 some villages like Samton and Namon villages. Pig raising activity in Pongdong village is an exception, where both sales value and stock at the end of the project are high. Proportions of revenue from pig raising activities to total household income vary from 4 percent in Namon to 12 percent in Pongdong in In Pongdong, ratio of revenue from pig raising activity to total household income reached to 30 percent after 2 years from the beginning of the project in 2006, but decreased slightly in 2007 and 2008 due to rapid increase of total household income during the period. Goat raising activity shows similar inverse relation between sales value and stock change as observed in pig raising activity. In Hat Houay and Samton villages, annual revenues from goat raising activity surpassed 900,000 kip and accounted 8 percent of total household income. In Namon village, revenue from goat raising activity is less than 50,000 kip per year but number of stock increased from 60 to 172 or 52 million kip. As for goat raising activity in Pongdong village, widespread epidemic disease among the livestock forced villagers to sell all of their properties of the project in Cattle raising activity has been implemented only in Namon village among 4 Initial Sites. Sales value is still small because of relatively slow growth of the animal. However, number of raising cattle increased from 12 to 25 during the project period

66 Figure 59 Total household income and revenue from CSP activities Hat Houay (kip; if not mentioned) Total income per H/H (a) 4,393,000 6,184,400 10,829,000 13,405,000 16,623,000 Pig Raising Revenue from CSP (b) , ,286 1,244,211 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 5% 7% 7% Total income per H/H (a) 5,938,000 5,509,600 9,505,600 9,952,684 11,736,484 Goat Revenue from CSP (b) , , ,926 Raising Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 1% 3% 8% Total income per H/H (a) 3,510,000 6,320,000 13,345,000 18,500,000 23,417,500 Fish raising Income from CSP(b) , ,500 3,127,500 6,777,000 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% -5% -2% 17% 29% Samton Total income per H/H (a) 7,801,000 8,239,100 7,447,200 9,636,833 9,459,933 Pig Raising Revenue from CSP (b) , , ,500 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% -2% 6% 5% Total income per H/H (a) 7,381,000 9,382,900 8,837,800 11,314,429 12,042,829 Goat Revenue from CSP (b) , , ,827 Raising Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 5% 4% 8% Total income per H/H (a) 3,446,000 3,809,400 5,323,500 8,252,250 9,191,000 Posa Revenue from CSP (b) 67, , ,800 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 1% 8% 10% Pongdong Total income per H/H (a) 6,797,000 5,151,100 9,523,300 16,313,625 17,676,775 Pig Raising Revenue from CSP (b) - 360,000 2,880,000 3,610,400 2,166,240 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 7% 30% 22% 12% Total income per H/H (a) 6,339,000 5,347,500 8,743,300 8,080,000 9,282,150 Goat Income from CSP (b) 804, ,800 Raising Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 0% 10% 9% Namon Total income per H/H (a) 6,846,000 10,152,000 17,904,000 14,822,800 20,351,800 Pig Raising Revenue from CSP (b) - 18, , , ,273 Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 3% 2% 4% Total income per H/H (a) n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Goat Revenue from CSP (b) 24,091 11,364 48,436 Raising Ratio (b)/(a) % n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. Total income per H/H (a) 8,576,000 6,602,600 9,543,800 15,983,625 16,467,525 Cattle Revenue from CSP (b) - 112, ,000 1,395,000 Raising Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 1% 6% 8% Total income per H/H (a) 4,230,000 3,390,000 8,587,100 16,348,333 18,526,883 Rice Field Revenue from CSP (b) - 516,000 1,076,000 1,963,200 Expansion Ratio (b)/(a) % 0% 0% 6% 7% 11% Source: Household Income and Expenditure Surveys, Monthly Monitoring Sheets Notes: Total household incomes of the year 2008 are estimation. Income from CSP activities of the year 2008 are estimated from data as of October Stocks at the end of the project are estimated from data as of October Total income and Revenue from CSP of the year 2008 is culculate from the trand of

67 Figure 60 Comparison of stocks at the beginning and the end of the project Hat Houay (kip; if not mentioned) Initial Investment Stock at the end of the project Change Number of stock 18heads 37heads 106% Pig Raising Value of the stock 10,365,000 18,500,000 78% Goat Number of stock 36heads 99heads 175% Raising Value of the stock 16,160,000 26,000,000 61% Fish Number of stock 7,900 fish juveniles 7,200 fishes - raising Value of the stock 1,335,000 3,000, % Samton (kip; if not mentioned) Initial Investment Stock at the end of the project Change Number of stock 17heads 132heads 676% Pig Raising Value of the stock 11,336,000 66,000, % Goat Number of stock 16heads 32heads 100% Raising Value of the stock 8,068,000 16,000,000 98% Posa Number of stock 1,568seedlings - - Value of the stock 7,655, Pongdong (kip; if not mentioned) Initial Investment Stock at the end of the project Change Number of stock 20heads 122heads 510% Pig Raising Value of the stock 8,690,000 61,000, % Goat Number of stock 18heads 0heads -100% Raising Value of the stock 6,815, % Namon Pig Raising Goat Raising Cattle Raising Rice Field (kip; if not mentioned) Initial Investment Stock at the end of the Stock at the end of project the project Number of stock 22heads 251heads 1041% Value of the stock 16,400, ,500, % Number of stock 60heads 172heads 187% Value of the stock 30,000,000 51,600,000 72% Number of stock 12heads 25heads 108% Value of the stock 20,692,000 43,108, % Expanded Area 2.5ha 2.5ha - Value of the stock 10, Expansion Source: Household Income and Expenditure Surveys, Monthly Monitoring Sheets Notes: Total household incomes of the year 2008 are estimation. Income from CSP activities of the year 2008 are estimated from data as of October Stocks at the end of the project are estimated from data as of October

68 Project efficiency reviewed by using internal rate of return (1) Calculation method for internal rate of return Internal rate of return (IRR) is the way to calculate performance or forecast of annual average rate of yield generated by investment activities. IRR is widely used as an indicator to review efficiency of a project itself. IRRs calculated for each CSP activity in 4 Initial Sites for the project period are shown in Figure 61. CSP activities are implemented by family labor but its cost is not included in the calculation because IRR would change greatly depending on the assumption of unit price of family labor. Stock at the end of the project is included in the calculation as liquidating value for livestock and fish raising activities. Figure 61 Internal rate of return for each CSP activity Internal Rate of Return (IRR) Hat Houay Samton Pongdong Namon Pig Raising 57% 59% 169% 58% Goat Raising 40% 53% 5% 24% Cattle Raising 44% 27% Chicken Raising 26% Paddy Field Expantion 59% Fish raising 93% 358% Posa 1% Weaving 103% Source: Calculated from results of the monthly monitoring sheets Note: Family labor cost is not taken into consideration (2) Reasons of low IRR in some CSP activities IRR of CSP activities in 4 Initial Sites show relatively high figures except posa activities in Samton (IRR=-1), goat raising activity in Pongdong(IRR=5%) and chicken raising activity in Namon (IRR=-26). In Namon, epidemic disease spread widely and most of the chicks died soon after the project provided ones. Goat raising activity in Pongdong also experienced wide spread diseases among the livestock in 2007 and participants were forced to sell all the survived goats supported by the project and suspended the activity in Posa activity in Samton provided profits in 2007 and 2008, but the figure does not include stock value at the end of the project due to its difficulty in estimation. (3) High IRR for most of the CSP activities One of the factors of high IRR for most of the CSP activities is that family labor cost is not included in the calculation. As for family labor, added value per person day is calculated in the next section. Another important factor is that technical assistance by the project improved productivity in CSP activities. It seems that techniques provided by the project reduced death rate of livestock and fishes and lead to higher productivity. Increased return to the investment due to technical assistance encourage non-participating households and near-by villagers voluntarily come to visit participating households for the purpose of learning production techniques and invest by their own capitals in raising

69 livestock and aquaculture. This voluntary investment is collateral evidence of high return of CSP activities. In this chapter, IRR is calculated as livestock go into liquidation at the end of the project. However, the fact is that CSP activities will continue to expand even after the project termination through revolving system introduced by the project. Therefore, in reality more return would be expected than what was calculated in this section Added value of family labor (1) Added value of family labor Figure 62 shows that added value per person day (PD) for CSP activities in each Initial Site. Value added per unit family labor of fish raising activity in both Hat Houay and Pongdong is around thousand kip PD and surpassed other CSP activities. This is because fish raising is thought by villagers as time saving activity because it just needs feeding twice a day and keep relatively high price in markets. Goat raising activity requires almost same labor hours as for fish raising. Goat raising is basically kept in the pasture and does not require preparing feed of villagers. A person spends around 30 minutes for raising goat for a day in a household. Goat raising activity of the project is implemented as group. A person is in charge of chasing the herd for a daytime and this post is rotated among project participating households at a daily basis. On the other hand, pig raising activity requires preparation of feed twice a day and one person spend three hours for it in a family. However, added values for pig raising and goat raising are different by villages and it is difficult to conclude advantage in point of added value. As for weaving activity, it takes 6 hours to complete a weaving (e.g. wide 38cm length 160cm). The woven textile can be sold at 20,000 kip in 2008 and its profit is around 14,000 kip per weaving. Weaving is labor-intensive activity and added value per PD is lower than other CSP activities. However, comparing with other CSP activities, weaving activity brings more quick and secure incomes to participating households. Figure 62 Value added per PD for each CSP activity / shifting cultivation Value added per PD for each CSP activity (kip/pd) Hat Houay Samton Pongdong Namon Pig Raising 17,279 47,677 35,393 82,623 Goat Raising 55,993 56,830 40,505 37,281 Cattle Raising Chicken Raising Paddy Field Expantion Fish raising 145, ,650 Posa Weaving 28,000 Source: Calculated from results of the monthly monitoring sheets Note: 1 PD= 1Person Day (1day=12hours) Traditional long fallow 25,521 Transitional short fallow 28,521 Source: Midgley et al. (2006)

