Table of Contents: ESIA
LAO PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC
PEACE INDEPENDENCE DEMOCRACY UNITY PROSPERITY
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY
Environment and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA)
DRAFT 3
Scaling-up Participatory Sustainable Forest Management
Lao PDR - Forest Investment Program
SUPSFM Preparation Team
Vientiane, Lao PDR
January 2012
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND of the Project 10
1.1.1 Further Scaling Up of PSFM 11
1.2 FOMACOP/SUFORD/SUFORD AF/feasibility study FIP 11
1.2.1 FOMACOP 11
1.2.2 SUFORD 12
1.2.3 SUFORD AF 12
1.3 Goals and Objectives of SUPSFM 13
1.4 Project Components of SUPSFM 14
1.5 The Legal and Institutional Setting 15
1.5.1 Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic Laws and regulations 15
1.5.2 Judicial Bodies – the courts 16
1.5.3 Strengthening dissemination of legal information and increasing legal awareness 17
1.5.4 Key national regulations 17
1.5.5 The World Bank Operational Policies and Directives 21
2 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES 25
2.1 Field Activities 25
2.2 Village work 26
2.3 Systems and Guidelines for Implementing Field Activities 27
3 ESIA SURVEY METHODOLOGY 28
3.1 Literature review (FOMACOP, SUFORD and SUFORD AF) 29
3.2 Field survey in new provinces 29
3.2.1 Tools used during stakeholder consultation 30
3.2.2 Sampling strategy 31
3.2.3 Timing and duration or field mission 32
3.2.4 Constraints Error! Bookmark not defined.
4 Lessons learnt from past experiences 32
4.1 Free, Prior and Infromed Consultations (FPIC) 32
4.2 Mainstreaming ethnic and gender work approach 34
4.3 Village Forestry Committees and Village Development Committees 38
4.4 Benefit sharing from forest harvest revenues 40
4.5 Village development grant and Village Fund 42
4.5.1 Safeguards measures applied and gaps found 44
4.5.2 Gender equity 45
4.5.3 Capacity of project beneficiaries 47
4.5.4 Land acquisition/resettlement 48
4.5.5 Grievance and conflict resolution mechanisms 49
4.6 Participatory Sustainable Forestry Management PSFM 50
4.6.1 Land tenure 52
4.6.2 Monitoring and evaluation 53
5 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT BENEFICIARIES/ AFFECTED PEOPLE 53
5.1.1 Coverage of Field Implementation 54
5.2 Demographic data 56
5.3 Ethnicity profile 58
5.3.1 SUFORD 59
5.3.2 SUFORD AF 59
5.3.3 SUPSFM project beneficiaries in 3 new provinces 60
5.4 Ethnliguistic groups 61
5.4.1 Mon-Khmer groups 61
5.4.2 Hmong-Iu-Hmien groups 67
5.4.3 Sino-Tibetan Groups 68
5.5 Customary authorities and decision making in ethnolinguistic categories 70
5.5.1 Hmong-Iu-Hmien and Sino-Tibetan groups 71
5.5.2 Tibeto-Burmese groups 71
5.5.3 Lao-Tai groups 73
5.5.4 Mon-Khmer groups 73
5.5.5 Weakening customary structures and social implications 73
5.6 Gender 74
5.6.1 Residence Patterns 75
5.6.2 Birthing customs 75
5.6.3 Division of Labor 76
5.6.4 Women and Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) 76
5.6.5 Increased workload of ethnic minority women 77
5.6.6 Power & Decision-Making Structures 78
5.7 Socio-economic settings 79
5.7.1 Poverty profile 79
5.7.2 Target district poverty profile 80
5.7.3 Vulnerable groups 81
5.7.4 Economics and livelihood 82
5.7.5 Education 83
5.8 Health 85
5.8.1 Human trafficking 85
5.8.2 HIV 86
5.8.3 Use of health services 86
5.9 Livelihood settings 86
5.9.1 Land issues 87
5.9.2 Livelihood and agricultural production systems 87
5.9.3 Forest Use and Management (shifting cultivation, legal systems traditional versus state, land rights) 89
5.10 Exposure to external market 90
5.10.1 Traders 90
5.10.2 Infrastructure and existing markets 91
5.10.3 2+3 Contract farming 92
5.10.4 1+4 Contract Farming 93
5.10.5 Tourism 94
6 Environmental setting 95
6.1 SUPSFM Components 95
6.1.1 Regional Environmental Setting 95
6.1.2 SUFORD (old and AF) Forest Zonation 97
6.1.3 New (PFA) Province Forest Zonation 99
6.1.3.1 Vegetation cover of new Northern Province PFAs (Bokeo, Luang Namtha, Oudomxay and 99
6.1.4 A summary of forest cover for northern province PFAs 104
6.1.5 Climate Northern Areas 115
6.2 SUFORDs positive environmental (management) contributions 115
6.2.1 GOL capacity and institutional arrangements 115
6.2.2 Forest management and planning 115
6.3 SUPSFM Environmental Risks 116
6.3.1 No Project Scenario 117
6.3.2 SUPSFM Internal design challenges 117
7 INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 125
7.1 Institutional framework 125
7.2 Institutional and Implementation Arrangements 126
7.3 Government stakeholders 128
7.3.1 PAFO, DAFO (agriculture, production forest), MONRE (conservation) 128
7.3.2 Department of Agricultural Extensions and Cooperatives (DAEC) 128
7.3.3 Lao NCAW 129
7.3.4 MoIC 129
7.3.5 DoFI 129
7.3.6 National Assembly 129
7.3.7 Party internal audit system 130
7.3.8 Technical Service Centers 130
7.3.9 LFNC/LWU 130
7.3.10 Lao Bar Association 131
7.4 Civil Society Organizations 133
7.5 Village level committees 133
7.5.1 Village Forestry & livelihood development committees 133
7.5.2 Village mediation units 134
7.6 Financial management 135
8 EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL RISKS 136
8.1 Internal risks 136
8.1.1 Social risks Error! Bookmark not defined.
8.1.2 No project scenario 136
8.1.3 Risk analysis matrix and social parameters Error! Bookmark not defined.
8.1.4 Capacity risks Error! Bookmark not defined.
8.1.5 Risks related to livelihood loss 136
8.1.6 Risks related to sustainability Error! Bookmark not defined.
8.1.7 Risks related to weak consultations and participation 137
8.1.8 Land tenure and access to natural resources 137
8.2 External risks 141
8.2.1 Village consolidation 141
8.2.2 Relocation 142
8.2.3 Land concessions 143
8.2.4 Migrations and labor 149
8.2.5 Illegal Wildlife Trade 150
8.2.6 Pesticides 151
8.2.7 Incompatible Concession granting 153
8.2.8 Fire Control 156
8.2.9 Illegal Logging 157
8.2.10 Shifting cultivation and access restriction 160
9 PROJECT MITIGATION MEASURES 160
9.1 Social Mitigation Strategies Error! Bookmark not defined.
9.1.1 Checklist, Eligibility criteria and Project Screening 160
9.1.2 Enhanced community engagement and FPIC 161
9.1.3 Raising Legal awareness at community level 162
9.1.4 PLUP 163
9.1.5 Physical Cultural Resources 163
9.2 Sustainable alternative livelihood development activities 164
9.2.1 Adaptable models of forest-based livelihoods 164
9.2.2 Principles of forest-based livelihood options 166
9.3 Integrating Environmental Mitigation within a PES Approach 167
10 PROJECT FEEDBACK MECHANISMS 187
10.1 Grievance Redress mechanisms Error! Bookmark not defined.
10.2 Project grievance redress 4 steps procedures 188
10.2.1 Step 1 Village level 188
10.2.2 Technical Service centers: support mechanism for VMY Error! Bookmark not defined.
10.2.3 Step 3 District level 189
10.2.4 Step 4 Province level 189
10.2.5 Step 5 Central level 189
10.3 Format for Recording Grievance and Complaints 190
10.3.1 Griveance forms 190
10.3.2 Petitions 190
11 MONITORING AND EVALUATION 191
11.1 Internal monitoring 191
11.2 Record keeping Error! Bookmark not defined.
11.3 External monitoring 193
11.4 Participatory M&E Error! Bookmark not defined.
11.5 Disclosure Error! Bookmark not defined.
12 Appendices 194
12.1 References 194
12.2 FRAMEWORK documents 197
12.3 Forest Cover Inventory class summary 198
12.4 GOL Legal Regulations and Policies 199
Summary of key Loa PDR laws relating to forestry resources sector 200
12.5 Districts and population targeted by the SUPSFM Project in 12 provinces 205
ACRONYMS
ADB Asian Development Bank
CSO Civil Society Organizations
CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
CESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
CFV Case-Free Village
CIF Climate Investment Funds
CIFORD Community Initiative for Rural Development
CSS Country Safeguard Systems
DAFO District Agriculture and Forestry Organization
DOF Department of Forestry
DOFI Department of Forest Inspection
EGDP Ethnic Group Development Plan
EGDS Ethnic Group Development Strategy
EG Ethnic Group
ESIA Environment and Social Impact Assessment
EMFA Exemplary Managed Forests in Asia
EMF Environmental Management Framework
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization
FCPF Forest Carbon Partnership Facility
FID Forest Inspection Department
FINNIDA Finnish International Development Agency
FIP Forest Investment Plan
FMU Forest Management Units
FOMMACOP Forest Management and Conservation Project
FPIC Free, Prior Informed Consultation
FSC Forest Stewardship Council
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
GOL Government of Laos
GVFC Group of Village Forest Committees
GVFO Group of Village Forest Organisations
HBVF High Biodiversity Value Forest
HCV High Conservation Value
IDA International Development Agency
IEC Information Education Material
IRD Institut de Recherche sur le Développement
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
LAK Lao Kip
LBA Lao Bar Association
LFNC Lao Front for National construction
LPSFM Landscape Participatory Sustainable Forest Management
LUPLA Land Use Planning and Land Allocation
LSMP Legal Sector Master Plan
LWU Lao Women’s Union
MAF Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
MDB Multilateral Development Bank
MFAF Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland
MOIC Ministry of Industry and Commerce
MONRE Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources
NAFES National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Services
NAFRI National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute
NBCA National Biodiversity Conservation Areas
NC National Consultant
NPA Non Profit Associations
NPV Net Present Value
NTFPs Non Timber Forest Products
PAD Project Appraisal Document
PAFO Province Agriculture and Forestry Office
PCR Project Completion Report
PDO Project Development Objective
PES Payment for Environment Service
PFA Production Forest Areas
PLUP Participatory Land Use Planning
PSFM Participatory Sustainable Forest Management
PM Prime Minister
PRF Poverty Reduction Fund
PSC People Supreme Court
REDD Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation
SUPSFM Scaling up Participatory Sustainable Forest Management
SCF Strategic Climate Fund
SIDA Swedish international Development Agency
SFMA Sub Forest Management Areas
SIA Social impact Assessment
STEPP Strategic and Tactical Enforcement Patrol Program
SUFORD Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development Project
SUFORD-AF Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development Project – Additional Funding
SWAT Soil & Water Assessment Tool
VD Village Development
VDC Village Development Committee
VFC Village Forestry Committee
VFLC Village Forestry and Livelihood Committee
VFO Village Forest Organization
VLG Village Livelihoods Grant
VMU Village Mediation Unit
WAD Women’s Advancement Division
WB World Bank
WCS World Conservation society
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND of the Project
Lao PDR is one of the least developed countries in Southeast Asia. The country has considerable natural resources in forests, water resources, and minerals and these are significant for cultural development, environment protection, and economic development. Its forests cover about 40% of the country, the highest percentage in Southeast Asia, but the total area of forest has declined dramatically from 70% of the land area of 26.5 million ha in 1940, to 49% in 1982, and to only 40% or about 9.5 million ha in 2010. Data on changes in forest cover suggest that during the 1990s the annual loss of forest cover was around 1.4% annually, giving an average annual loss of forest cover of about 134,000 ha.
In addition to the declining forest area, there has been a steady fragmentation of forests and a decline in the average growing stock within the residual forest, which have both reduced carbon values and had a negative impact on biodiversity. Annual emissions from deforestation and forest degradation were estimated at 95.3 million tCO2e in 1982, declining to 60.6 million tCO2e by 2010. For the period from 2012-20, the average annual emission is estimated at 51.1 million tCO2e.
The Lao Forest Investment Program (FIP) to which this ESIA and subsequent safeguard frameworks (from ADB and IFC) relate, have been developed to support the national Forest Strategy 2020 (FS2020) and ongoing efforts to protect and restore forest cover and to reduce forest carbon emissions and implement a national REDD+ program. The program themes have been developed to directly address the primary drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. The underlying idea is that grassroots forest managers operating in any and all forest areas will become more active and vigilant in protecting the forests in their areas from the various agents of deforestation and degradation, and will rehabilitate degraded lands using land management systems that will provide them with livelihood benefits, while enhancing carbon stocks.
Overview of PSFM Implementation in PFAs. The current implementation of Participatory Sustainable Forest Management (PSFM) in Production Forest Areas (PFAs) has its roots in village forestry, which was piloted in the late 1990s at large scale covering two state production forests (Dong Sithouane in Savannakhet Province and Dong Phousoi in Khammouane Province). The piloting of village forestry was undertaken by the Forest Management and Conservation Project (FOMACOP) with technical assistance provided by the Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland (MFAF) and financial support by the International Development Agency (IDA) of the World Bank (WB). The appropriateness of the developed village forestry systems and procedures has been shown by the inclusion of Dong Sithouane and Dong Phousoi in the FAO List of Exemplary Managed Forests in Asia in the early 2000s, as well as by the certification as sustainably managed forests of forest management units (FMUs) in the two forest areas by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) in 2005-2010 with extension in 2010-2015.
The piloting of village forestry was followed by the institution of participatory management of production forests for nation-wide application as an official government policy in the early 2000s. Many of the current PSFM concepts, systems, regulations and operating guidelines have been formulated based on the pilot village forestry model. PSFM was first applied in 2004-2008 in 8 PFAs, which have a total area of 0.66 million ha and are located in 4 provinces in Southern Laos. This was undertaken by the Sustainable Forestry and Rural Development Project (SUFORD), which like FOMACOP were provided with technical assistance support by MFAF and financial support by IDA. MFAF and IDA continued their support through an additional financing phase, SUFORD-AF, expanding the application of PSFM to cover a total of 16 PFAs, which have a total area of 1.28 million ha and are located in 9 provinces in Southern and Central Laos.
1 Further Scaling Up of PSFM
As the completion of SUFORD drew near, the Lao Government (GOL) proposed the Lao Investment Plan to the Forest Investment Program (FIP) of the Climate Investment Fund (CIF) with the core objective of reducing GHG emissions from forests by reducing deforestation and forest degradation, conserving and enhancing carbon stocks, and sustainable management of forests (five GHG emission-reducing activities that together constitute REDD+). The Lao Investment Plan includes components on managing five categories of forest areas, i.e. PSFM in three categories of state forest areas (production/ conservation/protection), village forestry in village-use forests, and smallholder forestry in land allocated to villagers, and includes a component to strengthen the enabling environment. The proposal was favorably considered by the FIP Steering Committee with funding provided for three projects, namely: (a) Protecting Forests for Ecosystems Services with the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as the designated Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) partner, (b) Smallholder Forestry with the International Finance Corporation (IFC) as the designated MDB partner, and (c) Scaling up PSFM (SUPSFM or the Project) with WB as the designated MDB partner. During the design of the project it was deemed necessary to introduce a landscape approach to facilitate dialogue and coordination among forest managers at the local level, Provincial and District level authorities and to facilitate the inter agency support to improve local communities livelihoods and tenure security.