70 (2) Advantages of CSP over shifting cultivation Added values per PD of CSP activities in 4 Initial Sites are better than those of both traditional long fallow and transitional short fallow shifting cultivations with exceptions like pig raising activities in Hat Houay. CSP activities of FORCOM provided new income sources that have advantages in labor productivity and put fewer burdens to forest. Thus, villagers can reduce shifting cultivation areas while their incomes increase. 5. Conclusions Improvement of livelihood requires not only income increase but also income stability and improvement of living conditions. Many of production activities supported by CSP are livestock husbandry. It revealed that prices of livestock are more stable than those of commercial crops. Livestock raising can allow villagers keep savings that can be sold anytime they need, and it can be lead to secure household income through the year. Traditional production activities, combining with new activities which were introduced by CSP, can be diversified. CSP can contribute to income stability as production activities with more stable prices, secured income through the year with livestock as well as diversified production. Building of infrastructures such as small-scale water-supply system and improvement of environment through setting up common forest in the villages where the project support also contribute to the improvement of livelihood. Since FORCOM began in 2004, Lao economy expanded at high rate of average 7.9 percent per year. Average total household income in 4 Initial Sites grew at considerably high pace of average of 25.5 percent per year during the same period ( ). Review on contribution of CSP activities to high growth rate of average total household income in 4 Initial Sites confirmed that revenue from CSP activities have play a certain role in household income expansions. Revenues from some CSP activities are relatively low, but such activities contributed to increase of stock rather than cash flow during the project period. In order to measure performance of the project itself, internal rate of returns (IRR) are calculated by CSP activities in each Initial Site. Calculated IRRs reveal significantly good performance of CSP activities of the project with exceptions like posa activity and some livestock raising activities which experienced breakout of transmitted diseases. The good performance is partly explained by improvement of productivity due to technical assistance provided by the project. Many facts that non-participating households in Initial Sites and near-by villagers voluntarily learn production techniques from project participating households and invest their own money is collateral evidence of high return of CSP activities. Thus, it can be said that CSP contributes to livelihood improvement such as income stability and improvement of living conditions as well as income increase. As for contribution to poverty reduction, the poor household rate (PHR) in 4 Initial Sites decreased faster than those of 6 northern provinces or nearby villages. CSP can be said to have contributed to poverty reduction as the numbers of poor CSP participating households decreased steadily year by year. References Prime Minister s office Order of the Prime Minister regarding the establishment of Village and Village Development Group. Government of Lao P.D.R National Growth and Poverty Eradication Strategy (NGPES). FORCOM st 4 th Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM

71 Chapter 4 Result of Capacity Building Through the Project Activities <Abstract> The project tackled capacity building with extension staffs and participating farmers in order to achieve the project purpose, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers. The approach of capacity building is Plan- Do-See cycle, which consists of training and OJT in villages, that is to say that target beneficiaries (extension staffs and farmers) are expected to gain enough core capacity, such as management and communication, by experimental learning based on actual work. As a result, it appears that the capacity of target beneficiaries has gradually improved and that they are likely to implement CSP by themselves. Specifically, it is expected that extension staffs obtain the capacity of CSP extension. However, capacity building for extension staffs has not yet equipped them with techniques for sustainable land and forest use and continued strengthening of their core capacity for forest conservation is needed. Moreover, capacity building is a continuous process; thus it is essential to consider the process of capacity building continuously. Keywords: capacity building, training, learning cycle, core capacity 1. Background and purpose of this chapter National Agricultural and Forestry Extension Service (NAFES), established at the beginning of 2001, established a extension system to promote general techniques of agriculture and forestry. Moreover, in order to expand the agricultural and forestry techniques, the technical service centers (TSC) 5 have been established in provinces, districts and clusters since On the other hand, issues of financial and organizational extension system at provincial and district levels have been in the center of discussion, especially in the northern area. It is difficult to say that the agricultural and forestry extension system was promoted effectively (Ishibashi, 2007) in the past. Therefore, it is imperative to improve the extension system, especially the capacity of extension staff at the district level. In other words, the capacity building is the first step toward the implementation of effective extension in rural areas. FORCOM has focused on capacity building of extension staff so that the issue of forest degradation by shifting cultivation would be solved by villagers and extension staffs. This chapter aims to examine whether the project has contributed to the capacity building of beneficiaries in order to achieve the project goal. 2. Stand point of capacity building in FORCOM structure Before discussing the contribution to capacity building, it will describe that component of capacity building took a part in the project. Forest conservation is one of the most important issues in Laos because forest areas have shrunk rapidly in the northern area. Therefore, this issue should be tackled swiftly. Given the situation, the project aims to achieve the goal, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by 5 Technical Service Centre (TSC): Order of the Minister of Agriculture and Forestry No 0261/MAF, dated 17 January

72 villagers in the northern Laos. In order to achieve the goal, the project has developed Community Support Programme (CSP), which support production activities for income generation and sustainable land and forest use by villagers. Moreover, the project has attempted to enhance the sustainability of CSP for strengthening an implementation system and securing budget for CSP after the project termination. Figure 63 shows a management framework of the project based on the above idea. The framework encompasses the component of capacity building for beneficiaries in order to tackle the issue effectively; particularly, the project has emphasized the capacity building for extension staff (C/P) and participating farmers to implement CSP effectively. Issue Figure 63 Forest reduction and degradation Management framework on the project Further vision Forest recovery Sustainability Methodology Build up CSP Capacity building for CSP implementation Internalisation of CSP Establishment of CSP implementation system (Drawn by the author based on JICA[2006]) 3. Strategy of FORCOM for capacity building It is difficult for villagers to collect information on agricultural techniques for livelihood improvement because the project targeted shifting cultivation area located in remote mountain areas with an underdeveloped transportation system. Therefore, it is important to improve the capacity of provincial and district extension staff (C/P) who live nearby remote villages. At the same time, target farmers capacity is also important to solve the issue. Therefore, the project has focused on capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers. In addition, capacity building is a continuous possess can take different approaches depending on conditions and timing. Thus, in order to implement CSP effectively, the project has emphasized capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers, especially their core capacity 6 to build up implementation capacity Definition of capacity building It is difficult to define capacity building because it depends much on learning situation or place. In the project s context, capacity building means that target beneficiaries (extension staffs and participating farmers) will improve their capacity and/or skill thought the project activities based on the CSP including the planning, implementation and reviewing. 6 Core capacity means the basic capability for activity implementation such as management, attitude, problem solving and so on (JICA, 2008)

73 4. Approach of capacity building for the project 4.1. What kind of capacities (or skills) do they need to gain? This section describes what kind of capacities extension staffs and participating farmers should gain through CSP implementation Extension staffs (C/Ps/ DAFO / PAFO) Capacity conditions at the beginning of the project The basic survey at the beginning of the project indicated that many PAFO and DAFO staffs thought they lack capacity to conduct their duties. In addition, the result of survey pointed out a lack of basic extension skills such as problem-solving, communication and coordination, management and monitoring (JICA, 2004). In other words, extension staffs need to improve core capacity. Necessary capacity for solving problem In order to achieve the project goal, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers, it is essential to improve core capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps)(JICA, 2006). At the same time, they need to obtain an appropriate technology needed for sustainable land and forest use. Thus, it is important for the project to build up the core capacity and technical capacity of extension staffs concerning sustainable land and forest use (C/Ps) to promote collaboration with farmers in implementing and extending CSP at the village level. Target capacity of the project The project cannot support the whole of capacity improvement due to the time constraint. Therefore, the project concentrates on strengthening of core capacity rather than technical capacity. Detailed target capacities are as follows: Capacity Core capacity Attitude Figure 64 Commutation/ Facilitation/ Coordination Problem solving Planning Technical capacity Target capacities for extension staff (C/P) Contents of capacity Attitude and awareness of tackling the issue together with villagers Capacity of building up collaboration system between stakeholders smoothly which exchange information with stakeholders Capacity of grasping problem and making solution based on needs and situation Capacity of making a proper plan based on needs Acquisition of appropriate techniques related to sustainable land and forest use

74 Participating farmers Necessary capacity for solving problem In order to achieve the project goal, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers, it is essential for farmers to gain techniques for sustainable land and forest use. Furthermore, in order to utilize the techniques properly, the farmers should improve core capacity, for example planning and management of production activities. Therefore, farmers should recognize that they can do by themselves through the process of the project activities. That is to say, by the end of the project the participating farmers will probably be able to carry out CSP activities effectively. Target capacity of the project The project cannot support the whole of capacity improvement because of time limitation. Therefore, the project concentrates on strengthening of core capacity rather than technical capacity. Detailed target capacities are as follows: Capacity Core capacity Attitude Management Problem Solving Sharing skill Technical capacity Figure 65 Target capacities for participating farmers Contents of capacity Attitude and awareness of tackling the issue Capacity of carrying out a production activities effectively and efficiently Capacity of grasping confronted problem and making solution Rising awareness of importance of sharing information and techniques Capacity of sharing and practical using of suitable technology Acquisition of appropriate techniques related sustainable land and forest use 4.2. Approach of capacity building The process of capacity building to achieve the project goal might take a long time, and there are various approaches for capacity building according to each condition. As mentioned in the previous section, the target capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers is core capacity. The core capacity is hard to improve through a few training sessions only; it is effectively improved through daily work. That is to say, it is necessary for target beneficiaries to learn from experiences. Therefore, the project focused on not only training but also daily work in villages, and also CSP consists of Plan-Do-See cycle for carrying out CSP continuously. The project has carried out capacity building based on the above approach for extension staffs (C/P) and participating farmers. The detailed approach is described below: Extension staffs (C/Ps): The first step (Plan) is training for understanding and planning contents of CSP. The second step (Do) is implementation of CSP as on-the-job training (OJT 7 ) in villages. It is considered that extension staffs (C/P) can learn necessary attitudes and communication with farmers. The next step (See) is reviewing and monitoring of CSP activities. 7 On-the-job training means a kind of experimental learning in a field

75 These steps are one learning cycle; the first cycle was carried out with experts in Initial Sites, and then the next cycle was carried out by them in 1 st Pilot Sites, and the learning cycle is implemented continuously. The cycle is composed of training and OJT which is aimed at learning from experience at village work. At the same time, in order to support CSP implementation by trained extension staffs (C/Ps), the project developed a detailed manual of CSP activities. The project also prepared the whole framework for implementing CSP by extension staffs (C/Ps). In case of participating farmers, a learning cycle is similar to that of extension staffs (C/Ps): The first steps (Plan) is planning of CSP based on village situations and their needs. The second step (Do) is implementation of activities, which include farmer training, procurement of equipment and production activities. The third step (See) is reviewing and monitoring of activities. These three steps are one learning cycle for participating farmers, so learning cycle aimed at building up the ownership of participants is implemented continuously. Figure 66 Extension staffs Approach of capacity building of FORCOM First Step: Initial Site Implementation Second Step: Pilot Site Implementation Continue See Reviewing and monitoring of CSP activities Plan Needs Survey Training for preparation of CSP See Reviewing and monitoring of CSP activities Plan Improved preparation of CSP in PS based on reviewing IS implementation Do CSP implementation through OJT (on-the-job training) Do CSP implementation through OJT (on-the-job training) Participating villagers Continue See Reviewing and monitoring of CSP activities Plan Needs assessment CSP planning Do CSP implementation (Farmer training, procurement) (Drawn by the author) In this section, the achievement of the training provided by the project has been introduced. Process of learning cycle explained here starts with the organization of training for carrying out production activities. Extension staffs (C/Ps) introduce farmers the techniques that could reduce pressure on forest resources. In this way, the learning cycle emphasizes not only core capacity but also technical capacity. At the same time, the project has organized study tours for extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers as it is a good opportunity for them to gain techniques and to exchange information. The

76 project held various training as well. Detailed list of training provided by FORCOM is shown below: Figure 67 Number of main training provided by FORCOM Training Contents Target person Number of times Training for CSP in IS Extension staffs (C/Ps) 26 times Training for CSP in PS Extension staffs (C/Ps) 4 times Training for up dated CSP Extension staffs (C/Ps) 3 times Training for Production activities in IS and PS Participating farmers 234 times* Study tours Extension staffs (C/Ps) and 16 times Participating farmers Other technical training (GPS etc.) Extension staffs (C/Ps) 2 times Source: Data from the project Note: The training held in 34 Initial and Pilot Sites. 5. Implementation results of capacity building The project adopted two approaches for capacity building for extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers. Evaluation of capacity building has been done by interviewing extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers. However, it is hard to measure changes in their capacities and show quantitative results given that capacity is intangible and results of capacity building seem to vary among target beneficiaries. Therefore, the project used three different evaluation methods: i) self-evaluation; ii) interviews with other stakeholders (including questionnaire); iii) examination for extension staffs (C/Ps). In this way, the project attempted to indicate the results of capacity building from different standpoints Evaluation of capacity building of extension staffs The project has conducted capacity building for extension staffs (C/Ps) so that they can effectively implement CSP with farmers, and the project has gone through a long process for carrying out activities from Initial Sites to 4th Pilot Sites. For this reason, the results of capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) show that their basic capacities have improved enough to carry out CSP. The capacities of extension staffs (C/Ps) were assessed by asking the following questions; 1) how do they think their capacity improved through the project activities, 2) how do they improved their knowledge for extension activities, 3) how do farmers think about the capacities of extension staffs (C/Ps). In other words, the project has tried to evaluate the capacities from different angles Attitude The first evaluation of capacity is the attitude of extension staffs (C/Ps). The project has advised extension staffs (C/Ps) on the importance of their attitude through CSP activities. At first, two examinations of the extension staffs were held to measure their working attitude and standard of conducts. The result of examination shows that their understanding improved in the 2 nd examination than the 1 st. Regarding Figure 68, it turned out that the extension staffs (C/Ps) with a shorter working period in the project did not have enough understanding about appropriate attitudes. It is thought that it takes time for extension staffs (C/Ps) to grasp working attitude and standard of conduct

77 Figure 68 Results of the 1 st the 2 nd examination of extension staffs of FORCOM on working attitude and standard of conduct Working with 1 st Examination (June 2006) 2 nd Examination (June 2008) FORCOM Number of Ave. Score* Number of Ave. Score* since C/P C/P Total Average Source: The result of the 1 st the 2 nd Examination for Extension staff on FORCOM) Note: Total scour is 20 points. The next evaluation is self-evaluation of attitude. Figure 69 indicates that most of extension staffs (C/Ps) felt that their attitudes and confidence in extension work have improved. In addition, there were comments from the extension staffs (C/Ps) that they could obtain confidence for extension work through the project work. Thus, extension staffs (C/Ps) thought their attitudes for extension work are now better than before joining the project. Figure 69 Self-evaluation by extension staffs: attitude and confidence Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: Sample number 36 persons The final evaluation of attitude is based on the viewpoint of farmers. The result of survey conducted in 1st and 2nd PS by the project shows that most of farmers are satisfied with the attitudes of extension staffs (C/Ps). In other words, extension staffs (C/Ps) improved their attitudes in order to cooperate with farmers in solving problems. Figure 70 Evaluation of extension staff by project participating farmers: attitudes of extension staff (C/P) toward villagers Village 1 st Pilot Site 2 nd Pilot Site Pangthong Pakha Namsat Phonthon Silimoon Kokieng Boampaseng Houayla Ave Point* Source: 4th Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM Note: The scoring for performance assessment is as follow: 5points- Excellent, 4points- Better, 3points-Good, 2points-Poor, 1point- Bad. Sample number 258 Households

78 As a result, attitudes of extension staffs (C/Ps) became better than before joining the project. It is thought that extension staffs (C/Ps) have confidence in their work. However, there is a gap in their understanding about appropriate working attitudes depending on their working period of extension and the project work. Therefore, it is important to support and/or cooperate with each other continuously Communication/Facilitation/ Coordination Communication skill is one of the important skills for extension workers, and capacity for facilitation and coordination are related to communication skill. Therefore, the project has tried to improve their communication, facilitation and coordination capacity altogether. The first evaluation is self-evaluation on three capacities. Figure 71 indicates that extension staffs (C/Ps) thought their three capacities improved through the project activities. Similarly, some extension staffs mentioned that their capacities for communication, facilitation and coordination with villagers improved through frequent visits to villages. Figure 71 Average of points of each capacity Capacity Before working Present the project Communication Facilitation Coordination Source: Questionnaire conducted by the project on Nov 2008 Note: The scouring of assessment is as follows, 1: Terribly unskilled, 2: Unskilled, 3: Less skilled, 4: Skilled,5: Highly skilled. Sample number 29 persons The second point, communication capacity was evaluated by participating farmers. It appeared difficult for them to understand the meaning of facilitation and coordination, so the interviews did not include the capacity for facilitation and coordination. The results of interviews show that farmers felt communication capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) got better than before (see Figure 72). Equally, comments from the farmers show that communication with extension staffs (C/Ps) had much improved by their frequent visits. Moreover, it was reported that explanation skill had improved by frequent meetings with farmers. In this way, communication capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) much improved through CSP. Figure 72 Improvement of communication between villagers and extension staffs Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: Sample number 35 persons It appears that one of the reasons for improved communication/facilitation/coordination with extension staffs (C/Ps) is increased frequency of visits to villages, allowing extension

79 staffs (C/Ps) for more opportunities to communicate with farmers. It is important for them to visit villages regularly, so their capacity may improve for more effective extension work Problem solving Problem solving capacity is to grasp and analyze a given situation correctly by hearing villagers voice and to lead to a solution by a suitable method. The project has advised extension staffs (C/Ps) to grasp village conditions and to suggest to farmers an appropriate activity. First of all, extension staffs (C/Ps) evaluated their own capacity for problem solving. Figure 73 shows that a lot of extension staffs (C/Ps) felt that their capacity for problem solving improved compared to before the CSP implementation. Figure 73 Self-evaluation by extension staffs: problem solving Source: Questionnaire conducted by the project on Nov Note: Sample number 29 persons The next is the evaluation of their problem solving capacity by farmers. Many participating farmers replied that extension staffs (C/Ps) corresponded to problems more quickly than before joining the project (see Figure 74). Furthermore, many comments from participating farmers indicate that participating farmers are satisfied with quick problem solving by extension staffs (C/Ps). Figure 74 Participating farmers evaluation of extension staffs prompt response to problem solving in villages Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 35 persons In addition to that, Figure 75 indicates that extension staffs (C/Ps) properly grasped village situations. It means that extension staffs (C/Ps) understand village problems very well and were able to support and/ or adjust the problem solving smoothly

80 Figure 75 Participating farmers evaluation of extension staffs understanding of village situations for problem solving Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 35 persons It can be said that problem solving capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) has improved; especially their understanding of village situations. On the other hand, problem solving capacity has seen rather limited improvement compared to other capacities; therefore, it is important to support capacity building process continuously Planning Planning capacity is to make a suitable plan based on needs and village conditions. As mentioned earlier, extension staffs (C/Ps) have improved their capacity for collecting village information, so they can understand village situations better than before joining the project. The project also supported the planning processes of CSP based on villagers needs in order to make a suitable plan for the farmers. The evaluation below is self-assessment by extension staffs (C/P). Most of them thought that their capacity much improved. At the same time, it appears that they are able to support planning of CSP activities with farmers (see Figure 76). Figure 76 Self-evaluation by extension staffs: planning Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 36 persons On the other hand, this evaluation did not include the quality of CSP plan, so it is difficult to say that they can obtain enough planning capacity for extension work in general. However, planning capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) should be considered broadly. It is necessary to improve their planning capacity continuously Technical capacity Technical capacity is to acquire appropriate techniques related to sustainable land and forest use and so forth. The project has provided an opportunity to study the extension system in Laos, working attitudes and standard of conduct, FORCOM activities, CSP and so on