2 FOMACOP/SUFORD/SUFORD AF/feasibility study SUPSFM
1 FOMACOP
FOMACOP started in January 1995 and ended in September 2000. It had two sub-programs: forest management and biodiversity conservation. The forest management program consisted of "Village Forestry" in 60 villages comprising 20,000 village people and 145,000 ha of land and forests in the Savannakhet and Khammoune provinces.
One of the main features of the program was the establishment of Village Forestry Associations (VFAs) in charge of the logging of "village forest management areas" ranging in size from 400 to 600 ha. While the forests remained under state ownership, the villagers in the program areas would keep the revenue from logging after paying royalties and other taxes. On average, each village would have received about US$3000 per year. FOMACOP also supported a Land Use Planning and Land Allocation (LUP LA) activity from 1996 to 2000, which was conducted in two districts (Songkhone and Thapangthong) with a total of 39 villages.
Most villages interviewed in Savannakhet knew of the SUFORD by the name of “the Production Forest Project” or khongkan paaphalid and considered it as an extension of FOMACOP. Since FOMACOP also undertook LUP LA in selected villages and since the SIDA-supported forestry project operated in some of the same areas, several villagers mixed up the FOMACOP and the SIDA forestry project when asked to remember way back in time and assess changes.
2 SUFORD
SUFORD has been the main pillar of GOL engagement in forestry in Lao PDR and focuses on sustainable management of natural production forests. The SUFORD project was financed until December 2008 through an IDA Credit of US$9.9 million with parallel financing from GOF in the amount of EUR8 million. SUFORD operated in 8 Production Forest Areas (PFAs) in Champasak, Khammouane, Savannakhet, and Salavan. The specific project objectives were to: (a) Improve the policy, legal and incentive framework enabling the expansion of Participatory Sustainable Forest Management (PSFM) throughout the country; (b) Bring the country’s priority natural production forests under PSFM; and (c) Improve villagers’ well-being and livelihoods through benefits from sustainable forestry, community development and development of viable livelihood systems.
Field implementation of SUFORD covered about 640,000 ha of natural forests in Khammouane, Savannakhet, Salavan and Champassak provinces, including 270 000 ha of the previous FOMACOP and SIDA financed project sites. SUFORD project areas included 412 villages with an estimated population of 100,000 villagers, most of whom benefited either directly or indirectly from the project. A special attempt was made to target the poor, and village development support targeted in many cases to account for different levels of poverty. The majority of the project beneficiaries live in remote districts, where the percentage of the population rated as “poor” was higher than the national average.
The project also contributed to in situ biodiversity conservation through the maintenance of natural forest composition and structure, through the identification and protection of “high conservation value forests” within PFAs, and through creating buffers around and connectivity between National Biodiversity Conservation Areas (NBCAs). Sustainable management of production forest areas has entailed management of all resources: commercial timber; household wood; botanical non-timber forest products (NTFPs); biodiversity; and environmental services provided by the forest landscape. Forest management and control systems sufficient to achieve forest certification by Forest Stewardship Council (FSC).
3 SUFORD AF
Considering SUFORD’s implementation successes and GOL’s continuing commitment, the World Bank and GOF provided further support to the project. ”Additional Financing” (under World Bank Operational Policy 13.20), is an instrument that provides additional IDA resources (on IDA grant terms), and allows for a project extension of up to 3 years beyond the initial closing date. IDA resources during the additional financing phase were again complemented by MFAF grant resources, governed by bilateral agreement between the Governments of Finland and Lao PDR.
The Additional Finance (AF) phase of the SUFORD project 2009-2011 provided continuing support to existing SUFORD province but was expanded to include five new provinces. The majority of the population in SUFORD and SUFORD AF areas comprised ethnic groups that needed special attention and culturally appropriate communication to make them partners in the project. Additional and extra attention was also needed to involve ethnic group women in the project. SUFORD-AF added Xayaboury, Vientiane, Bolikhamxay, Sekong, and Attapeu Provinces and included 8 new PFAs with a total area of 539,630 ha. About 438,660 ha are intact forest, and of this about 352,150 ha are on slopes that were potentially harvestable. The 311 villages of SUFORD-AF were inside or within 5 km from the border of a Production Forest Area (PFA).
The project was implemented by the Department of Forestry together with the National Agriculture and Forestry Extension Service (NAFES). A group of national consultants were engaged to facilitate and support project implementation and reporting at the sub-national level. Involved agencies and contractors attached great importance to ensuring that vulnerable groups such as ethnic groups and women shared equally in the benefits derived from the project and ensuring that adverse impacts are either avoided, or if unavoidable, mitigated. SUFORD-AF worked to improve ethnic group communication and engagement through establishing relations with the Lao Front for National Construction (LFNC), Department of Ethnic Affairs, and the Lao Women Union (LWU) and the Division for the Advancement of Women in MAF.
The aim of the SUFORD-AF project was to achieve sustainable management of natural production forests, including sustainable logging based on approved management plans. Revenues from log sales were shared with local communities in an effort to reduce rural poverty reduction. The project also supported improved policy, legal and incentive frameworks for PSFM. Sustainable logging was planned based on forest inventories established with villagers’ participation. It was anticipated that villagers’ livelihoods would improve through benefits from casual labor, revenue sharing from sustainable production forestry and village development grants. Villagers were expected to take an active part in implementing forest management activities such as land and forest zoning, forest inventories as well as in designing a forest management plan at the sub-Forest Management Area (FMA) level.
3 Goals and Objectives of SUPSFM
The objectives of the SUPSFM project are building and expanding on the progress made under SUFORD and SUFORD AF but are substantially broader in that SUPSFM explicitly includes reductions in forest carbon emissions, increasing forest carbon sequestration through forest restoration and inter agency coordination at the landscape scale.
.
Project Development Objective
The project development objective (PDO) is to contribute to national REDD+ efforts to reduce carbon emissions from forests by expanding the national program of Participatory Sustainable Forest Management in Production Forests and developing and piloting Landscape PSFM in at least 4 provinces by:
a) expanding areas under approved forest management plans
b) developing and agreeing on a Landscape approach to PSFM in Lao PDR
c) increasing the number of people with monetary and non monetary benefits from forest
d) decreasing the rate of forest cover loss in project areas
e) enhancing carbon storage from assisted natural regeneration and forest restoration
f) reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation in project areas
4 Project Components of SUPSFM
The SU-PSFM Project will build on lessons learned from SUFORD and take advantage of existing and emerging opportunities for collaboration with development partners. Key lessons from SUFORD, which have been factored into project design, include mechanisms to increase capacity of the Department of Forestry (DOF) and Department of Forest Inspection (DOFI) for effective planning and implementation; improved project management by bringing consistency to deployment of capacitated staff in project areas; creating sustainable institutional mechanisms through a rigorous community engagement framework; improved safeguard mechanisms through capacity building, additional staff, partnerships with CSOs, and monitoring; expanding incentive options through sustainable livelihoods, PES, and REDD+ benefits; and deployment of dedicated staff, integration in project design, capacity building, and monitoring to mainstream equity and gender issues in all project activities.
Opportunities for collaboration exist with ongoing and planned investments by development partners in PFAs, conservation, protection and village-use forests, and in forest law enforcement. These include KfW investments in protection and conservation forest areas in Northern Lao, ADB and IFC in Southern Lao, and GIZ-EU on forest law enforcement, in addition to linkages with ongoing WB projects in poverty reduction, biodiversity, food security, and trade. The Project will include four components designed for the attainment of the PDO, as follows:
Component 1: Strengthening and expanding PSFM in Production Forest Areas
There are 34 PFAs with a total area of 1.91 million ha located in the 9 SUFORD provinces in Central and Southern Lao, but SUFORD provided support to only 16 PFAs with a total area of 1.28 million ha. The Project will continue to support activities in the 16 PFAs covered by SUFORD, but will expand PSFM implementation to cover all 34 PFAs, while adding 7 more PFAs with a total area of 0.39 million ha located in 3 Northern Lao provinces. Thus the Project will support the implementation of PSFM in 41 PFAs with a total area of 2.30 million ha. Table 1 lists the 41 PFAs and provides some relevant information about them. Component 1 will have three sub-components, namely:
• Sub-component 1A: Capacity Building and Partnerships: The sub-component is aimed at establishing mechanisms to ensure the availability of adequate and effective capacity for project implementation. The Project will take advantage of increased capacity in the natural resources and civil society sectors, as well as utilize from the outside those skills that are not available in the country. The sub-component will include the following main activities:
• Sub-component 1B: Community Engagement and PSFM Management Planning: Investments in capacity and partnerships will permit the Project to engage effectively with communities and initiate PSFM management planning in PFAs. Approaches to strengthen tenure and expand sustainable livelihood options are embedded within the community engagement process. The sub-component will include the following main activities:
• Sub-component 1C: Implementing PSFM plans in Production Forest Areas: Capacity building and community engagement will provide the foundation to effective implementation of PSFM management plans. This sub-component will focus on PFA management, consolidation and expansion of forest areas under certification, and implementation arrangements for livelihoods. The sub-component will include the following main activities:
Component 2: Piloting landscape PSFM
Landscape PSFM offers a cross-sectoral and integrated approach to manage development activities, minimize negative environmental impacts, mitigate climate change, and reduce poverty. Although this approach has not yet been implemented in Lao PDR, interest and support for working at the landscape scale is growing, e.g. ADB and KFW work on biodiversity conservation and corridors using PSFM as a model. This component is aimed at developing frameworks for managing forests at landscape scale and will pilot the application of the framework a Northern Lao biodiversity corridor in cooperation with KfW and in a Southern Lao biodiversity corridor with ADB. LPSFM plan implementation will be limited only to PFAs within the forest landscapes in conjunction with Component 1.
• Sub-component 2A: Developing Methodologies and Frameworks for LPSFM
• Sub-component 2B: Establishing Pilot LPSFM Models
Component 3: Enabling legal and regulatory environment
Component 3 will include sub-components on strengthening legal and regulatory frameworks, strengthening forest law enforcement and governance, and creating public awareness for climate change and REDD+. This component will cover the following sub-components:
• Subcomponent 3A: Strengthening Legal and Regulatory Frameworks
• Sub-component 3B: Strengthening Forest Law Enforcement and Governance
• Sub-component 3C: Creating Public Awareness for Climate Change and REDD+
Component 4: Project management
This component will cover the following sub-components:
• Sub-component 4A: Project management at the national and sub-national level
• Sub-component 4B: Technical Assistance
• Sub-component 4C: Monitoring and Evaluation
5 The Legal and Institutional Setting
1 Lao Peoples' Democratic Republic Laws and regulations
The existing environmental safeguard system of Lao PDR is important, and has been analyzed before developing the social and environmental safeguard compliance framework for SUPSFM. The World Bank safeguard policies place emphasis on using/ applying and strengthening the country safeguard systems (CSS) related to environmental management. Appendix 12.4 briefly describes the CSS related to environmental safeguards in Lao PDR, including institutional arrangements and responsibilities, as well as the regulatory framework/ legislations.
In Laos different ministries are engaged with environmental issues and environmental safeguards in the context of private and public investment. In relation to SUPSFM the lead ministries include the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) and Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources with other ministries playing supporting roles. .
Legislative and other requirements relevant to the SUPSFM include: local, provincial and national laws and regulations, operating licenses, permits and approvals, international standards and conventions and legal obligations to which the GOL is a party. Refer to the Appendix 12.4 for a list and summaries of these key documents relevant to SUPSFM.
Constitutionally, Laos is recognized as a multi-ethnic society, and Article Eight of the 1991 Constitution states, “All ethnic groups have the right to preserve their own traditions and culture, and those of the Nation. Discrimination between ethnic groups is forbidden.” For the social safeguards, therefore, the constitutional framework is in place to ensure the rights of different ethnic groups are protected. Women’s rights to equality are also entrenched in the constitution and more recent legislation.
The Letter on Forest Management Policy mentioned above contains specific policy intentions regarding “community participation in forestry”: …the GOL has adopted the principle that villagers in forest areas, organized in village forestry associations or other forms of appropriate groupings, should participate in forestry planning and operations at the field level, within the dispositions of the Prime Minister’s Order on Decentralization, and share in the benefits derived the forest.
The Forestry Law (2007) also recognizes villagers’ customary rights to forest use, and the Land Law makes provision for communal titling of land. OP 4.10 states that it is part of “ensuring that the development process fully respects the dignity, human rights, economies and cultures of Indigenous Peoples.” In this respect, the GOL is a state party to various international human rights treaties including the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) which states: “in no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.”
The first Production Forest Areas (PFAs) were created under Prime Minister (PM) Decree 59 in 2002, and the total number and area of PFAs were increased under additional decrees issued in 2006 and 2008. Subsequently the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAF) issued regulations on forest management. A timber revenue benefit sharing decree was issued in 2012. The PM Order on Decentralization (2001) and the Law on Local Administration (2003) make the Province the strategic unit, the District the budget-planning unit, with villages as the implementation unit with, however, the village enabled to “formulate development plans.”
Basic legal and policy frameworks exist to support social safeguards implementation in the Lao PDR. At the same time, however, there are two major policy areas of the GOL that affect this supporting framework: the eradication of shifting cultivation and the policy to transform villages into development centers and townships; these two major policy objectives are directed mainly at ethnic groups living in smaller villages and practicing rotational upland cultivation.
2 Judicial Bodies – the courts
In the Lao PDR, the court system is divided into four tiers: area; provincial - or, in the case of Vientiane, the Vientiane Capital Court; regional; and People’s Supreme Court (PSC). There is no district court; in 2010 the 102 district courts abolished and consolidated into area courts. The area courts have jurisdiction over civil claims less than 300 million LAK (USD 36,500), as well as minor criminal cases in which the maximum sentence is three years or less.
The provincial courts and (one) Vientiane Capital Court are the courts of first instance for those cases falling outside of the jurisdiction of the area courts, as well as being the appellate courts for cases decided by the area courts. The three regional courts - Northern, Central, and Southern - hear appeals from the provincial courts. In terms of the formal justice system and Access to Justice, the area courts are the most significant for the majority of the population in Lao PDR. This is both because of the type of cases that they handle - i.e., small disputes or minor offences - but also because of their relative proximity to where people live, particularly in the rural areas.
At central level, the People’s Supreme Court (PSC), located in Vientiane, is the highest level court and court of last resort. In addition to its appellate jurisdiction, it has authority to issue guidelines or instructions on legal issues to, and supervises the work of, the lower courts. The PSC may also serve as the court of first instance in certain important cases. In 2009, almost eight and a half thousand cases were brought to court - i.e., to the formal justice system - throughout Lao PDR.
The law provides for open trials in which defendants have the right to defend themselves with the assistance of a lawyer or other persons. . An important aspect of access to justice is the availability of legal advice. Although there have been some improvements since 2003, the shortage of lawyers continues to be a problem in Lao PDR.