81 The first evaluation is self-assessment. The project conducted examinations of extension staffs (C/Ps) twice to monitor their understanding of the extension activities. Most staffs score in the 2 nd examination is much better than that in the 1 st examination. Moreover, the project held training and OJT for new extension staffs (C/Ps) to promote an understanding of the project activities. For this reason, it seems that the result of examination is not necessarily related to staffs working period in the project. Figure 77 Results of the 1 st and the 2 nd examinations for extension staffs of FORCOM 1 st examination (June 2006) 2 nd examination (June 2008) C/P Ave. work period (month) Ave. total score C/P Ave. work period (month) Ave. total score Total Source: The result of the 1 st the 2 nd examination for extension staffs on FORCOM Note: examinees were tested on 50 questions in the following five areas: 1. Agriculture and forestry extension system in Lao, 2. Working attitude and standard of conduct, 3. FORCOM project, 4. Community Support Programme, 5.Monitoring and evaluation It is thought that extension staffs (C/Ps) were able to gain the knowledge necessary for implementation of CSP. However, comments from extension staffs (C/Ps) indicate that it was hard to advice appropriate solutions and solve problems quickly due to a lack of technical skills and information when technical problem related to production activities occurred in villages. In addition, comments from extension staffs (C/Ps) pointed out a lack of techniques for sustainable land and forest use. The project attempted to equip them with these techniques during CSP implementation, but it is thought that the information given was not enough for them to carry out extension activities at the village level. Therefore, it is important to increase the opportunities to learn these techniques in order to promote forest conservation at village level Total capacity Almost all the extension staffs (C/Ps) felt that their capacity improved through the project activities, especially OJT at village. Above all, the most improved capacity is coordination, while the least improved capacity is problem solving according to their self-evaluation (see Figure 78). Figure 78 Self-assessment of capacity by extension staff Source: Questionnaire conducted by the project on Nov 2008 Note: The scouring of assessment is as follows, 1: Terribly unskilled, 2: Unskilled, 3: Less skilled, 4: Skilled, 5: Highly skilled. Sample number 29 persons

82 In the evaluation by participating farmers, it turned out that farmers are satisfied with the performance of extension staffs (C/Ps). They mentioned that the performance of extension staffs (C/Ps) is excellent or better. Moreover, the performance in 2nd PS got a bit better assessment than 1st PS. It is thought that extension staffs (C/Ps) utilized their experience in 1st PS. Figure 79 Evaluation of performance of extension staffs by participating farmers Site Village Average points of questions* 1 st PS Pangthong (BKO) 4.32 Pakha (LNT) 4.28 Namsat (HPN) 4.23 Phonthon (VTE) 4.23 Average nd PS Houayla (LPB) 4.32 Boampaseng (LPB) 4.25 Kokieng (HPN) 4.51 Silimoon (LNT) 4.23 Average 4.32 Sources: 4 th Household Income and Expenditure Survey for FORCOM Note: The scouring of assessment is as follows: 5 Points: Excellent, 4 Points: Better, 3 Points: Good, 2 Points: Poor, 1 Point : Bad Sample number 258 Households Altogether, capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) has improved. The result testifies to the fact that capacity for CSP implementation was bearing fruit. Specifically, it seems that extension staffs (C/Ps) who gained enough capacity could smoothly carry out CSP through the Plan-Do-See process based on the needs of villages. This is considered to be the result of the experiences in training and OJT. On the other hand, some other capacities need to be further improved, especially problem solving and technical capacity for sustainable land and forest use. Therefore it is necessary for extension staffs (C/Ps) to try to improve their capacities continuously. As mentioned earlier, capacity building is a continuous process; capacity building by the project is only a one step. Capacity building is indispensable for extension staffs (C/Ps) in order to work smoothly and efficiently. At the same time, it is necessary to develop extension materials for supporting extension staffs (C/Ps) Evaluation of capacity building of participating villagers The project has carried out CSP at the village level in order to achieve the project goal, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers. As participating farmers, who implement CSP at the village level, need to obtain a capacity for planning, management and monitoring of activities, the project has carried out capacity building for participating farmers. Moreover, the project has supported not only core capacity but also technical capacity including production techniques for sustainable land and forest use. Evaluation of capability of participating farmer was mainly carried out by interviews and the questionnaires Attitude Capacity building for farmers attitude has focused on encouraging positive attitudes and awareness about issues surrounding them. Ownership of activities is one of aspects of

83 changing their attitude; thus the project encouraged sharing of activity costs between the project and participating farmers as a means to promote farmers ownership. Figure 80 shows that villagers have borne more than 50 percent of activity costs by contributing labor and materials. That is to say, the attitude of participating farmers has changed through CSP. It is thought that change of attitude was prompted by high commitment to improving their livelihoods. Figure 80 Average rate of cost sharing of CSP activities Villages Villagers The project Initial Site st Pilot Site nd Pilot Site rd Pilot site th Pilot Site Source: Implementation Result of 2007/2008 and Annual Work Plan for 2008/2009 of FORCOM Furthermore, Figure 81 shows that participating farmers were very positive about implementing project activities. Thus, this might have led to the ownership and continuity of activities. Figure 81 Attitude of participating farmers of FORCOM Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study As the change of attitude could lead to solution, participating farmers mentioned shifting cultivation was decreasing because of advice from the project. In this way, it is thought that participating farmers deeply understand the importance of forest conservation and methodology of reducing pressure on forest resources. It should be noted that changing farmers attitude is an endogenous process and it takes time to implement activities spontaneously. Thus, it is indispensable to consider continuous support or learning opportunity Management The project has attempted to improve management capacity of participating farmers so that the farmers could gain the capacity to implement activities effectively and efficiently. The result of interviews with them shows that they were able to improve management capacity for CSP implementation, especially the management of production (see Figure 82). Furthermore, comments from interviewees indicate the improvement of not only capacity for production activities but also capability for the management of their committee

84 Figure 82 Self-evaluation by participating farmers: management Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 35 persons Problem solving Capacity of farmers for problem solving means a capacity to grasp issues and to seek effective solutions. Process of CSP emphasized that the farmers understood village situations and issues during the planning stage. As a result, Figure 83 shows that most participating farmers felt their problem solving capacity improved. Moreover, it indicated that they were able to tackle their problem by themselves. Figure 83 Self-evaluation by participating farmers: problem solving Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 35 persons Sharing skills and experiences The project aimed to strengthen capacity for sharing experiences such as appropriate techniques in order to expand CSP throughout village. The result of survey shows the first participating farmers have transferred appropriate techniques gained through their own experience or through project activities to new participating farmers (see Figure 84). In addition, the comments from extension staffs (C/Ps) indicate that key farmers 8 have introduced appropriate techniques, management system and so on to other farmers regularly. Figure 84 Self-evaluation by participating farmers: sharing skill Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number 35 persons 8 The project s context of key farmer: Those who are skilled, good personality, creative in adapting to new technology and able to transfer knowledge to others

85 However, it is not clear if there are enough incentives for key farmers to expand their techniques and experiences. Given this uncertainty, information sharing among the farmers is difficult to continue in the future. Therefore, it is imperative to develop a system to expand appropriate technologies in village and to neighboring villages Technical capacity Technical capacity has been promoted for the purpose of mastering the appropriate capacity for each production activity aimed at sustainable land and forest use through CSP. Extension staffs (C/Ps) conducted training for farmers in each production activity before implementation activities. The result of survey indicates that most trainees understood techniques introduced by the project (see Figure 85). It is thought that contents of training were well suited for farmers knowledge level. Figure 85 Rate of understanding of farmer training Note 1: Monitoring was carried out for farmer training at 4 th Pilot Sites) Note 2: Technical aspect of main 3 activities (goat, cattle, and pig raising) The next evaluation is the level of understanding of farmers. The result shows that the farmers have continued to utilize techniques introduced by the project (see Figure 86). That is to say, techniques introduced by the project were suited for farmers needs. Figure 86 Rate of household practicing introduced techniques in IS and PS Source: Interviews with villagers in Sep and interviews with participating farmers in Mar Note: The scoring for assessment is as follows: Good practice-2 Points, moderate-1 Point, Not practice-0 Point. Technical aspect of main 4 activity (pig, goat, cow and buffalo raising and fruit planting in IS and PS was surveyed

86 However, comments from extension staffs (C/Ps) indicate that farmers have not used some techniques such as compost making and Village Veterinary System (VVS) maybe because those techniques require extra work or time. It is necessary to review the method of support for farmers and/or the contents of introduced techniques. Finally, the farmers evaluated their own technical capacity by themselves. The result of questionnaires shows that nearly half of the farmers thought their own capacity improved; the rest thought that their capacity partly improved. Figure 87 Rate of acquisition of techniques Source: Preliminary Study for the Terminal Evaluation Study Note: sample number: 35 persons Total capacity It is thought that the progress of capacity building of participating farmers has been moderate. Although the project has encouraged opportunities to change consciousness and improve attitudes toward sustainable land and forest use, it is difficult to say that the achievements of the capacity building of the farmers are enough to address forest issues and their own livelihoods. For instance, the result of interviews indicates that although farmers recognized the importance of forest resources there are few cases where actual activities for forest management by themselves are observed at villages. It is thought that farmers tend to focus more on production activities than forest conservation. Therefore, it can be said that it is necessary to carry out further capacity building for the farmers for forest conservation. 6. Conclusions The project has supported capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers in order to achieve the project goal, activities leading to sustainable land and forest use begin to expand in the project site and its surrounding areas, initiated by villagers. This chapter attempted to depict how the project has contributed to the capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers. The result shows that the capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers have improved through the project activities. The project has emphasized the capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers; more specifically, core capacity such as management and problem solving to build up CSP implementation capacities. Moreover, as capacity building is a continuous process the project recognizes that capacity building should be done continuously. The approach of capacity building the project adopted is a Plan-DO-See cycle, which consists of training and OJT at village in order to carry out CSP continuously. The project tried to improve capacity of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers based on the above approach. The result shows that most extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers thought their capacity improved through CSP implementation