3 Strengthening dissemination of legal information and increasing legal awareness
Lao PDR has embraced the goal of establishing a state firmly based on rule of law by 2020. Helping the population and especially the poor and vulnerable groups to understand and exercise their rights is a keystone of development. Legal empowerment is a process through which the poor are protected and enabled to use the law to advance their rights and interests.
The Legal Sector Master Plan (LSMP; September 2009) already recognized that capacity building and the upgrading of legal awareness, by method of dissemination of Laws and supplying legal information broadly, is essential and urgent, and will allow people access to Law and Justice. The dissemination of Laws, especially, these Laws affecting daily life of the people, protecting legitimate interests and promoting the rights and performing of obligations of all citizens in the society will primarily add to a reduction of the violation of Laws. (LSMP, 41). Developing a wide public understanding of the legal framework is the responsibility of the Law Dissemination Department within the MoJ but is also supported by the provision of community legal services through civil society organizations in legal awareness and legal aid services and also through the Lao Bar Association (LBA) project on legal aid and legal awareness.
One way to empower poor and ethnic minority communities can be achieved through the setting and training of community-based paralegals. Paralegals are persons with specialized training who can provide legal assistance to disadvantaged groups, and who often are themselves members of these groups. In Lao PDR, taking into account the amazing ethnic diversity, community-based Paralegal would be efficient in disseminating legal information and increasing legal awareness in their community.
Existing initiatives to recruit, train village para legal to raise awareness about basic law rough paralegal at community level by NGOs and LBA have proven more than satisfactory and demonstrated that community-based paralegals (1) can bring parties together to mediate, take witness statements and gather information, draft and deliver letters, assist citizens in navigating structures of authority, and organize communities to address their own justice problems; (2) can educate communities, individuals and chiefs about laws governing a particular issue and legal processes; (3) can provide many of the basic general and criminal services that clients of legal aid programs need and (4) are appropriately located to understand the issues and the form of intervention most suitable to a specific community or case.
4 Key national regulations
Decree on Sustainable Management of PFAs. (No.59/PM, Vientiane 22/5/2002).
This Decree covered the identification, establishment, planning, management and harvesting of Production Forest Areas (PFA) and the key principles for monitoring the implementation of sustainable forest management on PFAs throughout Lao PDR. It further covered the duties and functions of relevant government agencies (MAF, PAFO, DAFO), local authorities and villagers in participatory management of PFAs.
Decree on Industrial Tree Plantations and Environmental Protection. (No. 96/PM, Vientiane 11/06/2003).
This decree promoted the planting of industrial fiber plantations of fast growing indigenous and exotic species, and the planting of trees for land re-greening and environmental protection. MAF is to coordinate with local authorities to select and survey areas of “barren land, degraded forest, vacant land and secondary forest for such plantations. Technical assistance and financial incentives are to be provided to encourage plantation development.
Regulation on Establishment and Sustainable Management of Production Forests. (No. 0204/MAF, Vientiane, 30/10/2003).
This regulation appears to be a further elaboration of Prime Ministerial Decree 59 of 2002 in that it defines principles and procedures for establishing PFAs and instituting sustainable forest management “on PFAs throughout the country”. It refined the criteria for PFA selection given in Decree 59 (See Section 5.2 for a more detailed description of PFA criteria), and provided direction on both the preparation of PFA Management and operational plans and on important management activities within the PFA (boundary demarcation, timber harvesting, forest regeneration, biodiversity conservation and NTFP management). This regulation provided much more detailed direction for timber sales which has been superseded by Decree of The President of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic pertaining to the sharing of revenue from timber harvested in the Production Forest Areas. (No.001/PM, Vientiane capital, 31/1/2012) (see below).
Amended Land Law, No.61/PO, dated 21/11/2003
The objectives of the Land Law are to determine the regime on the management, protection and use of land in order to ensure efficiency and conformity with [land-use] objectives1 and with laws and regulations, and to contribute to national socio-economic development as well as to the protection of the environment and national borders of the Lao People's Democratic Republic. Of specific interest for this project are the following articles (most relevant in bold):
Article 3. (New) Land Ownership;
Article 17. Determination of Scope of Agricultural Land Use Right
Article 21. (New) Determination of the Scope of Forest Land Use Rights;
Article 22. (New) Allocation of Forest Land Use Rights;
Article 48. Land Certificate;
Article 49. (New) Land Title;
Article 52. Acquisition of Land Use Rights;
Article 53. (New) Rights of the Holder of Land Use Rights.
Forestry Law (No. 06/NA, Vientiane, 24/12/2007).
This new law supersedes the Forestry Law 13/NA of 9/11/2005. The objective of the law is to define the basic principles, regulations and measures on inventory, management planning, sustainable management, protection, development and utilization of forest resources and forestland. Natural forests are the property of the national community as represented by the government. Use can be allocated to individuals or organizations in accordance with established regulations. Conservation and maintenance of forest resources for watershed protection, biodiversity, forest services and the livelihood of local peoples is the primary objective of sustainable forest management. Of specific interest for this project are the following articles (most relevant in bold):
Article 9. Forest categories
Article 12. Production Forests
Article 27. Preservation of trees and NTFP species
Article 35. Promotion of tree and NTFP plantation;
Article 36. Management of tree and NTFP plantation activities;
Article 39. Categories of utilization of the forest and forest products;
Article 40. Utilization of forest and forest products for village benefit;
Article 41. Utilization of forests for households;
Article 42. Customary utilization of forests;
Article 49. Logging and harvesting of forest products
Article 51. Distribution of NTFP and wood products
Article 53. Transport of timber and forest products
Article 56. Categories of forestland
Article 61. Preservation of Production Forestland
Article 65. Development of Production Forestland
Article 68. Utilization of forestland for households
Decree on associations No.115/PM, Vientiane, 09//04/2009
This Decree sets the rules and regulations governing the establishment, operation and management of associations registered as legal entities in Lao PDR for the purposes of: (i) Promoting the Lao people’s rights of freedom, creativity and ownership in the organization of associations aiming at national protection and development; (ii) Providing references to individuals or organizations intending to set up their associations; (iii) Providing references to government organizations concerned in managing, facilitating and encouraging lawful activities by associations, promoting associations’ contributions towards socio-economic development and poverty eradication, as well as countering and restricting activities affecting national stability, social order and individual rights of freedom.
Decree on cooperative No.136/PM, Vientiane, 05/03/2010
This decree determines rules, regulations and measures regarding establishment, activities and administration of cooperatives in the Lao PDR in order to assist and support small commercial entrepreneurs in collectivity being competitive, cooperating and helping each others, growing in production for trade and establishing income, contributing in alleviation of poverty and improving living conditions of the people.
Decree of The President of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic pertaining to the sharing of revenue from timber harvested in the Production Forest Areas. (No.001/PM, Vientiane capital, 31/1/2012)
This decree supersedes parts of Regulation No.0204/MAF, Vientiane, 30/10/2003 most notably on the issue of benefit sharing from timber harvested. Article 1: States that the division of revenue gained from the sales of wood exploited in the production forest areas has to be divided in two parts: Part 1: Seventy percent (70%) of the total revenue as the state budgetary revenue; Part 2: Thirty percent (30%) of the total revenue as the budget to support the forestry management, protection-conservation, and development activities, primarily the production forests, and the funds for the development of villages or the village groups bordered with the production forests. Article 2: The Division of the Second Part of the Total Revenue. In order to be used into various purposes, the second part of the total revenue has to be segregated into 4 portions as follows: First portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the forests and the forestry resources; Second portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the production forest throughout the nation Third portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the exploited production forests. Fourth portion: Forty (40%) percent as the trust funds for developing the villages or village groups that are the agreement partners in the management of the production forests.
Decree on compensation and resettlement of people affected by development projects. (No. 192/PM, Vientiane, 07/07/2005).
This decree defines principles, rules, and measures to mitigate adverse social impacts and to compensate damages that result from involuntary acquisition or repossession of land and fixed or movable assets, including change in land use, restriction of access to community or natural resources affecting community livelihood and income sources. This decree aims to ensure that project affected people are compensated and assisted to improve or maintain their pre-project incomes and living standards, and are not worse off than they would have been without the project. This decree is followed by Regulations for Implementing decree 192/PM on compensation and resettlement of people affected by development projects (2010) and the Technical Guidelines on compensation and resettlement (2010).
Resolution of Politburo on Formulation of Provinces as Strategic Units, Districts as Comprehensively Strong Units and Villages as Development Units. (No. 03/PM, Vientiane, 15/02/2012)
This resolution provides general legal reference for decentralization politics. Province, district and village level governments are requested to explore new roles and responsibility for enhanced integrated leadership to enhance ownership and accountability. Two prominent sections are: “Study to define principles regarding decisions that [provinces, district] are not allowed to make by themselves (provinces/district have no right to decide), especially with regard to management, extraction and use of natural resources; management and use revenue collected that is exceeded the plan; leasing-concession or disposal of State assets, approvals and issuance of business registration, management of public vehicles and assets and others…” Secondly: Define revenue units (custom-tax) for villages and strict regulations; as well as to define expenditure regulations for management-administration village tasks, including regulations for creation of reserves, funds, collection of fees and service charges of village for transparency.
Important ongoing revision on key legislation
Two key legislations on land and forestry are currently under revision in Lao PDR. The National Assembly has oversight over a process that will lead to a land policy followed by a land use master plan, and a revised land law. The current draft of the land policy provides recognition to customary land management rights, collective management and community management rights. The design of SUPSFM is based on the existing land and forestry laws but the project will update the design and implementation plan if required, depending on the opportunities presented by the revised laws on land and forestry.
Table 1: Other related legal documents related to the project
|Legal document |Year of endorsement |
|Constitution in Lao PDR |1991, updated in 2003 |
|Decrees |
|Decree on the management and protection of Wild Animals, Fisheries and on Hunting and Fishing. |1989 |
|Decree on the Establishment of National Forest Reserves |1993 |
|Decree on the Implementation of the Law on Land No. 88 2005 and Ministerial Direction No. 564/NLMA, 6th |2007 |
|August 2007. | |
|Decree On State Land Lease and Concession Fee Rate, No. 02/PO, Date: 18/11/2009 |2009 |
|Decree on State Land Lease or Concession |2009 |
|Decree on the Preservation of Cultural, Historical and Natural Heritage |1997 |
|Decree on the Implementation of the Water and Water Resources Law |2001 |
|Implementing Decree for the Environment Protection Law |2001 |
|Decree on the Establishment of the National Regulatory Authority (NRA) for the UXO program in Lao PDR |2004 |
|Decree on the Organization and Activities of the Nam Theun 2 Catchments Management Project Authority |2005 |
|Decree on Environmental Impact Assessment |2010 |
|Laws |
|Water and Water Resources Law |1996 |
|Law on Water and Water Resources |1996 |
|Law on Agriculture |1998 |
|Environment Protection Law |1999 |
|Road Law |1999 |
|Law on Property |2002 |
|Law on National Heritage |2005 |
|Law on Labor |2006 |
|Wildlife and Aquatic Animals Law |2007 |
|Electricity Law |2008 |
|Fisheries Law |2009 |
|Regulations |
|Regulation on the Management of the National Biodiversity Conservation Areas, Aquatic and Wild Animals |2001 |
|Guidelines, Policies and Standards |
|Regulation on the Management of National Protection Areas, Wildlife and Aquatic Animals |2003 |
|Resolutions of the Lao PDR Government on National Strategic Plan for the UXO Program in the Lao People’s|2004 |
|Democratic Republic 2003 – 2013 “The Safe Path Forward” | |
|Agreement on National Ambient Environmental Standards |2009 |
|Lao PDR National UXO / Mine Action Standards |2009 |
|Environmental Guidelines for Biomass Removal from Hydropower Reservoirs in Lao PDR |2010 |
|Instruction No. 1668/NLMA. CAB, dated 29 April 2008: on the Use of New Formats of Land Titles and New |2008 |
|Registration Book | |
|Ministerial Direction No. 564/NLMA 2007: on Adjudication Pertaining to Land Use and Land Occupation |2007 |
|Right for Registration and Land Titling | |
|Public Involvement Guidelines |2009 |
|Technical guidelines on Village Grievance Handling |2010 |
|Decree on Village Grievance Handling |2010 |
|O3/PM, June 1996: Instructions and Recommendations on the Continuation and Expansion of Land Management |1996 |
|and Land and Forest Allocation | |
|822/MAF, August 1996: Directives on Land and Forest Allocation for Management and Use |1996 |
|No. 0054/MAF, 1996: Ministerial Approval/Decision on Customary Use Rights of Forest Resources |1996 |
5 The World Bank Operational Policies and Directives
The environmental and social policies and procedures of the World Bank are widely regarded as de facto international standards for the environmental and social management of resource development projects in countries with developing or absent regulatory frameworks such as Lao PDR.
The World Bank undertakes environmental screening of each of its proposed project to determine the appropriate extent and type of ESIA to be undertaken. The Bank classifies the projects into one of four categories[1] depending on its type, location, sensitivity and the nature and magnitude of impacts on communities and the environment.
While the SUPSFM project is not expected to have adverse environmental impacts, it has been assigned Category "A" status because it may trigger several bank safeguard policies. Refer to Table 2 and Table 3. This is a precautionary measure to make sure that all safeguards policies are given proper attention, and to help the SUPSFM preparation team identify ways to enhance the expected positive impacts. For a Category A projects the borrower, the Government of Lao PDR is responsible for preparing an ESIA.
Table 2 World Bank Project Classifications
|Category A: A proposed project is classified as Category A if it is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts |
|that are sensitive, diverse, or unprecedented. These impacts may affect an area broader than the sites or facilities subject |
|to physical works. EA for a Category A project examines the project's potential negative and positive environmental impacts, |
|compares them with those of feasible alternatives (including the "without project" situation), and recommends any measures |
|needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance. For a |
|Category A project, the borrower is responsible for preparing a report, normally an EIA. |
|Category B: A proposed project is classified as Category B if its potential adverse environmental impacts on human populations|
|or environmentally important areas--including wetlands, forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats--are less adverse than|
|those of Category A projects. These impacts are site-specific; few if any of them are irreversible; and in most cases |
|mitigatory measures can be designed more readily than for Category A projects. The scope of EA for a Category B project may |
|vary from project to project, but it is narrower than that of Category A EA. Like Category A EA, it examines the project's |
|potential negative and positive environmental impacts and recommends any measures needed to prevent, minimize, mitigate, or |
|compensate for adverse impacts and improve environmental performance. The findings and results of Category B EA are described|
|in the project documentation (Project Appraisal Document and Project Information Document). |
Although the SUPSFM project is intended to improve overall forest management capability and increase forest cover in Lao PDR, there is a risk that some sub-project activities my cause localized small scale negative impacts. As such the ESIA, EMF and Social Safeguard frameworks will be compliant with World Bank Safeguard Policies: Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01), Natural Habitats (OP 4.04), Forest Strategy (OP 4.36), Pest Management (OP.4.09) Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11), Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) and Ethnic Minorities (OP 4.10)
Table 3: Relevant World Bank Safeguard triggers
|World Bank Safeguard |Description/Comment |
|Environmental Assessment (OP 4.01) |In World Bank Operations, the purpose of Environmental Assessment is to |
| |improve decision making to ensure projects are sound and sustainable, and |
| |that potentially affected people have been clearly consulted. The (OP 4.01)|
| |is the umbrella policy for the banks environmental policies. Refer to Table|
| |2 |
|Natural Habitats (OP 4.04) |Forests are managed for broad range of goals, which include livelihoods, |
| |timber, conservation, biodiversity and environmental services and cultural |
| |purposes. The World Bank does not support projects involve significant |
| |conversion or degradation of critical natural habitats. Where this does |
| |occur, analysis must prove that benefits far out way costs. The bank will |
| |take account of the Loa Governments ability to implement conservation and |
| |mitigation measures. In regard to this trigger these issues are addressed |
| |in within the various technical guidelines and policies that have been |
| |developed over the SUFORD years, and the SUPSFM project environmental |
| |screening process outlined in this EMF. |
|Forest Strategy (OP 4.36) |At various levels of government, the World Bank has supported forest |
| |management projects in Lao PDR that include governance capacity building, |
| |increasing village grassroots participation, livelihood enhancement |
| |sustainable forestry, biodiversity management and conservation, forest |
| |planning and law enforcement. In regard to this trigger these issues are |
| |addressed in within the technical guidelines and policies that have been |
| |developed over the SUFORD years, and the project environmental screening |
| |process outlined in this EMF. |
|Physical Cultural Resources (OP 4.11) |The project activities will be widespread across several provinces. The |
| |areas are replete with in physical cultural resources of various sizes and |
| |values. It is known that the illegal trade of objects occurs throughout |
| |Laos, with the result being a steady erosion of Laos’s rich cultural |
| |wealth. The project environmental screening process, outlined in this EMF, |
| |will help identify and design appropriate responses to manage physical |
| |cultural resources. Together with Chance Find Procedure these provide an |
| |appropriate and effective response to cultural heritage management |
| |requirements under this World Bank trigger |
|Pest Management (OP.4.09) |Although pesticide use in SUPSFM is discouraged where alternative natural |
| |biological solutions can be practically applied, total avoidance is |
| |unlikely. Discouragement assists land managers from becoming dependent on |
| |costly and potentially destructive chemicals and fertilisers. The inclusion|
| |of this Safeguard encourages adoption of Integrated Pest Management |
| |Strategies. The project environmental screening process in this EMF will |
| |help identify and design appropriate responses to pest control. |
|Involuntary Resettlement (OP 4.12) |It is unlikely that the project will require significant acquisition of |
| |private land, if any. Local people affected by the project will benefit |
| |from more sustainable access to forest and other natural resources as well |
| |as project-supported actions for improved livelihoods. Nonetheless, short |
| |term loss in livelihood may be unavoidable since the development of |
| |alternative resource allocation and livelihoods are longer-term processes. |
| |In line with OP 4.12, any short term loss from changes in livelihoods will |
| |be mitigated in Community Action Plans which are developed in participation|
| |with project-affected communities. |
|Indigenous Peoples (OP 4.10) |Many project beneficiaries are known in Lao PDR as Ethnic Groups. In line|
| |with OP 4.10, the project has developed a Community Engagement Process |
| |Framework (CEPF) to facilitate community participation, will engage with |
| |communities. The CEPF is based on a process of free, prior and informed |
| |consultations with the goal of establishing broad community support. The |
| |CEPF ensures that Ethnic Peoples will receive benefits that are culturally |
| |appropriate and gender- and intergenerationally-inclusive. Potential risks |
| |or; adverse effects on the communities will be identified, managed, and |
| |mitigated by means of Community Action Plans which are to be developed and |
| |implemented with the participation of communities that opt to be included |
| |in the project. This aim is consistent with GoL national policies that |
| |promote a multi-ethnic society, and seek to ensure the full participation |
| |of ethnic groups in the country’s development. |
The SUPSFM design has triggered two World Bank social safeguard operational policies (OP): OP 4.10 Indigenous People and OP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement. That the project could conceivably result in land acquisition or resettlement/relocation has triggered OP 4.12. Since the GOL has determined that none of the 49 ethnic groups living in the country is “indigenous” per se, the accepted terminology used in Lao PDR is “ethnic group”.
As many of the target communities belong to ethnic groups, the World Bank Policy on Indigenous People applies. The World Bank’s policy on Indigenous Peoples requires that free, prior and informed consultations would be conducted with affected indigenous groups leading to their broad community consent to participate in the project. It also requires that potential adverse effects on the Indigenous Peoples’ communities should be avoided, and when avoidance is not feasible, should be minimized, mitigated, or compensated. Indigenous Peoples should also receive social and economic benefits from the project that are culturally appropriate and gender and intergenerationally inclusive.
While no single definition can capture their diversity, in particular geographical areas, indigenous peoples can be identified by the presence in varying degrees of the following characteristics
• A close attachment to their ancestral territories and the natural resources in these areas;
• Self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group;
• An indigenous language, often different from the national language;
• Presence of customary social and political institutions; and,
• Primarily subsistence-oriented production.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES
The project development objective is to contribute to national REDD+ efforts to reduce carbon emissions from forests by expanding the national program of Participatory Sustainable Forest Management in Production Forests and developing and piloting Landscape PSFM in at least 4 provinces.
The project will start in 2013, and will operate for a period of 5 years. During this period, the project will continue to support ongoing PSFM activities in thirty four (34) PFAs located in nine (9) provinces where SUFORD was active. At the same time the project, introduce PSFM activities in seven (7) additional PFAs in three (3) new provinces of Oudomxay, Luangnamtha and Bokeo. By the end of the project, 41 PFAs located in the 12 provinces are expected to have forest management plans in place. Opportunities to create synergies with other funding agencies supporting PSFM and REDD+ initiatives have been identified and are expected to be fully developed during the course of project implementation. SUPSFM funds will mainly provide operational resources while the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Finland (MFAF) will provide the bulk of the TA resources under this project[2]. Where collaborative agreements are reached, overarching safeguards requirements outlined in this document will be applicable to activities with the participating communities.
The key results indicators outlined in the Project Results framework include :
a) expanding areas under approved forest management plans
b) developing and agreeing on a Landscape approach to PSFM in Lao PDR
c) increasing the number of people with monetary and non monetary benefits from forest
d) decreasing the rate of forest cover loss in project areas
e) enhancing carbon storage from assisted natural regeneration and forest restoration
f) reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation in project areas
1 Field Activities
PSFM and livelihoods development activities in participating villages will be facilitated by teams consisting mainly of district line agency staff with support from national consultants contracted by the project. In addition, opportunities will be explored and sought to involve non-profit agencies (NPA) and mass organizations (Lao Women’s Union and National Front for Construction) to enhance the community engagement process particularly concerning livelihoods development. Village work on both PSFM and livelihoods development will be modular, with work modules defined around specific tasks. The district-NPA teams will be provided training and practicum on the work modules before they are sent to do cascaded training in villages. Initial training of district-NPA teams will take place in the province, while practical field training will be carried out in a focal village. Those training activities will be facilitated by a Trainers’ Team of expatriate and national consultants, including as well invited resource persons from development partners for specialized topics, e.g. on a particular livelihood enterprise or option.
2 Village work
Village work will consist of various activities that are related to PSFM and livelihoods development. Those are listed below. Further details, e.g. process steps, indicative timing, are given in Annex 1.
I. Village organizing for PSFM and livelihoods development (first 3 months)
• Focus group discussions and village assembly meeting to disclose the Project and secure prior free and informed consent of the village to participate
• Establishment or activation of the Village Forestry and Livelihood Committee (VFLC)
• Identification of forest area categories that overlap with the village
• Initiating the formation of livelihood groups
• Participatory land-use planning (PLUP) with the following sub-activities
– Introductory village assembly meeting about land use and livelihoods
– Village history, population, and problem census
– Socio-economic data collection and analysis
– Village 3D model building or use of high resolution image (0.5 m resolution) to facilitate identification of village features, e.g. farm lands, settlements, high conservation value forests, access roads and tracks, etc.
– Village boundary demarcation on the ground and delineation on the 3D model or high resolution image
– Delineating forest area categories on the 3D model or high resolution image
– Delineating current land uses on the 3D model or high resolution image
– Increasing understanding of outcomes of land-use decisions using a simulation game
– Zoning on the 3D model or high resolution image and recording of zoning information on the village map
– Painting the 3D model
– Painting the village map on wooden board and installing in a strategic site
– Discussion and signing of village agreement on land management, village land management rules, and description of plots
– Drafting the contents of the Village Action Plan
– Training the VFLC on monitoring and reporting of PSFM and livelihood activities and results
– Final village assembly meeting to disclose the various PLUP results
II. PSFM activities for various categories of FMUs in the village (follows after PLUP))
• Forest resources assessment and formulation of PSFM plans (first 2-3 years)
– Land-use mapping of FMUs based on forest area categories identified during PLUP
– Partitioning of FMUs into zones based on PLUP and compartments within zones
– Participatory setting of management objectives of FMUs and the dominant management objective of each zone of the FMUs
– Identification of high conservation values and delineation in the maps of FMUs
– Forest inventory in production and potential production forest zones
– Analysis and reporting back of results of the forest inventory to the village
– Specification of forest management system for each zone of FMUs
– Specification of forest management activities by compartment of the zones
– Writing of management plan of FMUs
– Plan validation and approval process
• Implementation of PSFM plans of FMUs (third year and onwards)
– Pre-harvest inventory (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Sustainable harvest planning (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Securing sustainable harvesting quota (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Marking trees to be cut (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Contracting the logging operations (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Controlling the logging operations (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Timber chain-of-custody process (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Timber sale (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Turnover of timber revenue share (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Post-harvest assessment (FMUs with production forest zones)
– Sustainable collection of non-timber forest products
– Maintenance of high conservation values
– Forest protection from various drivers
– Forest restoration (see livelihood development)
– Implementing grievance and conflict resolution mechanisms
III. Livelihoods development in each village (following after PLUP)
• Communal titling of village-use forests in undesignated forest areas
• Leasing of village-use forests inside state forest areas
• Village-state agreement on forest restoration inside state forest areas
• Titling of smallholder agroforestry areas to farmers
• Exploring livelihoods development option with the village
• Village visits and discussions with villagers on current livelihoods and outlooks for livelihoods development
– Contracted studies or by development partners on various livelihood options preferred by or recommended for villages under different situations and considering existing and future markets
– Selection of livelihood options for further feasibility study
– Decision on livelihood options to develop in the village
– Preparation of proposals for funding from the village livelihoods grant (VLG)
• Management of VLG
– Developing capacity of VFLC in financial management
– Obtaining of VLG and financing of intended livelihoods projects
– Monitoring of VLG use, results, and issues
– Resolution of issues affecting livelihoods
• Monitoring the development of village livelihood groups
• Formal organizing of developed village livelihood groups into associations for enterprise development, marketing, and related purposes
3 Systems and Guidelines for Implementing Field Activities
The systems and guidelines for implementing various PSFM and VLD activities are in general already well developed, although further development to cover enhanced mechanisms will be needed. For instance, those for PSFM are described in detail in the PSFM Operations Manual developed by SUFORD. Those for PLUP will be adapted from the PLUP Handbook developed by NAFRI-IRD-CIFOR. Systems and guidelines have also been developed for REDD+ REL and MRV by SUFORD and various development partners (KfW/GIZ/JICA/WCS) and will further be developed as part of Component 3. Timber revenue sharing has also been developed with guidelines recently released by GOL. Systems and guidelines will be developed for a few new tasks that have not yet been covered by SUFORD and other projects, such as leasing of degraded land in PFAs for forest restoration, including revenue sharing from products harvested from forests restored through village initiatives.
It should be noted as well that a low-intensity, low-impact timber harvesting system has been developed by SUFORD, documented in the PSFM Operations Manual, and applied for several years already in the pioneer PFAs supported by SUFORD. Low-impact logging methods include minimized logging access infrastructure development, directional felling, and supervised log transport that applied together have resulted in low impact to habitats. Low-intensity timber harvesting where only 1 or 2 trees are harvested per ha also contributes to low logging impact on habitats, as well as to low clearing of the canopy thus preventing the influx of bamboos and weed species and other unacceptable changes in stand structure and species composition in harvested stands. The silvicultural treatments developed under SUFORD have been applied primarily in southern and central provinces. Additional investigations will be required during SUPSFM to develop silviculturally appropriate techniques for northern Lao forests.
ESIA SURVEY METHODOLOGY
The ESIA method consists in a systematic and in depth literature review of key documents produced under the SUFORD Project. This allows describing the project beneficiaries/ characteristics in old SUFORD provinces and to finding out about and capitalize upon experiences and lessons learnt under SUFORD. The second method used consist in a field visit of 10 potential target communities in Louang Namtha and Oudomxay Province ted by the SUPSFM project.
The experience under SUFORD strongly suggests the importance of continuous learning and adjustments throughout the implementation process, and of active participation of beneficiary communities, in order to adequately address the significant diversity of cultural and socioeconomic conditions across project areas as well as rapidly changing operational environment. Such critical determinants of successful PSFM as access to market, forest covers, soil/ terrain conditions, absorption capacity, and so on, varied across SUFORD villages and continued to change during project implementation. Active private sector investments in mining, agricultural plantations, hydropower development frequently changed local socioeconomic landscape abruptly. Community livelihoods are complex and diverse; situations change due to various external factors; development of alternative livelihoods need various support tailored to the different needs and capacity levels of beneficiary communities; and community understanding and ownership are critical for the success of sustainable forestry. A blueprint approach of conducting a comprehensive ESIA and devising pre-determined sets of interventions during preparation proved to be inadequate. The project therefore decided that a more process-oriented approach would be taken whereby detailed collection of environmental and social data would be carried out during implementation at village level through participatory Social Assessment (SA) processes.
This ESIA therefore aimed to identify a broad range of relevant variables that will affect project performance and potential impacts that may result, and provide a framework for the more detailed and participatory assessment of environmental and social issues and for the development of mitigation measures during implementation. More specifically, the ESIA aimed to assess general trends in community livelihoods and resource use as well as relevant environmental settings in project areas, identify key issues that community resource diagnostics and participatory assessments that will be conducted during implementation should pay particular attention to, and provide the analytical framework and methodological approach to be used in the process.
1 Literature review (FOMACOP, SUFORD and SUFORD AF)
There is an extensive library of literature that has been developed for SUFORD, including ethnic development plans; socio-economic impact assessment; traditional ecological knowledge; and various technical handbooks. Of pertinence to SUPSFM were several recent reviews of the SUFORD AF social livelihoods program, in particular key studies including Ethnological study of Katuic speaking groups (Daviau, 2006), Chamberlain SIA (2008), Ewers (2012), Anderson et al (2012) and other field studies undertaken by SUFORD during implementation. . These reports were complimented by various mid-term reviews, field assessments and project social impacts assessments. It also benefits from the extremely valuable experience from project implementation by an Applied Anthropologist hired as the Ethnic and Gender TA and involved in the SUFORD AF (November 2012-February 2013).
The ESIA thus benefited from the broad lessons learnt during the implementation of previous projects in terms of the social and environmental impacts that had not been anticipated during their preparation, and how the projects tried to address them and where gaps remained to be addressed, as will be described in more detailed below, these reports indicate that by and large environmental and social impacts of the forestry and livelihood components are relatively minor, but that some aspects of the design of and implementation of SUFORD provided short comings that need to be addressed under SUPSFM. These challenges relate to SUPSFM activities in both the previous SUFORD areas and new northern provinces.