87 Regarding the capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps), the result of interviews shows that the extension staffs (C/Ps) gained the capacity enough to effectively carry out CSP activities. It is thought that the training and OJT the project provided were effective in the improvement in core capability of extension staff. However, some extension staffs (C/Ps) pointed out a lack of capacities for production techniques for sustainable land and forest use; therefore it is necessary to review contents of technologies introduced by the project. Regarding the capacity building of participating farmers, participating farmers thought that their capacity improved through the CSP activities. However, the activities aimed at sustainable land and forest use are limited. Therefore, it is difficult to say that the achievement of the capacity building of the farmers is enough to address forest issues and their own livelihoods. It is necessary to continue the capacity building of participating farmers for forest conservation. It should be noted that there are two important points in capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers. The first point is the duration of the process of capacity building. Since the capacity building by the project is just the first step, it should be continued by relevant authorities. The second point is the emphasis on technical capacity for sustainable land and forest use. Although extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers recognize the importance of forest recourses, they have not fully implemented such activities yet. Therefore, it is necessary to continue the capacity building for this aspect. In conclusion, it is thought that the project has contributed to the capacity building of extension staffs (C/Ps) and participating farmers in order to effectively carry out CSP. References Ishibashi, N Assignment completion report Training and Extension JICA Study on Training Needs Assessment of the Target PAFOs and DAFOs. The Basic Study for the Forest Management and Community Support Project in Lao PDR. JICA Towards Capacity Development of Developing Countries based on Their Ownership Concept of CD, Its Definition and Its Application in JICA Projects-. JICA Capacity Assessment Handbook

88 Chapter 5 Efforts to Enhance the Sustainability of the Project <Abstract> From the early stage, FORCOM placed great importance on the sustainability of the project. Various measures have been invented and taken to enhance the sustainability at three different levels: the central government (mainly NAFES of MAF), local authorities (provincial and district levels) and communities. FORCOM has taken different approaches to each of the three levels depending on the roles they play: the central government in internalizing the outcomes of the project and allocating budget; the local authorities in institutional strengthening and securing budget for project implementation; and the communities in implementing project activities on the ground. As a result, the efforts at the central level culminated in the endorsement of the Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT) by NAFES as an effective tool for shifting cultivation stabilization and livelihood improvement, and the CSPT has been internalized into the Lao Extension Approach. At the local-government level, the action plans for following up on project activities have been developed by the local authorities concerned. At the community level, participating farmers have become able to sustain their activities through the Implementation Committee and the revolving system. In the Initial Sites and the 1 st Pilot Sites, the increasing number of interested farmers has joined the productive activities through the revolving system. These measures at the central, local and community levels have laid the foundation for the current activities to be sustainable. However, whether the project activities are further expanded and the sustainability can be enhanced after the project termination remains to be seen given the limited public finance. Therefore, continued follow-ups should be provided until the sustainability is enhanced. Keywords: sustainability, participatory approach, ownership, two-tiered (central- and local authority level and village level) approach, revolving system 1. Sustainability in the context of the project At the outset, it should be clarified what the term sustainability means. In general, it means being self-reliant without support or control from others. In the context of project activities, it refers to a circumstance in which outcomes of a project are sustained even after the termination of a project (A Practical Approach to Project Evaluation; International Cooperation Press). According to A Practical Approach to Project Evaluation, sustainability of a project is evaluated through a holistic assessment of various aspects: policy/institutional; organizational; financial; technical; social, cultural and environmental and so forth. Putting in the context of FORCOM, the sustainability refers to the circumstance in which the beneficiaries of FORCOM are capable of sustaining the outcomes of the project without any further support from FORCOM even after the project termination. The sustainability of FORCOM then is evaluated through a holistic assessment of various aspects of project activities: policy/institutional; organizational; financial; technical; social, cultural and environmental and so forth. Ensuring the sustainability of project outcomes is one of the challenges that any donors of international cooperation face toward the end of projects. How can the sustainability of project outcomes be ensured after the project without donors input such as technical advisors and financial support?

89 FORCOM has made every effort to address the challenge through various approaches. The following sections summarise the strategy, approaches and outcomes of such efforts in ensuring the sustainability. 2. Strategy to enhance sustainability 2.1. Basic strategy and its elements In principle, FORCOM has adopted a two-tiered approach of top-down and bottom-up in its project activities. A top-down approach aims to disseminate the needs and policies of the central and local authorities among communities so that farmers can put them into practices on the ground. On the other hand, a bottom-up approach aims to communicate the needs and realities of communities up to the central and local authorities to be integrated into their policy-making and planning processes. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and its provincial and district offices are responsible for formulating policies and secure budgets, whereas communities and farmers are the main actors for implementing such policies. In this sense, policy will be of no practical use without communities involvement in its implementation process; therefore it is essential to link the authorities and communities if policy enforcement and sustainability are to be ensured. FORCOM has attempted to facilitate the two-way communication between the authorities and communities through a two-tiered approach of top-down and bottom-up in project planning and management. Specifically, FORCOM s strategy to enhance sustainability focuses on three elements: i) institutions (central- and local-authorities and communities) and ii) human resources and iii) elaborate, yet flexible planning of specific measures to enhance sustainability. The following sections explore institutional and planning aspects of the strategy (the second aspect, human resources, is described in the section 4 of this chapter). The institutions that have been involved in FORCOM activities include the central authority (mainly NAFES of MAF), local authorities (provincial and district levels) and communities. The section on the third element, elaborate planning of specific measures, also describes how the plans for ensuring sustainability have been put into practice through various innovative measures Three approaches to institutions (1) Central-government (mainly NAFES/MAF) Agriculture and forestry extension used to be conducted by each department under MAF. However, the increased awareness about unified extension policy and structure has led to the foundation of National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Service (NAFES) in June NAFES was established as one of the departments during the MAF reorganization in 2001 and the extension structure gradually began to take shape through the establishment of provincial and district extension offices. Upon the establishment of the NAFES, Laos Extension for Agriculture Project (LEAP) commenced with the support from Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation. The phase I of LEAP tested a participatory extension process and developed the Lao Extension Approach (LEA), which was endorsed by the MAF in December 2005 as the official extension approach for agriculture in Laos. FORCOM is a project affiliated with NAFES. NAFES is responsible for internalizing/institutionalizing project outcomes and securing budget for replicating and expanding activities, and thus a key agency in enhancing the sustainability of FORCOM s outcomes. FORCOM has, therefore, worked mainly with the NAFES at the central government level and made collaborative efforts in internalization of project outcomes and institutionalization

90 Box. 4 Institutionalization and internalization of project outcomes FORCOM considers that institutionalization of FORCOM s outcomes requires i) establishment of LEA+CSPT as a model; ii) endorsement of LEA+CSPT by NAFES/MAF as an effective extension tool; iii) institutional arrangement for implementing LEA+CSPT; and iv) self-sustainable budgetary arrangement by central and/or local authorities for continuing and expanding LEA+CSPT. Sustainability is realized when these four conditions are met. On the other hand, FORCOM defines the internalization of FORCOM s outcomes as the situation where the first two conditions, i) establishment of LEA+CSPT as a model and ii) endorsement of LEA+CSPT by NAFES/MAF, are met. At this stage, the foundation for ensuring sustainability is laid though the level of sustainability may not be high (2) Local authorities (agriculture, finance, and planning offices in provinces/districts) Local agriculture authority, or provincial and district agriculture and forestry offices, are the administrative unit responsible for implementing extension policy of the MAF on the ground. As the local authorities play an important role in continuing and replicating project activities after the project termination, FORCOM has paid a special attention to the measures to enhance sustainability at the local level. In the last half of the project term, FORCOM has proposed to the MAF to establish the Committee for Ensuring the Sustainability of FORCOM s Outcomes (CS) in each target province and district. The purpose of the CS is to formulate an action plan for each province and district to continue and expand project activities after the project termination. The action plan specifically addresses the strengthening of extension staff s capacities and implementation structure, a monitoring system, and a budgetary plan to continue and expand project activities. In order to enhance the impact, CS involves not only the agriculture authority but also the planning and investment offices and financial authorities of provinces and districts. The formulation and implementation of the action plan by target provinces and districts is another key to the sustainability of FORCOM s outcomes. (3) Communities and farmers The main actors in project implementation on the ground are communities and farmers in the target areas. Thus, the internalization/institutionalization of project outcomes at the central level or the action plan formulation at the local level is not enough to ensure the sustainability on the ground. How the communities and farmers can be self-reliant in continuing the activities holds the third key to ensuring the sustainability of FORCOM s outcomes. Based on such an understanding, FORCOM has attempted to enhance a sense of ownership and self-reliance of target communities by various measures such as creating a good understanding of the role and responsibilities of communities, activity groups and each participating farmer. These measures also include developing an in-kind revolving system and strengthening a village-level implementation structure. They are devised as community support programme tools so that the participating communities and farmers can be self-reliant in sustaining project activities even if the support from the central and local governments may not be sufficient after the project termination