Since the SUPSFM is extending into new areas that have not previously had social and environmental evaluations pertinent to SUFORD, social demographic diagnostic has been required. While the challenges to SUPSFM are expected to be similar to that experienced by SUFORD, the social and environmental fabric of the northern areas may present yet new unforeseen issues. Safeguards, both environmental and social become important aspects of SUPSFM design and implementation.
A number of scoping missions have been conducted over 2012 between the WB and various stakeholder line agencies, primarily at provincial and central level. As well as means to further develop the SUPSFM design and gauge GOL capacity, the missions provided a forum for SUFORD technical advisors to present project progress and discuss its positive aspects and challenges. This ESIA makes use of these shared lessons and was supplemented village level surveys and district office meetings.
2 Field survey in new provinces
There is a vast amount of reference literature and tool kits available detailing a variety of participatory tools and methodologies that can be employed to engage with various communities and key target groups. However, the choice of method and tools as often depends on the context, objective, time availability and the type of stakeholders being consulted. This ESIA used the approach of a Rapid Rural Appraisal, following the guidelines of the WB on Free Prior Informed Consultation. Advantages of this method are the ability to address several objectives in one village visit. The method has facilitated the project preparation team in engaging meaningfully with the stakeholders to inform them about the planned project, to gauge their interest and to get a bird’s eye view of the social-economic realities, gender division of work, existing livelihood strategies, and particular focusing on natural resource use and management and tenure aspects. In addition to this, the team discussed village development plans, potential impacts the project could have and identified possible mitigation measures.
1 Tools used during stakeholder consultation
A large variety of tools –listed beneath- have been employed in order to find reliable and valid data on one side, and to provide adequate information to the involved stakeholders on the other side. The main techniques for consulting with, and distributing information to, the involved stakeholders have been: collective meetings in the form of workshop, discussions with key informants and key group discussions.
• Questionnaire: To facilitate the process of gaining data from a large group of people following a structured way of questioning. Two sets of questionnaires were developed for the purpose of this stakeholder consultation, which provided insight on various topics for the specific stakeholder group.
• Mapping and plotting: Participatory mapping techniques involved facilitating community members in developing spatial representations of their areas by creating maps on a large piece of paper. Such maps reflect the rudimentary locations of villages, different categories of forests, low land for agriculture land, upland agriculture areas, water resources, as well as management issues. The process of making the map and the discussions that occur while it is being made are important outputs of the exercise. Map information will be digitized so that it is documented for future reference. These results will not be used as definitive land use assessments, as this exercise will be carried out under PLUP. The results of the preliminary mapping exercise were merely to inform discussion on the broader issues of forest use and livelihood.
• Scoring and ranking: This process indicated the order of importance among variables (e.g. NTFPs, wealth, livelihood strategies) that were identified by the villages. For less complex issues, villagers can be asked to rank products during semi-structured interviews. A pair-wise ranking system or scoring (matrix ranking) system was used for more complex issues.
• Historical transect: The technique of having the community construct a transect of the area helped to identify successful and unsuccessful management systems so that a new management system can avoid the same mistakes and promote the positive aspects endorsed by the community. The decline and or increase of certain forest products and species can be established such that the management plan can address these issues.
• Cash flow calendar: The cash flow calendar documented the flow of money over time and the status of indebtedness throughout the year. This information can contribute to an estimation of the need for financial resources at a specific moment in time.
• Seasonal calendar: The seasonal calendar documented the flow of forest products over time and how product collection changes over the season. This information can contribute to an estimation of yields.
• GIS mapping and photographs: This will provide digital information on the exact location of the village and moreover provides a visual impression of the village and the surrounding areas. This information will contribute in assessing the capability of the land to implement alternative livelihood options for a particular village.
2 Sampling strategy
By late October 2012 after the consultation workshop was undertaken in several provinces in the North of Lao PDR, consensus was reached between MAF, DoF and WB on the new entry provinces and PFAs. The team selected Nam Fa PFA in Long district in Luang Namtha province and Nam Nga PFA stretching out over Xay, Beng, and Nga district in Oudomxay Province.
In the absence of factual up to date information on location, names and number of villages an initial estimation of project villages has been made based upon year 2000 data from DoF GIS department. A buffer zone of 10 km around the PFAs was plotted on the initial maps from the DoF GIS department. Although, anecdotal evidence from the field mission suggest that villagers as far 20km from the PFA use its resources, it can be assumed that villages within the 10km radius would use PFA resources more frequently and intensely. This zone basically ensured that villages, which might be physically located outside the PFA, however still use resources inside the PFA, would be included in the ESIA of the project. A total number of approximately 100 villages were accounted for. The preparation team took 10%[3] and ended up with an initial 10 villages to conduct the ESIA ground truthing.
The team initially planned to conduct consultations in 4 villages in Long district Luangnamtha and 6 (3 x 2) villages divided over Xay, Beng and Nga districts in Oudomxay. Due to difficulties accessing some villages only 2 villages were consulted in Long district Luangnamtha province. To compensate for that shortfall, the preparation team decided to conduct additional village consultation in Nga and Xay district, Oudomxay.
Based on the review of secondary data regarding these provinces, it was determined that not all villages in the target provinces and district would be homogenous. In order to get an adequate representation of about 10% of the villages, which were likely to be impacted by the project activities, the preparation team identified a set of criteria. A stratified sampling along these criteria has facilitated the sampling process of villages for the consultation/baseline/impact assessment field visits. The identified criteria are listed below:
• Accessibility: this criterion determines whether and how relatively easy it is to access the impacted villages by road and also relates to possible mobility of villagers to access markets
• Ethnicity: this criterion defines which ethnic groups are present in a certain village.
• Consolidation and/village development clusters: the Government of the Lao PDR has currently several development strategies and policies in place, some of these aim to consolidate and or give special attention to certain villages throughout the country.
• Wealth Status: wealth status according to GoL standards (poor, average, well off)
• Forest Dependency: this criteria assess the dependency of household livelihoods on forest products
• Village location related to PFA: villages with their village territories inside the PFA, are likely to have different impacts then villages located in proximity of PFA.
• Availability: this defines whether the community is actually available to host a meeting with the assessment team at the proposed time.
• Distance to district: closer proximity to district would suggest better connection to market and other sources of income
• Geographically located near border sub-district (khumban), district and/or province: the project activities can only be implemented in a selection of villages in a certain amount of PFA’s, therefore it is good to assess potential impacts on project geographical borders
• Number of villages per district: districts with high and low village density
On the basis of these criteria the SUPSFM Prep Team made a shortlist of villages to be selected for consultation. A second round of selection, together with the DAFO staff determined which villages actually were available for consultation. Some of the preselected villages had to be dropped and replaced by 2nd selection villages. Reasons for converting to 2nd selection villages were; (i) inaccessibility of villages due to bad road condition and heavy rainfall; (ii) some villages were not available because of the harvest season. The final selection of villages reflected a balance of villages with a variety of ethnic groups, different access road conditions, variation of forest dependency and different geographical locations in relation to the PFAs.
3 Timing and duration or field mission
A table with these criteria in the header row was distributed by the end of October 2012 amongst the PAFO offices in the participating provinces, with the request to populate the table and sent it back to the project preparation team. After one week without any response from the participating provinces the preparation team decided to start planning the field mission with the participating districts and provinces, it was assumed that the table could be populated during consultation meetings with provinces and districts and selection of villages could be made on location. Prior to departure some village data was sent back from Oudomxay province, however data from Luangnamtha remained incomplete till the team actually physically consulted the DAFO staff in Long district.
Gaps in data available at the ESIA stage will be filled through the Community Resource Diagnostics and Participatory Social Assessment to be carried out during implementation prior to or at the beginning of engagement with respective beneficiary communities.
Lessons learnt from past experiences
The objectives of the literature review were to assess key social and environmental aspects of the SUFORD project to identify key lessons learnt so that Safeguards could be improved, or formulated and then integrated into SUPSFM design. Specifically the ESIA focused on the following:
1 Free, Prior and Informed Consultations (FPIC)
This section discusses the lessons learnt from SUFORD and SUFORD AF in relation to village consultation (including woman and ethnic minorities), in decision making, planning and implementing PSFM and Village Development (VD). One of the main cornerstones or underlying principles of the social safeguards is effective community consultation.
According to the 2008 Social Impact Assessment (SIA), in the initial phase of the SUFORD, the implementation of the Ethnic Group Development Plan (EGDP) was rated as only “moderately satisfactory” primarily because villagers reported that “decisions had been made too fast” and no attempt was made to ”investigate local traditional decision-making processes and how these might be incorporated into the planning process.”
Thus, during the preparation of the SUFORD AF, emphasis was placed on making extensive improvements to the project to ensure the participation of ethnic minorities. This was done by focusing on the consultation process and on the role of an applied anthropologist to provide inputs on the relevant groups for inclusion in all aspects of implementation, notably in VD, PSFM, and LUP. The role of the anthropological components was crucial in incorporating anthropological concerns into SUFORD guidelines for all aspects of the operational side of the project.
It was also emphasized that project personnel needed to be informed on the specific ethnic characteristics of each group prior to engaging in consultations since groups will have different interpretations and expectations depending on ethnic backgrounds; that ethnographic analyses of village social structures would need to be carried out, especially where ethnic minorities were not well-known. It was also pointed out that all project information need to be translated and presented in the language of ethnic groups. Mass organizations such as the Lao Women’s Union were engaged to provide support for communication with local communities.
Despite these efforts recent reviews of SUFORD safeguard performance have concluded that the Free, Prior Informed Consultation (FPIC) process was not well implemented or effectively monitored despite improvements to project design. Field investigations have revealed that government and mass organization staff tasked with village level work has only a limited understanding of the FPIC concept. Inherent challenges in communicating with Ethnic groups and especially with ethnic women remain for SUPSFM to address. Based on recent fieldwork by Ewers (2012) and others and on field surveys undertaken during preparation of the ESIA the team can make the following recommendations:
• Given the size and complexity of the PSFM program Government should also engage both Lao Women’s Union and Civil Society Organizations to support consultation efforts in the future;
• Consultations must be conducted as a process in which women and men of different ethnic groups are given full information to consider;
• Consultation must be conducted with women’s groups separately in villages and in their own languages. Their thoughts and opinions must be reflected in overall decisions. The people to facilitate ethnic group women should themselves either be women of the same ethnic group or be able to speak the particular language fluently;
• The timing and location of meetings is crucial to ensure the participation of women and poorer families. There should be a small survey done before consultation starts to find out when it is most convenient for women and poorer families to attend important meetings; and finally
Perhaps the most salient guidance can be traced back to the Social Impact Assessment (2008). This document clearly states “the project needs to budget enough time and resources to be able to interact comfortably with villagers throughout the life of the project. This will enhance the learning process of both the project and the villagers.”
2 Mainstreaming ethnic and gender work approach
Mainstreaming Ethnic Group Issues in SUFORD-AF basically meant to carry out project implementation in a way that caters to culturally appropriate modes of communication. The implementation approach for Ethnic Group work comprises: a) raising awareness of ethnic issues with the technical forestry staff, LFNC and LWU through guidelines and special training; b) supporting PAFO’s and DAFO’s technical work in villages with extra facilitation from ethnic teams of LFNC and LWU, and c) integrating ethnic group and gender issues into the regular technical training that is carried out in SUFORD.
A workshop held on 29 April 2009 agreed to establish an institutional agreement on collaboration between the Lao Front for National Construction (LFNC) and MAF. The LFNC is a mass organization under the Party. It has a Department for Ethnic Group Affairs and the central LFNC has officially appointed the Head of the Division of Ethnic Affairs to work closely with project’s “Ethnic Group Facilitation Teams” or “Ethnic Team”. These Ethnic Teams consisted of LFNC and Lao Women Union members at province and district level. The Ethnic Teams were set up in support of the Technical Teams of Provincial Agricultural and Forestry Office (PAFO) and District Agricultural and Forestry Office (DAFO). Earlier consultancy reports indicated a need to engage with the LFNC in the project activities. This engagement was not implemented in Phase 1 but in the AF Phase, where the project moved to new provinces with a high number of diverse ethnic groups, the engagement was established.
As an organization the LFNC is designated as an advisor to the central committee of the Party, and it has a mandate to act in the interest of the ethnic groups and reduction of poverty. Its tasks are to enhance the administrative mechanism for inclusion of ethnic minorities in promotion in rural development activities and ensure that other agencies are aware of the requirements for the participation of ethnic minorities. The ethnic groups have their traditional leaders; therefore it is effective to approach them by the LFNC officers as they are often from the local ethnic groups and have knowledge of the local language.
SUFORD-AF made room for LFNC in the project by including budget lines for its work along with LWU to form an “ethnic (group consultation) team”. The LFNC is represented from Central down to village level. So is the LWU.
The Lao Women’s Union (LWU) works with the project along with the LFNC. It is also a mass organization, which seeks to enhance women's capacity for self-development and promote women's role in society. The LWU is represented from Central down to village level. LWU has conducted dissemination throughout the country by organizing workshops, seminars, and publication of handbooks as well as communicating through newspapers, TV program and radio broadcasting in three main ethnic languages, namely Lao, Khmu and Hmong. Five Gender Resource Information and Development Centers (GRID) were set up across the country to promote knowledge and information concerning gender and development in Lao PDR, ensure gender mainstreaming into the planning process in all areas and government sectors, conduct training on gender perspective for government officials at all levels and research.
The Ministry of Agriculture (MAF) has a Women’s Advancement Division (WAD), which acts as a representative of LWU. It supports measures in forestry and agriculture for woman to benefit from development activities. WAD is an important partner to facilitate sustainable gender development in the Ministry and in their field programs. It has the power to influence the advancement of women within forestry and agriculture within the country.
The villages in SUFORD AF differed in terms of their need for support. To ensure that the available resources were used effectively, the villages were ranked into a priority order where the high priority villages, that is, First Priority Villages, would benefit from the most extensive support. The villages in under SUFORD AF were divided into two levels of priority: first priority and second priority villages.
A: First Priority Villages (75 villages) meeting the following criterion: multi-ethnic with a recent history of migration; no dominance of Lao-Tai groups, villages ethnically diverse, or consisting of ethnic groups who communicate traditionally in their own language/s (other than Lao); villages with poor infrastructure and services; villages with a high dependence on forest systems for their livelihoods and villages located inside PFAs. B: Second Priority Villages (236 villages) include all other multi-ethnic villages or villages inhabited by one ethnic group who communicate traditionally in their own language/s (other than Lao).
According to the EGDP, Coordination with PSFM and VD processes, in First Priority Villages, the technical PSFM and VD process must be preceded by non-technical visits by LNFC staff. Technical teams will follow recommendations from the LNFC staff on how the consultative process is best set up in each village and what specific issues relating to ethnicity need to be taken into consideration.
The performance monitoring conducted in June 2012 revealed that 50% of the LWU and 53% of the LFNC representatives went to all target 1 villages in their respective target areas. Comparatively, 88% of the LWU and 87% of the LFNC representatives went to the priority 2 villages with the technical team.
In terms of availability of human resources, 88% of the LWU and 60% of the LFNC representatives estimated they have sufficient human resource available to join the SUFORD project. At the beginning of the project a survey was conducted to inventory the ethnicity of the civil servant at district and provincial level in the LWU and LFNC. Unfortunately, the results were never used to select relevant collaborators, as illustrated by the ethnic and gender profile below.