91 2.3. Planning of specific measures to enhance sustainability The purpose, strategy and activities were specified and written in the project document prepared at the time of project formulation in 2004, but the detailed measures to ensure and enhance sustainability were not well specified in the document at the stage. Therefore, additional planning was done during the first six months after the project started in February 2004, the details of which are described below. (1) Decomposition of the project term into four stages In order to devise elaborate, yet flexible measures adaptable to changes in various stages of project implementation, the project term of five years were divided into the four stages and the target for each stage was specified. a) 1 st stage (start-up stage: Feb. - Aug. 2004) The first six months (Feb. Aug. 2004) was devoted to laying the foundation for smooth start-up of project activities. In Feb. and Mar., FORCOM project office in Luang Prabang and the coordination office in Vientiane were set up and office equipment procured. From Apr. to Aug., the project conducted a baseline survey for collecting necessary information in the target areas. The project document was revised by elaborating on the background, challenges, strategy of the project and project implementation management. b) 2 nd stage (learning-by-doing stage: Sep throughout 2005) The second stage aimed at equipping the counterpart staff with basic knowledge and skills necessary for implementing activities in target villages. Four villages were identified as Initial Sites, where the project staff (experts and Lao counterpart staff) provided the Provincial Implementation Teams (provincial and district extension staff) with on-the-job training on basic knowledge and skills for participatory extension work. At the same time, participatory planning in Initial Sites helped farmers analyse their livelihoods and learn how to make a plan with the support from extension staff. c) 3 rd stage (self-initiating stage: 2005 through 2008) In the third stage, the Provincial Implementation Teams who had been trained through the on-the-job training in the Initial Sites were expected to apply the knowledge and skills learned from the second stage to new project sites in their respective province. New project sites where the Provincial Implementation Teams play a major role in initiating or facilitating village-level extension activities are called Pilot Sites. In the Pilot Sites, the level of involvement of the project staff (experts and Lao counterpart staff) was low; only periodical visits were made to assist the Provincial Implementation Teams. The target of this stage was to expand the activities to about five villages per province or 30 villages in the six target provinces. d) 4 th stage (emerging sustainability stage: 2008 to project termination in Feb. 2009) In the fourth or the final stage, farmer-to-farmer extension was expected to happen in and around Initial/Pilot Sites with a minimal support from the Provincial Implementation Teams. Where activities expand from participating to non-participating farmers in Initial/Pilot Sites or neighbouring villages is called extension spots as extension activities are initiated and expanded by farmers themselves. In this stage, project outcomes begin to expand and scale up without direct support from the project; hence the activities become self-sustaining and sustainability begins to emerge at the village level

92 (2) Detailed measures to enhance sustainability at the village level a) Introduction of a revolving system The sustainability of village-level activities depends largely on how the activities expand from initial participants to other farmers. FORCOM attempted to ensure the village-level sustainability by introducing a revolving system. FORCOM defined the revolving system as a system whereby farmers receiving in-kind support (e.g. pig) directly from the project transfer the output or accrued benefits (e.g. piglets) to other farmers, hence allowing for expanding activities on a sustainable basis. Under the FORCOM s revolving system, farmers receiving direct support from the project are responsible for transferring the output or benefits to other interested farmers in kind or in cash. The value of the benefits being transferred should be equivalent to or higher than the amount originally supported by the project. The interest rates are also applied to the revolving system. The revolving terms differ depending on the nature of activities; one year for short-term activities (e.g. pig and goat raising) and three years for long-term activities (fruit tree planting). b) Number of initial participating farmers receiving project support (beneficiaries) If a sense of self-help was to be created, it would not be effective to provide free-for-all support to all the interested farmers in the target villages. Based on such an understanding, FORCOM limited the number of initial participants to % of the total interested farmers. Those who are not chosen at the initial member selection can still receive project support through the revolving system. From the initial participants standpoint, the fact that other farmers are waiting to receive accrued benefits from initial participants serves as peer pressure. Such pressure works to encourage initial participants to seriously engage in their project activities and transfer the benefits to other interested farmers without fail. c) More than 50 % of cost sharing by participants Participating farmers are required to share more than 50% of the costs associated with their project activities. The cost-sharing by participants aims to enhance their sense of ownership and prompt their commitment to bringing the activities to a success. As most farmers have a limited cash income, participants would contribute whatever is available such as local materials and labor. Participants contribution in kind or labor is calculated in the monetary term and should exceed 50% of the costs for the project activities in their village. 3. Measures taken at three levels of institutions and the results 3.1. Central government: internalization of CSPT into LEA through the Coordination Group (CG) (1) Background of internalization of CSPT At the time of FORCOM s Mid-term Evaluation Study in August 2006, the suggestion was made that MAF/NAFES take the lead in organizing a working group to discuss necessary actions for internalizing CSPT in the extension system of Laos. The establishment of a working group was suggested as a venue to assess the effectiveness of CSPT and discuss the way to expand CSPT activities even after the project termination. It was agreed then that NAFES would take the lead in operating the suggested working group and the project would serve as a facilitator. Responding to this suggestion, FORCOM and NAFES soon started a series of discussions on a possible approach to set up such a working group under the authority of NAFES. Through the discussions with NAFES and other donors, FORCOM identified common

93 interests of NAFES and donor projects in improving the national Lao Extension Approach to better respond to emerging needs of extension services. FORCOM thus decided to set up a working group as a NAFES-led discussion forum to deal with a wide range of issues aimed at upgrading LEA, rather than an ad-hoc group to discuss solely the internalization of CSPT into LEA. Although the momentum was somewhat lost during the MAF reorganization that started in May 2007, the endeavour began to take shape when the concept paper on the Coordination Group on Lao Extension Approach was formulated in July 2007 and shared with NAFES and MAF as well as other NAFES-affiliated projects for their review and comments. It was also presented to the fifth Joint Coordination Committee Meeting in November Upon the completion of reorganization of NAFES in March 2008, the internal approval was given by NAFES to officially launch the Coordination Group as a NAFES-led discussion forum (Ref. no.0851 and 0852/NAFES; 25 March 2008). (2) Basic principles in internalizing CSPT into LEA a) Promotion of Lao ownership From the beginning, FORCOM tried to create a common understanding that the Coordination Group would be set up as a group led and managed by NAFES rather than by FORCOM. The chair person of CG is Mr. Somxay Sisanonh, Deputy Director-General of NAFES and the members include head of all divisions and national project directors of NAFES-affiliated projects. FORCOM provides support and advice for its operation as the secretariat. In internalizing CSPT into LEA, NAFES should analyze and evaluate the effectiveness and achievements of CSPT on their own and consider how CSPT can be internalized, while FORCOM provides suggestions and directions for CSPT internalization. b) Inclusiveness and mutual benefits for all members Internalization of CSPT into LEA should be addressed from a broad perspective; in particular, it is important to assess the effectiveness and uniqueness of CSPT against similar tools developed by other projects in line with LEA. CG members should get all the NAFES-affiliated donors involved in the discussion of priority extension issues and necessary improvements to LEA as NAFES and its donors are required to adjust their extension activities to the emerging extension structure introduced during the reorganization of MAF in Sharing experience and lessons among CG members about various extension tools such as CSPT could help identify good practices in extension, providing mutual learning opportunities and prompting improvements in LEA. c) Capacity building of NAFES It is expected that the capacities of NAFES for developing strategies and coordination would be strengthened through the operation and dialogue at the CG

94 (3) Concept and approach to the internalization of CSPT into LEA a) Concept of internalization: what the internalization of CSPT into LEA means The activities geared toward the internalization of CSPT are elaborated in the Project Design Matrix (see Annex-2) and the Plan of Operation. In more specific terms, FORCOM considered that the internalization, as specified in the Project Design Matrix, would be complete only when the following four conditions are met: i) NAFES has identified and analyzed the good practices of CSPT through the CG meetings; ii) NAFES has endorsed CSPT as one of the extension tools within LEA; and iii) NAFES has issued an official endorsement announcement to relevant authorities (e.g. provincial and district agriculture and forestry offices). By achieving the internalization, the CSPT would be expected to be used widely by NAFES and donors engaged in extension and thus the sustainability of the project enhanced. b) FORCOM s approach to the internalization of CSPT into LEA As described earlier, FORCOM aims to ensure the expansion and replication of CSPT by internalizing CSPT as one of the tools available under the LEA, paving the way for a wider use by NAFES and donors in their own activities. LEA is the common framework for extension in the country and CSPT is added to LEA as an additional tool for a more effective extension activities. It was expected that the discussions at the CG meetings would help NAFES identify good practices and effective extension tools developed by NAFES-affiliated projects and assess which tools to be added to LEA in order to upgrade LEA into LEA+. With regard to CSPT, it was expected that NAFES and other CG members would identify the added value of CSPT and hence agree internalize it into LEA as one of the effective extension tools. It was considered imperative that the internalization of CSPT be addressed in light of the new extension structures and the need to improve LEA to better respond to the emerging needs of extension services. Figure 88 Upgrading LEA into LEA+ Drawn by the author