Main challenges identified during SUFORD AF implementation
- The LFNC and LWU were both key partners in the project. Initially an inventory of the ethnicity of staffs in each of the district and provincial departments was conducted in order to prioritize key individuals that would have collaborated with the project. Unfortunately, the outcome of this inventory has initially not taken into consideration. This resulted in most of the LWU and LFNC representatives to be from Lao-Tai ethno linguistic family and unable to bridge linguistically and culturally with the target communities. This lack of ethnic staffs among ethnic team at provincial and district level able to bridge culturally and linguistically with targeted communities which is a constraint in facilitate information sharing and technical work. 81% of the LWU representatives (13 women) belong to Lao-Tai groups and 19% belong to Mon-Khmer groups (Brao in Attapeu, Khmu in Vientiane province and Yae in Sekong).
- Others constraints include the lack of accuracy in using ethnic names both in daily activities and project documents; and the fact that community level meetings were often conducted in Lao language without proper translation in ethnic languages. The ethnic and gender team also lacked ethnic and gender awareness (male interview female, no gender segregated group discussions).
- Another constraint lay in the fact that the ethnic and gender teams that accompanied technical teams did not have clear task and lack skills in facilitation for technical teams so often they remained remain in the background and silent.
- Initially the capacity of LNFC and LWU to record both quantitative but even more qualitative data was weak.
- The ethnic and gender team was not initially asked to help in resolving conflicts or requested to raise sensitive issues such as land grabbing, impact of concessions on people access to agricultural land, corruption cases, etc.
- Ethnic and gender team suffered from a lack of efficient coordination between provincial and central level. Central level team lack leadership and was not aware of planning, implementation and there is no reporting done by the LFNC/LWU so the achievements of the provincial ethnic and gender team is not acknowledged.
- Initially the LFNC and LWU were not properly trained or made aware of the implementation approach outlined in the EGDP that clearly defines three main ways to mainstream ethnic and gender issues: (1) raising awareness of ethnic issues with the technical forestry staff, LFNC and LWU through guidelines and special training; (2) supporting PAFO’s and DAFO’s technical work in villages with extra facilitation from ethnic teams of LFNC and LWU, and (3) integrating ethnic group and gender issues into the regular technical training that is carried out in SUFORD.
- At the outset SUFORD-AF lacked formal link between project strategy, implementation, and central level discussions and meeting with key actors involved in the WAD. This meant that the WAD was not operational and was never mobilized to help address gender related issues.
- Neither LFNC nor LWU were involved in planning of field activities. Mostly they were requested to accompany the technical staffs in the field.
- Finally, huge turn over of project collaborator resulted in loss of capacity building provided and lack of ownership by government stakeholders resulting in lowering the efficiency of the work done.
Achievements
- SUFORD AF managed to address the lack of ethnic collaborators among government counterpart at local level and select key collaborators belonging to Mon-Khmer groups in Sekong and also hired female interpreters (Harak in Sekong Province) to allow setting up an interface in ethnic language; directly allowing women to participate in their native language. An official letter has been sent to all provinces to strongly advocate for the recruitment of ethnic candidate to collaborate with the project.
- LFNC and LWU were trained in participatory methodology and provided with clear tools and leading them directly in the field doing participatory monitoring and increasing their facilitation skills. They have monitored both VD and PSFM related activities in the 5 SUFORD-AF provinces.
- One of the main achievements of conducting this participatory exercise has been the increased ownership of national, provincial and district level ethnic and gender teams in implementing the work. At the end, the central level team including the national advisor and the NAFES staff have become fully operational in training and leading provincial and district team in the field and in bringing back highly valuable indicators to the central level
- One important achievement has been the operationalization of institutional framework between central, provincial and district level in terms of planning and coordination. This resulted from setting up a process characterized by:
– District and provincial teams acquired new skills and experience in data collection and recording both qualitative and quantitative information useful to the project
– Provincial and district EG team can pursue the work in other target villages based on their own planning and send their results to the central level ethnic and gender team for compilation, analysis and reporting
– Both ethnic team and technical staffs have enhanced communication and coordination skills in working with ethnic (minority) groups and women
– Provincial EG teams use reporting format introduced by central level to report activities and findings
– Central EG team prepare reports and send to provincial level and relevant stakeholders for discussion
– Sensitive issues are increasingly acknowledged, discussed upon and recorded.
Recommendations
• Inventory the ethnicity of each LFNC and LWU offices in each of the target district and require that ethnicity and gender are criteria for recruiting government representatives from the LFNC and LWU to ensure that they can bridge linguistically, culturally and in a gender sensitive manner with the target communities. If LFNC and LWU are not able to provide the required linguistic skills then these should be contracted separately.
• Ensure that individuals nominated to fill key positions are committed to collaborate with the SUPSFM project in order to avoid turn over and loss of trained staff during implementation.
• Train LFNC and LWU in ethnic awareness and participatory methodology and approaches to ensure that they have the sufficient skills to facilitate technical work, conduct consultation and gather and report data at community level
• Train LFNC and LWU about conflict resolution mechanisms to ensure that they fulfil their role in the grievance redress process.
• Improve the coordination between district, provincial and central offices in terms of planning and also reporting activities implemented.
• Provide LFNC and perhaps to a lesser extent the LWU with logistical means to participate in the project as they lack access to basic equipment such as computer, printer, Internet connection, motorbike, etc.
• Involve the LFNC and the LWU in planning of project activities; both organizations have good knowledge of the field realities, distance to villages, seasonal accessibility, constraints in terms of language proficiency, production system, etc.
• Train LFNC and LWU fully in the safeguard framework and Community Engagement Process Framework to ensure that they are aware of all relevant guidelines and requirements.
3 Village Forestry Committeees and Village Development Committees
SUFORD has established village and group-of-village (kumban) committees and organisations since its inception in 2003: these organisations include Village Forest Committees (VFCs), Village Forest Organisations (VFOs), GVFC and GVFO (whereby the “GV” stands for Group of Village). VFOs, are defined under PM Decree 59 and MAF 0204 (2003) on PFAs, while GVFOs were defined under DOF Notice 2154 dated 24/12/2004 and submitted in September 2007.
SUFORD village forestry institutions consisted in VFO as an all-encompassing village institution to which almost all villagers in a village have signed up as members, while the VFC is a 3-5-person committee elected by the VFO. The village headman is an ex-officio member. Then the GVFC/GVFO is an organization with representatives from VFOs in all SFMA villages. This GVFC/GVFO is to enter into a Forest Management Agreement with DAFO and collaborate in SFMA Plan implementation and be in charge of sharing the revenue among all villages in the SFMA according to their respective Village Development Plans (VDP).
To enhance ownership of the villagers in preparing village development plans, implementing, monitoring, evaluation and management of village development activities effectively, the Village Development Committee (VDC) chaired by the village chief has been established in 311 target villages in eight Production Forest Areas of 5 new provinces. Currently, there are 1,466 VDC members, among whom 296 are females, accounted for 20%. Committees charged with development fund management—the VDCs—have been more active since the VDFs/VDGs themselves require more meetings and actions.
According to the Sub-FMA management agreement, the VFC would (1) organize work teams to be provided training by DAFO and which would participate with DAFO in formulating management and annual operation plans of the Sub-FMA and in conducting forest management operations implementing the management and annual operation plans of the Sub-FMA; (2) ensure that forest management and related work was done by the village work teams properly following the prescribed procedures and within the time period agreed to with DAFO; (3) oversee customary forest use by villagers within their respective village territories, formulate village rules for this purpose, and regularly monitor collection of various forest products and other customary forest-use activities, furnishing DAFO/FMTU an annual report of these activities; (4) disburse the annual funds provided by DAFO for conducting forest management operations and administration of the VFCs, providing an accounting of the funds to DAFO, and returning unused funds to DAFO; and (5) participate in annual timber sales and sharing of net revenue from timber sales and hand over to their respective village administrations the share for village development.
Main challenges identified during SUFORD AF implementation
• Ewers (2012) findings make it clear that VFCs exist in all SUFORD villages and are considered part of village administration in line with MAF Regulation on Village Forestry (No 535, 2001) however the VFO and the apex organizations GVFC/GVFO described in SUFORD Toolkit were not fully operational as they have few regular functions to carry out. All forestry work by DAFO was carried out with the VFC and village headmen of the villages that had the timber forest inside their territory; comparatively, village without timber within their territory were much less involved.
• Ethnic women’s roles in forest committees have not been supported. Women are largely kept absent from all forest-related activities despite their interest in, and use of, forest resources—both wood and non-wood. This fails to recognise the socio-culturally and economically important relationship that women have with forest and forest resources.
• Community members in ethnic villages can often not even name people in the VDC or VFC. In some communities, even the village leaders have to look into the project document to list members. In Attapeu and Sekong provinces, many newly appointed and VDC members were unaware of their roles and responsibilities; in one village VDC members were even not aware that they were sitting on the committee (Hinlat village, Sanamxay district, Atttapeu Province).
• The election of village administration has a significant impact on the VDC and VFC as elected positions are linked to formal political positions (village head, deputy, women union representative and elders association). Changes in the village mass organizations also end in changes in VDC and VFC membership and newly appointed leaders usually are unaware of their tasks and have low understanding about the whole project. In many cases the members had gone and were not even replaced! This strongly suggests that in reality, the committees are not properly functioning.
• In Poungsang village, Vangvieng district, Vientiane Province, the Khamu ask for equality in terms of participation in the VDC as resulting from the consolidation policy, Niou (Lao) and Poungsang (Khamu) have been consolidated (and now called PounKham) and the Lao chief manage both VD funds. There is not a single Khamu in the VDC of Pounglak village. Many informants interviewed complained that the Lao monopolize all functions.
Achievements
• SUFORD has largely succeeded in its attempts to ensure that there is proportional representation of ethnic groups and women on the committees and organisations set up by the project. However, since the committees/organisations themselves lack clarity with regard to their ongoing roles and do not fully understand their rights and responsibilities under the law, this increased representation of ethnic groups and women should be seen only as a starting point from which much supporting work is still required.
• Gender disaggregated village development planning was implemented under SUFORD and under SUFORD AF. SUFORD helped establish the principle of preparing separate lists of priority activities by women and men before merging these priorities to achieve a gender balanced final list.
Recommendations
• Innovative ways of designing PSFM modalities are warranted for the SUPSFM, in particular since the SUPSFM has much broader objectives than timber harvest and includes indicators for an increase in land and resources under legal control and management of indigenous and local communities.
• Community empowerment requires organization and security of tenure. Sufficient time and support must therefore be provided to develop institutions that are legally viable and match the resource units in question (timber or plantations or NTFP etc) and where benefits can be shared with equity.
• As the Ewers report has shown, the VFO does not exist and should not be assumed to be a pre-existing mechanism for participation in SUPSFM initiatives. Only the VFC exists as a mandated ubiquitous village institution linked to the village administration.
• A variety of institutions with bylaws and internal rules for benefit sharing should be developed under SUPSFM in accordance with the forest zone it manages. Some may be village level and some may be supra-village. Benefits and rights will constitute incentives for villagers to take part in the sustainable management for carbon increase and livelihood co-benefits. The relevant attributes of the forest resources that are of importance for developing appropriate institutions comprise the legal categorization, which will require solving of the overlay and interplay of functional and legal categories presently found in Lao PDR; the nature and value of the resource units (timber, NTFP, grass, commercial fast growing species etc) that can be withdrawn by groups of people (whether for subsistence or for the market); and the natural richness of the natural endowment of the resource in question.
4 Benefit sharing from forest harvest revenues
The possibility for villagers to benefit from the timber harvested in their land started with FOMACOP –project, which ran between 1995-2000 in Khammouane and Savannakhet provinces. The purpose of the project was to create a village forestry model, in which the villagers would govern their own land and its use. During FOMACOP the villagers themselves took care of harvesting and forest management, collected money from the harvestings and paid the government taxes according to harvested volumes. After FOMACOP ended in 2000, the harvesting has been transferred back to government’s hands in all FOMACOP villages.
During SUFORD a new revenue benefit sharing system from timber harvesting was prepared (reg. no. 0204 / MAF. 2002: Regulation on Establishment and Sustainable Management of Production Forest, 03.10.2003). According to this law, villagers would receive their share at SubFMA (SFMA) or village level. The village share was calculated as 25% of the difference between the floor price and the actual sale price.
“Seventy-percent of the additional revenue shall be shared between the following funds:
• Twenty-percent to the forest development fund, under Forestry Law, Art. 47;
• Twenty-five percent to the operation costs for implementation of annual operation plan;
• Twenty-five percent to the local development fund(s).
This fund(s) shall be held in the village or group of villages account for village development activities to develop and improve the livelihoods of local people. These funds shall be spent according to relevant finance regulations and be consistent with development plans established by the village or group of villages and approved by the District Development Committee in coordination with DAFO.”
After being implemented for a few years this revenue sharing scheme was found to be flawed because the floor price and sale price were frequently very close together and as the sale price approached the floor price there was almost no revenue to share with communities.
In 2012, a new presidential decree was approved (001/PM; Decree of The President of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic pertaining to the sharing of revenue from timber harvested in the Production Forest Areas, 31.1.2012). This decree also passed through the National Assembly Standing Committee: 08/ST Decision Of The National Assembly Standing Committee pertaining to the sharing of revenue from timber harvested in the Production Forest Areas, 16/01/12). According to this new legislation, the benefit for the villages will be calculated from the total revenue (no longer from the net revenue). In the new system, the government will take 70% of the total revenue. The remaining 30% will be divided as follows:
“Thirty percent (30%) of the total revenue as the budget to support the forestry management, protection-conservation, and development activities, primarily the production forests, and the funds for the development of villages or the village groups bordered with the production forests.
1. First portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the forests and the forestry resources;
2. Second portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the production forest throughout the nation
3. Third portion: Twenty (20%) percent as the trust funds for developing the exploited production forests.
4. Fourth portion: Forty (40%) percent as the trust funds for developing the villages or village groups that are the agreement partners in the management of the production forests.”
A new regulation governing the implementation of PM decree 001 has been drafted and is expected to be piloted in 2013 and then finalized and submitted for formal endorsement.
Implementation Challenges
• SUFORD communities do not understand well about benefit sharing principles or their entitlements under the law. This lack of awareness has led to lack of accountability and in one case to misappropriation of funds. The new regulation governing implementation of PM decree 001 is expected to address this issue.
• SUFORD Toolkits and Manuals prescribed that the timber revenue was to be shared among all villages in a SFMA, but the villages in a SFMA do not constitute an organic unit and this inter-village sharing has proven impractical during implementation. The new law stipulates that revenue can flow either to individual villages or to a group of villages.
• Responsibility for managing timber sales was transferred during SUFORD from MAF to the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MOIC). While MOIC has made some progress in developing systems for transparent and competitive log sales these approaches have not yet been widely disseminated and are note currently implemented uniformly across all provinces.
Recommendations
• Increase community awareness of benefit sharing principles and entitlements under the law to ensure that they can claim what belongs to them.
• Set up monitoring mechanisms to ensure that funds are transferred to village level accounts in a timely and fully transparent manner.
• Continued support for MOIC to implement transparent and competitive log sales will be required in all participating provinces under SUPSFM. Support for developing verified chain of custody will also be needed.