95 Box. 5 Lao Extension Approach and the internalization of CSPT into LEA Lao Extension Approach, or LEA, is the official extension approach endorsed by the MAF (MAF Instruction/0065/2005). It involves a set of policies, principles, structures and processes that should be applied in all provinces and districts, and by all projects that support extension activities in the Lao P.D.R (The Lao Extension Approach, NAFES). LEA provides various tools for extension work as well. Given this, CSPT would not replace the LEA; rather the internalization of CSPT into LEA would add value to the LEA by introducing additional LEA tools available for use by provinces, districts and donor-supported projects for extension work, particularly in upland areas. NAFES is in the process of upgrading LEA by capitalizing on the lessons and good practices from NAFES-affiliated projects. LEA+ refers to the upgraded LEA, which incorporates various additional tools and methodologies. (4) Progress of the Coordination Group on LEA and FORCOM s contribution Since the launch in March 2008, monthly meetings have been held with specific agenda topics presented by a lead presenter e.g. village development fund, gender and extension, and extension in remote areas. The regular discussions have enabled effective sharing of information and experience as well as mutual learning. Detailed recommendations were made for each topic discussed at the monthly meetings, which would eventually be a reference for the NAFES management in deciding which good practices should be incorporated in the LEA+. With regard to FORCOM s contribution, it presented at the 5 th meeting the experience with CSPT and its achievements in shifting cultivation stabilization and livelihood improvement and so forth. At the 8 th meeting, a suggestion was made that he CSPT be internalized into LEA and was well received by the members. The chair announced that the CSPT would be endorsed as an effective extension tool to be added to LEA and to be called LEA+CSPT. The official announcement letter about LEA+CSPT was issued by NAFES in December 2008 and sent to relevant offices in order to disseminate and encourage the use of LEA+CSPT (No. 3588/NAFES; 29 December 2008; see Annex-5)

96 Figure 89 Past CG meeting topics and related activities Date March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 Main topics and activities 1 st meeting of the CG Generating a common understanding of purpose of CG and what LEA is about Introductions of each NAFES-affiliated project 2 nd meeting of the CG Introduction of Nam Ngum Basin Development Sector Project (village development fund) 3 rd meeting of the CG Introduction of Sustainable Forest Management and Rural Development Project (village development fund) 4 th meeting of the CG Introduction of Sustainable Forest Management and Rural Development Project (rural development, gender mainstreaming) Lao Extension Approach (principles, structure and process) 5 th meeting of the CG Introduction of Forest Management and Community Support Project 2 (Community Support Programme Tool, efforts to enhance sustainability, internalization into LEA) 6 th meeting of the CG Introduction of Sustainable Forest Management and Rural Development Project (village development fund, rural development process) Summary of the meetings th meeting of the CG Introduction of Rice Seed Multiplication Project (seed distribution system) Case study on shifting cultivation stabilization and permanent job creation by the Shifting Cultivation Stabilization Division Discussion with NAFES on the internalization of CSPT into LEA 8 th meeting of the CG Suggestion of the internalization of CSPT into LEA (LEA+CSPT) Preparation of an endorsement letter about LEA+CSPT by NAFES New mandate of Planning Division (planning) 9 th meeting of the CG Comments on the draft letter on the internalization of CSPT into LEA New mandate of Planning Division (cooperation) Set-up of monitoring and evaluation system within NAFES Announcement letter on LEA+CSPT to be issued by NAFES and disseminated to provinces and districts Official announcement of the endorsement of LEA+CSPT at the seminar on the achievements of FORCOM project on 6-7 January Discussions with NAFES about the expansion and replication of LEA+CSPT (5) Challenges ahead in enhancing sustainability at the central-government level a) Exit strategy It is imperative that FORCOM review the exit strategy specifically geared to effective consolidation of CSPT and lay out a direction toward the follow-up phase of the project

97 b) Assistance to the NAFES committee for developing LEA+ There is a plan that NAFES would set up a committee with all heads of divisions with a view to accelerating the efforts in mapping out what entails to develop LEA+. It is suggested that FORCOM provide assistance to the planned committee as well as to the CG so that there would be sufficient communications of feedbacks between the two forums in the process of developing LEA+. c) More active involvement in the Upland Sub-working Group In order to further enhance the sustainability, it is essential FORCOM actively participate in the Upland Sub-working Group of the MAF and make CSPT know to the members as the Upland Sub-working Group is an important venue for developing relevant policies for upland development. Through the Sub-working Group, FORCOM could share the lessons learned from CSPT and encourage a wide audience to apply it if appropriate; such an effort could also open the way for potential financial support for the expansion of CSPT in the target areas. d) Securing financial resources for the continuation and expansion of CSPT The internalization of CSPT into LEA does not necessarily ensure the continuation and expansion of CSPT use in the existing target areas. The effective replication of CSPT requires sufficient financial support for extension staff and villages. FORCOM plans to continue to urge sufficient allocation of national budget to extension work through the dialogue at the Committee for Sustainability. In addition, it is suggested that external funding sources be sought such as special funds of donor agencies Local authorities: Committee for Sustainability development and implementation of Action Plan (1) Background of the Committee for Sustainability of FORCOM s Outputs At the time of FORCOM s Mid-term Evaluation Study in August 2006, suggestion was made that regular meetings be organized with Provincial Agriculture and Forestry Offices and Provincial Department of Planning and Investment with a view to lay out a plan to continue and expand project activities. Responding to the suggestion, FORCOM organized preparatory meetings with NAFES and relevant authorities from provinces and districts in June and November 2007, where the participants agreed to set up the Committee for Sustainability (CS) for Ensuring the sustainability of FORCOM s Outcomes at the local level with provinces taking the lead and with FORCOM providing necessary support. (2) Basic principle in setting up the Committee for Sustainability Promotion of Lao ownership It is often the case that the province-based or district-based agriculture projects are implemented solely by the agriculture authorities and thus financial or planning authorities are not well aware of the details of the projects. As projects are designed to put specific policies of the central or local authorities into practice, they should involve a wide range of actors at the provincial and district levels in its implementation process along with the main department. Engaging key stakeholders as widely as possible in decision-making would help generate a sense of ownership. Based on such an understanding, FORCOM attempted to involve, along with the agricultural

98 authority, the planning and investment department and the financial department of the provinces and districts in its efforts in enhancing the sustainability as they hold a key to developing long-term development plans for provinces and districts. (3) Progress of the Committee for Sustainability A preparatory meeting for setting up the proposed CS was organized twice in June and November 2007 with the participation of relevant authorities from the six target provinces, where the purpose, TOR and expected outcomes of the CS were agreed upon. The 1st meeting of CS was organized in Houaphan Province in January 2008, followed by a meeting in Luang Prabang in March 2008 and in Sayaboury Province in September The summaries of the outcomes of the respective meetings are as follows: Figure 90 June 2007 November January 2008 March September January 2009 (plan) Past CS meeting topics and related activities Main topics and activities 1 st Preparatory Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Creating a common understanding of the purpose of the CS Relevant policies of NAFES Report on project activities by each province Discussion on the members of the CS 2 nd Preparatory Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Exchanging views on CSPT Discussion on TOR of the CS Approval of TOR, discussion topics and schedule 1 st Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Enhancing the understanding of CSPT Preparatory work for drafting an action plan 2 nd Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Presentation of the draft action plan by each province 3 rd Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Presentation on the action plan by each province Status of budgetary request and allocation 4 th Meeting of the Committee for Sustainability Presentation on the revised action plan Future plan for securing budget a) 1 st meeting of CS: March 2008 The Committee for Sustainability was set up as a venue to assess the outcomes of FORCOM and discuss the sustainability of the project with the relevant authorities well before the termination of the project. The uniqueness of the CS is that it consists of not only provincial agriculture and forestry offices but also the provincial departments of finance, and planning and investment. The first meeting of the CS agreed that such an inclusive forum to discuss sustainability is the first in its kind and thus responded very positively to the establishment of the Committee. Also, the participants from the target provinces exchanged views and ideas on drafting an action plan to continue and expand the project activities. b) 2 nd meeting of CS: June 2008 Based on the information and ideas shared at the first meeting, the Committee in each province prepared and presented the draft action plan. Active discussions were held regarding how detailed the action plan should be and which particular information would be

99 needed in order to be eligible for government funding. The meeting agreed to revise the draft action plan based on the suggestions made during the meeting. c) 3 rd meeting of CS: September 2008 The revised action plans were presented by the six provinces. The plan included two sections: i) a plan for monitoring and following-up of the existing project sites; and ii) a plan for expanding the activities to new villages. All the six provinces prepared the first plan, but some provinces did not present the latter plan because of the tight budgetary situations. Even with the provinces which presented the plan for expansion, many of them have not obtained the budget from the finance authorities nor did they elaborate the process for requesting budget. The plan for monitoring and follow-up activities were not specific enough either. Given this situation, the meeting agreed to further improve the action plan and present an elaborate plan at the next meeting in January The action plans presented at the third meeting are as follows: Figure 91 Action plan of six target provinces presented at 3 rd CS meeting in Sep Sayaboury province Bokeo province Luang Namtha province Houaphan province Luang Prabang province Vientiane province 1. Project title Project for ensuring sustainability of FORCOM s outcomes Project for forest management and community support Project for shifting cultivation stabilization, poverty reduction & environment protection Project for monitoring and strengthening FORCOM s Project for monitoring/ follow-up of FORCOM s outcomes Project for forest management & community support Project for rural livelihood improvement 2. Project term* 2008/ / Target areas FORCOM sites (4) new sites (?) 4. Main Follow-up activities Expansion 5. Budget Total 2008/ /2011 FORCOM sites (5) new site (1) outcomes 2008/ /2013 FORCOM sites (4) new sites (4) 2008/ / /2011 FORCOM sites (4) FORCOM sites (4) new sites (22) Follow-up Expansion Total 2008/ /2011 FORCOM sites (4) new sites (4) Follow-up Follow-up Follow-up Follow-up Expansion Expansion Expansion Total Total Total Total 250 mil. kip 220 mil. kip 344 mil. kip 30 mil. kip 191 mil. kip 186 mil. kip 08/ / Not specified / 11 Not specified Not specified / 12 Not specified Not specified 75 Not specified Not specified Not specified 12/ 13 Not specified Not specified 45 Not specified Not specified Not specified Note: The project term is in the Lao fiscal year (from 1 October to 30 September)