5 Village development grant and Village Fund
In SUFORD all villages including those villages 5 km from the PFA boundary received a village development grant of 8000 USD. This was scheduled to take place in two instalments: first US$3000 and then US$5000. All VDGs were transferred from the central level to the bank accounts of the target villages. 412 villages had released all VDGs of the US$3000 tranche. However, 64 villages out of 287 eligibly targeted villages had not released VDG of US$ 5000 tranche to their villagers as of December 2008 (the original closing date). The key reasons for late release of VDG were (i) lack of banking facilities in remote villages, (ii) changing from inappropriate planned activities to newly potential activities, and (iii) requirement to collect partly amount of the first instalment prior releasing the second instalment.
By the end of October 2010, all target villagers had received their VDG of US$ 5000. The total amount of VDG released stood at approx. 31.5 billion LAK (USD 3.9 million). Of these, 90 % were given as loans to individual households (Report on Internal Review, 2011). These funds, which were intended to be issued as grants were converted at the request of villages (but also in conformity with national policies)_ into revolving funds . This pattern of converting grants to loans was identified during SUFORD. Unable to identify a skilled partner agency to facilitate the development of microfinance institutions at village level, SUFORD AF discouraged the use of grant as revolving funds.
As of September 2012, the total amount of VDGs released to individual households stood at approx. 28 billion LAK (Annual Report 2011-2012). A total of 26,396 households in 412 villages have benefited from the scheme.
SUOFRD promoted the establishment of Village Development Fund (VDF) in each village in order to secure the VDG, to establish a formal mechanism for managing timber revenue at village level and to extend the impact of timber revenue to a larger number of beneficiaries. VDF is a fund , which includes savings of the VDF members, village revenue (from timber) and external contributions, including collected VDG transferred by the SUFORD project. The project assisted in setting up the VDFs in four old provinces. 299 VDFs have been officially established so far. Some VDFs continue to function as revolving funds and a large portion of repayments from VDG recipients have been used to recapitalize the VDFs. As of September 2012, all together 299 VDFs have been established with 8,100 members. Total VDF capital was approx. 4.6 billion LAK.
During SUFORD AF in the 5 new provinces, in order to improve livelihood of local villagers, reduce the pressure on natural resources, SUFORD provided VDGs for livelihood development and income generating activities (in the form of a draw down fund). As of 30 September 2012, all 310 target villages had received US$4000 each. Nearly 9.9 billion LAK was released to villagers; of whom 4% was directly allocated to VDCs for administrative costs. Financially, 92% of the remaining VDG were invested into food security related activities; 3 % for livelihood and Infrastructure; and 5% for SME enterprise development activities. 12,559 families received VDG; of which 5,283 (or 42%) self-identified as poor families.
Poverty reduction is an indirect objective of the SUFORD project. There were two key ways in which poverty was reduced, first through distribution of village development grants and second through sharing timber revenue with the village communities. However, the timber revenue received by villages has been quite modest; so far so the main impact has come from the VDGs.
To respond to the common question on how much the SUFORD project has contributed to reducing poverty in Laos, a study analyzed the impact of VDGs was conducted in 4 old provinces. The study found that household loans given using the village development grants coincided with moderate reductions in poverty in targeted villages. In 2009, at the beginning of the observation period, the proportion of poor households was almost the same among households that received and did not receive a loan, 29 % and 28 %, respectively. In 2012, it was found that among those households that had not received a loan, the proportion of poor households had dropped to 14%. Among those who had received a loan, the proportion of poor households was 9%. This suggests that the loans were able to accelerate poverty reduction.
Ongoing Challenges faced by SUFORD AF
• The main problem experienced by the VDFs is that their efforts to develop a revolving fund are financially and institutionally unsustainable.
• The revenue earned from interest on loans is low and unless commercial microfinance institutions step in there is no adequate support structure for VDF.
• The public sector institutions do not have the necessary professional skills to manage such schemes and commercial microfinance in Lao PDR is at a very early stage of development and is not yet able to meet the existing demand.
• The establishment of new revolving funds should therefore not be encouraged except in exceptional cases.
• In the future, if it is consider necessary to fund village investments through public sector schemes, the projects to be supported should be selected much more carefully.
Recommendations
• To the extent feasible, the existing VDFs should be supported to become self-sufficient both institutionally and financially but in the absence of specialist support on microfinance this may be difficult.
• Ownership and management of VDF/VDG must be entirely with the villagers. DAFO signatures should not be required to authorize use of VDF fund., and villagers—not DAFO—should have the final say in what they do with their money. This may also be seen as part of a learning process for ethnic group villagers.
• All VDF funds transferred through DAFO or PAFO must be transferred to village accounts in a timely manner and all such transfers should be monitored at village, provincial and central levels Village bank account books must be properly updated (ex. Interest owing properly shown) and all such books held by villagers. Public notification meetings to inform funds status to all households must be held.
• Lengthy, complicated approval and fund release procedures must be simplified perhaps with the assistance of a consultancy.
• It would be important to create uniform and transparent practices for all provinces to use, which would be at the same time flexible enough to take into account the varying and sometimes difficult circumstances.
• The most efficient and reliable way would probably be to request the benefit sharing information from PAFOs in each province and ask them to provide the information on a quarterly basis, followed by random audit of selected SFMAs. It needs to be taken into account, though, that the timber revenue benefit sharing takes place earliest one fiscal year from harvesting. Also, to make sure that the full amount has reached its destination, it would be necessary to require DAFOs to inform SFMAs of the money that they have received within a specified time limit. A suitable time limit could be 3-4 months .
• In order to make sure that the information has been received and understood, it would be necessary for DAFOs to visit the SFMA or village and ask the village chief to fill a ready-made template of their meeting, which would state the amount of money that they have been informed of and the necessary steps that are required of them to access the funds.
• In many ethnic minority villages, it is likely quite difficult to require even the village chief to fill such a template, in which case the job should be delegated formally to an independent and reliable partner (NPA representative, school official, contracted auditor).
1 Application of safeguards measures
SUFORD’s implementation over two phases and some ten years has generated a number of lessons learned regarding the implementation of social safeguards. The first phase developed an Ethnic Group Development Strategy (EGDS) in 2002 for its provinces. These had a limited number of ethnic groups. As of 2009, the project has expanded into five new provinces with a much more diverse ethnic composition than the four older target provinces. SUFORD-AF Project Appraisal Document (PAD) includes a Project Implementation Plan where volume IV is a Village Development Operational Manual (Sep 2008). Part of the Manual contains a description of the Consultation Framework for Ethnic Groups. The consultation framework is included under the “Village Development” project component that constitutes a separate SUFORD-AF project component. The said Consultation Framework constitutes the Safeguard instruments of the project.
The findings of a FINNIDA Mid-Term Review (Finnish Support to Forestry and Biological Resources: Country Report 5. Lao Peoples Democratic Republic, 2010) of SUFORD AF: “Marginalized groups are recognized in the project design through an Ethnic Group Development Plan but little evidence of consideration during implementation and outcomes. (p. 9); . . . The project [SUFORD AF] contains an Ethnic Group Development Plan, though it is uncertain how this is to be applied and the GoL’s commitment to it (p. 17). Marginalized groups – During the project preparation an EGDP was prepared to ensure that ethnic minorities do not suffer negative impacts and they receive social and economic benefits appropriate to their culture and circumstances. At the time of the Mid-Term Review few field activities had taken place among the ethnic minority villages; implementation had mainly advanced in the better off and more easily accessible districts and villages populated predominantly by Lao and Tai-Kadai . . . (p. 21).
It was also observed weak linkages between safeguard processes and other aspects of the project. Safeguard functions and responsibilities were not sufficiently integrated with technical processes carried out by PAFO/ DAFO at the local level, which limited the effectiveness of safeguard measures in ensuring full and meaningful participation of target communities.
Mechanisms to monitor implementation of safeguard measures were not adequate, and gaps were often left unaddressed for some time. Safeguard assessment concluded that LWU and LFNC should have played a more active role in monitoring and evaluation; that neutral parties such as NGOs should also have participated in project monitoring, and that project monitoring indicators should have included those specific to safeguard compliance including on ethnic women.
Recent field assessments also found that SUFORD project learned from lessons during implementation and took steps to address many issues mentioned above, under the initiative of the Ethnic and Gender Advisor hired by the project. Safeguard measures developed under the SUPSFM project incorporate the lessons learned and building on the improvement in safeguard performance in the final years of SUFORD.
Recommendations
• Strengthen mechanisms to monitor implementation of safeguards including clear indicators.
• Set up clear baseline in order to enable the measurement of project impacts and achievements.
• Provide a clear and practical consultation Framework for Ethnic Groups
• Refine the modalities of implementations of the Ethnic Group development plans
• Set up mechanism to ensure that poor households and vulnerable groups are not left aside but actively involved as beneficiaries in project activities.
2 Gender equity
The principles of gender equity with respect to natural resource use, its management and decision-making, particularly in upland areas and among different ethnic groups, are quite varied. Different concepts of gender-specific rights and responsibilities have developed over time as a means whereby livelihoods may be sustained and cultural identity expressed.
Under SUFORD, some 44% of target villages are either mixed Lao with other ethnic groups, or entirely other ethnic groups. In expansion areas the proportion of varied ethnic groups is much higher. Of these, many groups more numerous in northern provinces follow patrilineal, patriarchal social structures, such as Tai Dam, Hmong and Akha. Ethnic groups from southern provinces have typically more matrilocal or bi-lineal social structures.
Types of labor inputs and agricultural tasks tend to be gender defined, while extensive data on gathering of forest products indicate that women tend to gather products for consumption, domestic use or local roadside sales, while men tend to use the forest for more raising cash.
The type of ethnicity and social structure not only determines the degree of gender equity in decision-making over land, natural resources and their use, it also determines availability of adult male labor for the more heavy tasks in the seasonal calendar. Traditional land use is often regulated by the spirit world, and men are often the intermediaries between the natural and spirit worlds for key activities such as building a house or clearing land. Subsequent activities, which are more the domain of women, cannot continue until some key men's activities are completed.
When a statutory legal framework of land allocation and land management policy overrides customary land and resource use, the focus of land use tends to shift away from the collective and cooperative to the individual and household. This has gender equity implications for the project, both in terms of overall project structure, in community consultation methodology, and in activity planning. It was a lesson learned under SUFORD, that if the project ignores existing customary use of land and forest, it would not result in significant cooperation from villages.
One reason why this often occurs nonetheless is that project staff tend to talk only to village authorities, who are usually men, and do not take into account the differences between men and women of land use. This is particularly important in villages of mixed ethnicities, where hamlets have been consolidated into one larger village, regardless of the differences in culture, language and natural resource use. Furthermore, ethnic group women tend to be both less familiar with Lao language than do men as well as less literate, often resulting in women's views being completely marginalized or ignored, as was experienced in SUFORD. The SUPSFM project requires local teams to include persons with familiarity over different languages, as well as training on gender equity sensitivity as part of the community engagement process. The Lao Women's Union is the mass organization with the best field representation and access to members with a broad language base, and will be integral to field activities in project districts.
Activity planning is also typically undertaken with male village leaders, not taking into account women's labor contributions or opinions of preferred options, nor limitations on women's involvement in certain activities. For example, marketing exchanges beyond the local level are predominantly male activities, resulting in financial management often remaining out of women's hands and bankbooks only in the male household head's name.
A lack of equity may also be reflected in tenure instruments, which tend to cite the male household head on documents rather than husband and wife. Gender equity is statutory under Lao law, and if property or land has entered the family through the wife, or if a husband and wife have cleared new land together, then both names must be on the tenure document.
Given this situation, gender-responsive training and development programs, particularly for field staff, will be necessary. The project structure will also need to reflect gender equity in data gathering and management, time allocated for community discussions, and agreement process for project-supported activities.
SUFORD Project concept papers, give high importance to gender integration and mainstreaming and ensuring that women benefit from program activities. Nonetheless, when we look at gender mainstreaming at project organization level we see that it is rather left on the sidelines than being brought into the mainstream, let alone conceptualizing that the mainstream should be changed by virtue of women’s equal rights to participate in it. We also see that there are inconsistencies with the project-related documents, which spill over into all aspects of the project’s work program, including the way activities are planned, implemented and monitored. The Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system also is not adequately geared to monitoring women’s use and benefits of project outputs, and there are no adequate indicators to show impacts on women’s improved abilities to exercise their economic, social, cultural and political rights.
Recommendations
• Train project stakeholders about gender equity and gender mainstreaming
• Ensure that project will empower women as direct beneficiaries and avoid their marginalization in financial management, tenure issues, etc.
• Set up a culturally and gender suitable interface; this means conducting activities in local languages and providing enough time to ensure that women are fully involved.
3 Capacity of project beneficiaries
Given that a much higher proportion of target beneficiaries under the SUPSFM project will be drawn from a broader number of ethnic groups, and that PFA locations will include more upland areas, it must be recognized early on that the project will be working with communities whose capacity to interact with it will need more time and strong communication methodologies. Evaluations of SUFORD implementation identified the need to better explain the concept of PSFM, to allow communities to either opt in or opt out of activities, and to understand the consequences of restricted access to their customary forest and upland cultivation areas.
An effective system used by FOMACOP is to have all concerned district staff participate in the training of villagers in a model village. This gives the concerned district staff an opportunity to practice as trainers before they are sent to the villages assigned to them. This system is especially important for district staff members who lack experience as trainers.
Under the SUFORD-AF project, the VD teams in 9 project provinces had conducted 507 capacity building evens of 488 planned events (or 104%) from October 2010 to October 2012. Total of 1,927 training days were delivered to 8342 participants with 31% are female (Data gathered from VD Quarterly and Annual Reports from 2010-2012). Main trainings were village administrative and financial management, technical extension services, producer groups and small business management, on-the-job training on VDF management, and monitoring and evaluation. Capacity building activities
One of the most important lessons learned under SUFORD is to improve project recognition of people's existing livelihood activities which pre-date national preparation of PFA maps and boundaries. Most importantly, the capacities of field teams must be enhanced to meet the higher demand of communicating, discussing and planning with communities with limited communication skills with Lao speakers, and may often have experienced adverse consequences in their interactions with local authorities.
Additionally, traditional customary land use practitioners may not accept the extension opportunities available under the project during the lifespan of the project especially in the more remote upland areas. Years of experience in Laos has demonstrated the reluctance of subsistence farmers to innovate or engage in the broader monetary economy. In more traditional communities emphasis will be placed on adding crops with greater value (both monetary and nutritional) to existing rotational agriculture practices the focus will include familiar products (particularly NTFPs), reforestation, and tenure strengthening, then the possibility of community cooperation can be enhanced.
Challenges
• In terms of capacity building activities, the past experience suggests that ethnic villagers are seldom able to take advantage of training in the form of lecturing.
• Training was not usually provided by experienced trainer, and it often took the form of top-down lecturing of participants; training material not provided or not adapted to the capacity of participants.
Recommendations
• Capacity building is best approached through “learning by doing”.
• Ideally, all capacity building activities should occur at community level to ensure that a maximum of participants can be involved, especially women who lack exposure and are less eligible to leave the village. Training should also take place in local languages.
• Training should be practical and participatory avoiding lecture / top-down approach that often prevailed during the SUFORD-AF project.