100 Figure 92 Provincial Committee for Sustainability District Committee for Sustainability Provincial and district CS members by province Sayaboury province Bokeo province Luang Namtha Houaphan province <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Head, PAFO Deputy Head, DPI Deputy Head, DOF Head of Planning Div., PAFO <Chair> <members> <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Head, PAFO Head, DPI Head, DOF Deputy Head, PAFEC <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Head, DAFO staff, Planning/ cooperation staff, Finance Div. Women s Union PAFO: Provincial Agriculture and Forestry Office; DPI: Department of Planning and Investment; province <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Deputy Head, PAFO staff, DPI staff, DOF staff, PAFEC <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Deputy Head, DAFO Head, Planning Div. Head, Finance Div. Women s Union <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Deputy Head, PAFO staff, DPI staff, DOF Deputy Head, PAFEC <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Head, Policy/Planning Div. Women s Union Head, Finance Div. staff, DAFO staff, Rural Development Committee Luang Prabang province <Chair> Head, PAFO <members> Deputy Head, DPI Deputy Head, DOF Deputy Head, Admin. Dpt. Deputy Head, PAFO Head of Planning Div., PAFO <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Head, DAFO Head, Planning Div. Head, Finance Div. staff, Rural Development Committee Women s Union DAFO: District Agriculture and Forestry Office DOF: Department of Finance Vientiane province <Chair> Governor <members> Deputy Head, PAFO Deputy Head, DPI Deputy Head, DOF staff, PAFEC <Chair> Vice Governor <members> Deputy Head, DAFO staff, Planning Div. staff,, Finance Div. staff, Rural Development Committee Women s Union (4) Future plan of the Committee for Sustainability The third meeting of the CS agreed that further elaboration of action plans would be necessary as the action plans would need more details on future activities based on the past experience and its review. It was also agreed that more collaboration among the CS members should be made in elaborating the action plans. The revised action plans will be presented at the seminar on the achievement of FORCOM on 6-7 January After that, the CG in the six provinces plan to start the implementation of the plan in the fiscal year 2009/2010. (5) Challenges of the Committee for Sustainability a) Monitoring the implementation of the action plans The action plans should be put into action if they are to be effective in enhancing the sustainability. Give the prevailing situation of insufficient human and financial resources and implementation structure, it is imperative to provide a long-term support to the relevant organizations at the local level. It is also worth considering a flexible monitoring system suitable to the current conditions. b) Support to the Committee for Sustainability FORCOM has introduced the Committee for Sustainability as an important venue for all the project-related organizations to discuss the sustainability of the project outcomes and develop a concrete plan for ensuring the sustainability. This endeavour has been highly praised by the Lao authorities. In addition, the CS serves as a forum for mutual learning among the members. Having developed the action plans, the CS needs to address how to proceed in the future

101 c) Securing financial resources for CSPT Securing the financial resources holds a key to continuing and expanding the project activities effectively. The continued efforts should be made by the CS members in securing budget on their own. In addition, the possibility of seeking other financial resources should be explored e.g. policy bank, specific funds of donors Communities and farmers: production activity planning and implementation by Implementation Committee and production groups (1) Establishment of the Implementation Committee and production groups FORCOM introduced the establishment of Implementation Committee in each target village as the facilitator of community-based production activities supported by the project. Individual-based activities tend to face difficulties in sharing information and monitoring the outcomes. With the organization of the Implementation Committee, however, it is expected that information sharing among participating farmers and collection of monitoring data would be easier. (2) Clarifying the roles and responsibilities of village and participants Main actors in project activities at the village level include i) village (farmers), ii) DAFO (extension staff), and iii) FORCOM (project staff). Among these actors, farmers or a village as a whole are the main beneficiaries of the project-supported production activities. Recognizing that farmers participation without clear role and responsibilities would hamper a sense of ownership, FORCOM has specified the following role and responsibilities of farmers, encouraging the participation of those who are willing to accept such responsibilities. i) to think by oneself about what they want and need to improve his/her livelihood (a sense of ownership); ii) to take the lead in his/her production activities (a sense of ownership); iii) to bear the partial costs of what is necessary for production activities (cost-sharing); and iv) to transfer the benefits from the project-supported activities to other interested farmers (the revolving system). (3) Continuation and expansion of activities through the revolving system FORCOM placed great importance on the introduction of a revolving system, especially in-kind. This is because the in-kind revolving system is easy for farmers to handle as it does not require any transactions of cash. For example, famer A having received two female mature pigs from the project would raise them till they produce piglets and transfer the piglets and the techniques for pig raising to another interested farmer B. The piglets transferred to the farmer B should be equivalent or higher than the value of the original pigs the farmer A received from the project. (4) Participant signboards put up over participants door way FORCOM has provided a signboard for each participating farmer to put up over their front door. Each signboard indicates the name of the participant, activity, the date s/he participated along with a logo of FORCOM. The objectives of the signboard are i) to

102 generate a sense of responsibility; and ii) to strengthen their motivation by making his/her activities widely known to other villagers. The colour of signboards is different among the initial and following participants so that the expansion of activities can be visually understood. 4. Observations 4.1. Central-government level FORCOM started in February and developed Community Support Programme Tool (CSPT), which aims at reducing farmers dependency on shifting cultivation in the northern upland areas by providing alternative livelihoods. The CSPT is designed in line with the officially endorsed Lao Extension Approach, thus sharing similar principles, structure and process. For an effective implementation, LEA should offer a variety of tools and technical menus to respond to different extension needs. The Coordination Group on LEA has rightly attempted to identify good practices and various tools developed and made available by donor-supported projects. FORCOM s CSPT is one of those officially endorsed by NAFES as one of the effective tools within the framework of LEA. The endorsement of CSPT, or LEA+CSPT, has been announced and disseminated to the authorities of all the provinces and donor agencies involved in extension (No. 3588/NAFES; 29 December 2008; see Annex-5). NAFES initiative in setting up the CG for developing LEA+ testifies to increasingly strong sense of ownership and the internalization of CSPT into LEA confirms its commitment to continuing to utilize CSPT in the country s extension work. In reality, however, many uncertainties remain regarding the budgetary allocation to actually utilize the LEA+CSPT. What is important is the strong will of the Lao government to make use of the LEA+CSPT as a tool effective for shifting cultivation stabilization, livelihood improvement and poverty reduction, and sustainable use of land and forests Local-government level CSPT has been developed with the aim of assisting farmers in the poorest districts in reducing dependency on shifting cultivation. Project support is two-fold: materials (including animals) and production techniques. Most people in the poorest districts are subsistence farmers. The survey conducted in four Initial Sites in 2004 reveals that the annual incomes were as little as 4.3 million kip (about US$400) 6.7 million kip (US$700). They would usually lack funding for investing in productive activities even if they wished to improve their livelihoods, facing the difficulty in getting out of poverty. Given the situation, FORCOM has provided minimal in-kind support for poor farmers to start new productive activities, and hence increasing incomes and improving livelihoods. Once the project comes to an end, the central and local governments are expected to replace FORCOM and provide funding (grant or loan) for poor farmers. While the public finances are limited, the government is granted various funds from the international organizations, bilateral donors and non-government organizations, which can surely be mobilized for such funding. At the time of writing, only some target provinces has secured a certain amount of funding for monitoring productive activities after the project termination. On the other hand, the plan for expanding project activities and the use of CSPT to new villages has been prepared by all the target provinces but without funding sources specified. As various funding sources are available as described above, the agriculture and forestry offices together with the departments of finance, and planning and investment should make further collaborative efforts in seeking potential funding, thus carrying out the original purpose of the CS

103 4.3. Community level In the four Initial Sites and the seven Pilot Sites, the project activities have started expanding through the in-kind revolving system without the direct input from the project. The expansion, however, is expected to come to a halt at some point when all the interested farmers in the village have received the input from the in-kind revolving system. To avoid such a situation, two measures can be taken at the village level. One is to transform the in-kind revolving system into a cash-based revolving system. An ideal cash-based revolving system involves setting up of a village development fund where the investment funding and interests from the initial participants are pooled and then are loaned out to other interested farmers for productive activities under a specific set of rules set by the village. Cash-based revolving system can be more difficult to manage then an in-kind one as the former involves cash management and accounting; however, it can be suitable for villages with a good management ability and experience with a village fund. The other measure is to expand the activities beyond the village and transfer the in-kind support to neighboring villages. This measure can be taken when the establishment of a village development fund is difficult. A question remains, however, whether the original village agrees to transfer a part of their funds to other villages. In any case, it is essential to develop their activities according to the CSP. 5. Conclusions As introduced in this chapter, various measures to enhance sustainability have been invented and tried out at the central and local government and the community levels. These measures might not be sufficient to ensure sustainability at this stage, but at least have helped lay the foundation for the project activities to be sustainable. Among the various aspects of sustainability as described in 5.1 of this chapter (policy/institutional; organizational; financial; technical; social, cultural and environmental), FORCOM has achieved a certain level of sustainability on policy/institutional, technical, and social/ cultural/environmental aspects. The sustainability of the organization and financial aspects, however, has been limited. The phase 2 of FORCOM is planned to follow up on these aspects, especially the financial aspect. FORCOM phase 2 is expected to contribute to the financial sustainability by securing financial resources for CSP activities. In addition, CSPT should be further improved to suit the realities in Laos. so that the sustainability from all the aspects can be enhanced. References FORCOM Reports from the 1 st 9 th meetings of Coordination Group on Lao Extension Approach. FORCOM Reports from the 1 st and 2 nd preparatory meetings of Committee for Sustainability for Ensuring FORCOM s Outcomes. FORCOM Reports from the 1 st and 3 rd meetings of Committee for Sustainability for Ensuring FORCOM s Outcomes. Ishikawa, M Report on the progress on the internalization of CSP into LEA. Iwasa, M The records of Forest Management and Community Support Project LEAP Project Document Phase IV ( ) of Laos Extension for Agriculture Project

104 - 94 -

105 Part III Evaluation of Forest Management and Community Support Project