4 Land acquisition/resettlement
While it is true that SUFORD/AF has not induced resettlement or relocation of any villages, it does not mean that resettlement or village consolidation processes initiated by other agencies and projects have not affected SUFORD financed PFAs and SFMAs. Several thousand Hmong refugees were repatriated from Thailand in 2010 and many of the returnees were resettled in Pak Bueak (Bolikhamxay). In Kaleum District (Sekong) dam construction and mineral exploration caused access restrictions, removal of timber and the relocation of at least nine ethnic group villages that were supposed to be included under SUFORD AF, while one village is to be resettled in Lamam District. In Kaleum even the district capital will have to be moved.
While in general SUFORD areas to date have not been badly affected by resettlement, this does not mean that SUPSFM is “immune.” District authorities are also inclined to redraw village and kumban boundaries for consolidation purposes and to carry out Lao People’s Revolutionary Party (LPRP) policy on creating larger development sites.
Recommendations
• Set up a clear typology of all target village for the project to acknowledge the status of each community (stable, planned to be resettled, resettled, etc.) and exclude villages that have been relocated in the last 4 years and villages slated for consolidation or resettlement in the coming 4 years (consistent with World Bank financed Poverty Reduction Fund (PRF) project in Lao PDR)
• Ensure that all project stakeholders are made aware of WB resettlement policies also the Lao government policies on compensation.
5 Grievance and conflict resolution mechanisms
According to the EGDP, three distinct cases where complaints mechanisms are needed (i) disputes within the villages (ii) disputes between the village and a private party, (iii) disputes between village and government authorities.
With respect to the first case, the project planned to promote the use of traditional institutions for conflict resolution. Suggested approaches would include relevant project guidelines and relevant staff will be trained accordingly. The approach provided in the guidelines would consider the option to engage District authorities, the Land Management Authority or the LFNC for mediation. With respect to disputes with private sector, SUFORD would be able to provide limited support to ethnic villages by training the DAFO and LNFC staff to assist ethnic villagers in lodging formal complaints. Assistance would cover technical issues as well as language.
Constraints
• LFNC was not made aware of its crucial role in conflict resolution both in terms of language facilitation and helping villagers to lodge formal complaints.
• In fact, there was even no formal mechanisms to acknowledge conflicts or grievance
Actions taken
In order to determine if any remaining conflicts or problems, or whether the project had any negative impact on local communities, and in absence of a better alternative or extensive resources need to undertake complex impact assessments, a simple checklist was devised which could be used by LFNC and LWU representatives with GVFO and VFO members. The list consisted in 6 main areas of investigation including (1) facilitation and representation; (2) social issues; (3) resource exclusion; (4) benefits and timber revenues; (5) material; and (6) information provided. A last section is devoted to villagers’ concerns or demand.
The list allowed recording key issues/ conflict emerging in the sub-FMA areas and the impacts of the sub-FMA management plan and allowed opening up a discursive space and record Village Forestry Committees perceptions, ideas and concerns. In each Sub-FMA, a report has been produced for each meeting summarizing the main findings of the meeting with a special focus on the attendance, the quality of the facilitation, the degree of participation and also on the impact assessment conducted. This is particularly relevant since the project aims to maintain and enhance traditional resource use rather than to exclude or prevent it.
A database of critical issues that have been prioritized has been produced and it has been agreed that the DOF will directly contact the relevant stakeholders at provincial level to discuss about resolution mechanisms for the conflicts listed during the meetings. It should also be noted that in parallel to SUPSFM the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility (FCPF) would be financing the strengthening of national conflict resolution mechanisms. Efforts between projects will be closely coordinated and the World Bank social safeguards team based in Vientiane will facilitate coordination and facilitate the development of a uniform approach to resettlement and village consolidation across the Bank portfolio.
Opportunities: LFNC & LWU grassroots voices reach central level:
– Clear tools are prepared by central EG team and to allow capturing oral material including villagers voices, perceptions, concerns and relevant issues (in collaboration with FCPF and other WB projects).
– Provincial and district EG Team were increasingly skilled in capturing and recording oral material and using various tools and methodologies
– Clear indicators about status (gender/ ethnicity/ socio economic profile) of project beneficiaries were made available
– Discursive space have been opened during meetings allowing peoples’ concerns to be acknowledged and recorded
– EG team insisted on quotas to ensure women, poor and ethnic minorities’ participation during interviews or activities
– EG team acknowledged key issues such as change of beneficiaries, conflict over the land, etc.
Challenges
• Opportunity for public expressions of dissent is still quite limited in Lao PDR;
• This situation is not expected to change in the near-term but in the medium term initiatives to incorporate mass organizations and civil society participants more fully into project activities is likely to improve project performance and provide training opportunities for a next generation of leaders
• Although difficult to implement in practice it will be important to coordinate and facilitate dialogue among SUPSFM support partners (LWU, LNFC, CSOs at provincial level) and participants in the Dedicated Grant Mechanism.
Recommendations
• Empower the LFNC as a key actor in grievance redress mechanisms from community level to district and province up to central level.
• Raise awareness of LFNC and other project stakeholders about conflict resolution mechanisms
• Involve LFNC in monitoring grievances at community level
• Enhance LFNC skills in capturing and recording oral material and supporting villagers in fill up grievance forms.
6 Participatory Sustainable Forestry Management PSFM
The methods used to monitor progress with forest management planning under SUFORD consisted mainly of quantitative assessment. Keeping track of how many agreements were signed and how many Sub-FMA plans were completed left out any measure of the quality of the interactions and the breadth and depth of understanding among community members. Especially among Ethnic groups there were clear indications that planning required more time and a more sustained dialogue to reach consensus especially the most marginalized groups.
It is now widely accepted that project beneficiaries from ethnic groups were not given sufficient opportunities or support to fully participate in sustainable forest management planning and in developing a shared understanding of the terms of forest use. For instance, field surveys have concluded that some ethnic communities did not have sufficient chance to negotiate on the extent of production forest areas within their village boundaries even though they rely heavily on rotational upland cultivation for livelihood. There is no evidence that access restrictions have been imposed under SUFORD but SUPSFM will have to revisit the mapping process and selectively apply elements of the newly developed Community Engagement Process Framework to ensure that all communities are able to redress remaining doubts and lingering concerns.
Recommendations
• Ensure that local authorities are involved in participatory forest management to ensure that customary land tenure is taken into consideration.
• Provide time at community level to implement all project activities
• Define clear steps to be followed by the technical teams and empower the community by presenting the whole process including all steps.
• Avoid top down approach and implement grassroots participation at community level
• Traditional rotational swidden cultivation is a sophisticated, sustainable agricultural system that can make a significant contribution to local food security. Local farmers must be allowed to employ their traditional rotational farming methods on those lands that are zoned for agricultural production. Care must be taken during village forest planning to ensure that sufficient land is available to allow appropriate fallow periods.
High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF)
SUFORD defines HVC6 forest areas as areas critical to traditional cultural identity of local communities. The concept of “sacred forests” serves as a powerful sanction against cutting and burning forests of high conservation value. This notion refers to forest areas, which are believed to be inhabited by powerful spirits, and, therefore, not cleared, burned or cultivated by the local population. Although common among both the northern, central and southern groups, this belief and the accompanying restrictions against cutting and burning such forests appear to be most strongly upheld among the groups in the south – largely because these groups still tend to live in their homelands and are less penetrated by modern Lao society.
Indigenous communities/ethnic groups are often shy to talk about their spirit beliefs and be reluctant to indicate where there are sacred grounds, spirit forests, cemetery forests and so forth. Culturally significant areas fall under the High conservation Value Areas number 6 in the forest management plans.
SUFORD is committed to inventory and preserve those areas and is aware that in village spirit forests it must carefully monitor what happens to these spirit forests from then on, since these forests are often full of very valuable large trees and inroads are constantly attempted to make deals with local people.
Challenges
In some provinces HCV 6 areas were not inventoried and not mentioned in the forest management plans. This needs to be remedied through culturally appropriate means and protective measures need to be introduced to avoid any losses in these culturally significant areas.
Outsiders working in local communities should show greater sensitivity to the impact of their presence upon the need to conduct ritual ceremonies, and help to meet the costs involved. Currently, in most cases involving outsiders, ritual compensation, perceived as fundamental to maintain harmony and community well being, is never taken into consideration.
Measures taken
– During sub-FMA meetings gathering GVFO in 4 sub-FMA in Sekong province, the ethnic and gender team have successfully inventoried over 80 HCV6. The HCV6 areas including ceremonial sites, caves, forest cemetery, Buddhist monuments, etc. the information was provided to the national forestry consultant and integrated in the management plan.
– During monitoring visits in Sekong province, many village informants explained that the fundamental role of community rituals must be preserved and validated. Such rituals are critical to communities, ensuring community peace, harmony and well being, such as the annual ritual to honor the spirit of the land, (conducted in a holy area preserved by the whole community), or the spirit of the forest, to guarantee health and peace, be preserved and validated. Communities should be guaranteed the right to manage their traditional sacred place, including sacred forest, so that these critical ritual events can continue to be observed.
– Outsiders working in local communities should show greater sensitivity to the impact of their presence upon the need to conduct ritual ceremonies, and help to meet the costs involved. Currently, in most cases involving outsiders, ritual compensation, perceived as fundamental to maintain harmony and community well being, is never taken into consideration.
Recommendations
• Inventory all culturally significant areas in each target community and all participating provinces
• Record customary rules defining the access of those areas and the ritual requirements or compensations that must be provided in case of impact
• Raise staff awareness of customary significant areas
• SUPSFM to support recording, disseminating and enforcing local laws and community standards concerning significant customary forest areas to ensure that outsiders will implement accordingly.
1 Land tenure
Many ethnic groups practice a system of land use and resource management, which is uniquely adapted for upland areas. This has developed over generations as part of traditional ways of life, and is underpinned through ritual and customary practices. This section looks at how women’s land and property rights are established and maintained under these customary or traditional tenure systems.
Recent field surveys have pointed out that village resettlement and merging, the takeover of land for concessions, ongoing policies to restrict villager access to land and timber resources plus the lack of adequate land tenure arrangements in the ethnic group villages with upland cultivation is resulting in confusion over forest and agricultural land management in some project areas and undermining both customary systems, as well as the statutory systems which are supposed to replace them.
PSFM must be predicated on adequate land tenure systems whereby villagers with upland rotational cultivation are supported and assisted to have communal tenure over enough agricultural land to ensure their livelihoods.
Recommendations
• SUPSFM should improve the consultation processes through adoption of the enhanced participatory land use planning (PLUP) methodology developed by MAF and MONRE jointly in 2009
• Integrate gender sensitive consultation and data management;
• Prepare and financially support activities which give equal weight to men and women's land and natural resource use;
• Improve local communities’ enforcement capacity to prevent villagers and migrants opening new slash-and-burn areas (conversion of primary forest).
2 Monitoring and evaluation
As previously mentioned the mechanisms developed under SUFORD to monitor project implementation were not adequate, and gaps were often left unaddressed for some time. Many formats prepared by central level that would have been useful to monitor participation of ethnic minority, women and poor were simply not shared until late in the project cycle. This resulted in the lack of proper indicators to measure to which extent poor, women and ethnic minority participated in project activities.
Safeguard assessment concluded that LWU and LFNC should have played a more active role in monitoring and evaluation; that neutral parties such as CSOs should also participate in project monitoring, and that project monitoring indicators should include those specific to safeguard compliance including on ethnic women.
Recommendations
• SUPSFM should set up both internal and external monitoring mechanisms. Internal monitoring of the actual implementation against the planned activities, time frame, budget and entitlement that will be done on an on-going basis throughout the duration of the project and should involve village authorities in this process.
• Qualified staff based in Technical Service Centers (TSCs) should be responsible for implementation of the investment activities that involve land acquisition and/or resources access restriction. An appropriate agency and/or an independent qualified consultant should conduct external monitoring once a year.
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT BENEFICIARIES/ AFFECTED PEOPLE
The main project beneficiaries will be the communities involved in the implementation of PSFM in PFAs and other forest categories in the forest landscapes covered by the Project. They will benefit from a diversity of expanded livelihood opportunities. Villages located within PFAs that have significant forest stocks will receive direct and tangible benefits from employment in timber production and share of timber revenue. In addition, they and those that do not have well stocked natural forests or access to such resources will receive specific benefits through opportunities for expanded livelihood support. Vulnerable communities, ethnic groups, and women will receive priority attention in project design and participatory processes.
Management of forests at landscape scale will expand the coverage of beneficiaries outside the scope of PSFM in PFAs. As landscape PSFM will potentially include other categories of forest areas, such as conservation, protection, and village-use forests, the number of villages that will benefit from landscape PSFM (LPSFM) will include those outside PFAs but within the other forest areas in the forest landscape. However, this will be realized only when LPSFM is implemented in the next phase, as in the current phase the Project will focus on concept development and application at the LPSFM planning stage.
The Government and its institutions will also be the main project beneficiaries. District, province, and national forestry and other relevant government institutions and their staff will receive training and support from the Project. The Government will further benefit from improved quality of forest management, and improved rent capture and revenue collection.
1 Coverage of Field Implementation
There are 34 PFAs with a total area of 1.91 million ha, which are located in 9 SUFORD-supported provinces in Central and Southern Lao. However, SUFORD provided support to only 16 PFAs with a total area of 1.28 million ha out of the 34 PFAs. The Project will continue to support selected activities in the 16 PFAs covered by SUFORD, but will expand PSFM implementation to cover all 34 PFAs, while adding 7 more PFAs with a total area of 0.39 million ha, which are located in 3 Northern Lao provinces. The Project will thus support the implementation of PSFM in a total of 41 PFAs with an aggregate area of 2.30 million ha. Table 1 lists the 41 PFAs and provides some relevant information about them.
Table 4: Districts comprising the PFAs to be supported by the Project
| | |Official |FMAs (district) |
|Province |PFA name |area, ha | |
|Champasack |Pathoumphone |27,043 |1 |Pathoumphone |
|Champasack |Silivangveun |37,590 |2 |Bachiang, Sanasomboon |
|Khammouane |Dong Phouxoi |147,406 |3 |Mahaxai, Xaibouathong, Xebangfai |
|Khammouane |Nakathing-Nongkapat |105,416 |3 |Boualapha, Mahaxai, Xaibouathong |
|Salavan |Lao Ngam |74,580 |4 |Khongxedon, Lao Ngam, Salavan, Vapi |
|Salavan |Phou Talava |61,772 |3 |Salavan, Taoi, Tumlane |
|Savannakhet |Dong Kapho |51,650 |3 |Phalanxai, Phin, Xonbouly |
|Savannakhet |Dong Sithouane |150,900 |2 |Songkhone, Thapangthong |
|Expansion PFAs of SUFORD (2009-12) | | | |
|Attapeu |Ban Bengvilay |37,862 |1 |Sanamxai |
|Attapeu |Nam Pa Huayvy |75,037 |2 |Sanxai, Xaysettha |
|Bolikhamxai |Phak Beuak |112,756 |5 |Bolikham, Pakkading, Paksan, Met, Vientong |
|Bolikhamxai |Phou Pasang-Punghok |47,657 |1 |Bolikham |
|Vientiane |Nongpet-Naseng |68,725 |4 |Feuang, Kasi, Met, Vangvieng |
|Vientiane |Phou Gneuy |100,228 |4 |Feuang, Met, Meune, Sanakham |
|Xaiyabouly |Phou Phadam |95,224 |3 |Paklai, Phieng, Xaiyabouly |
|Xekong |Huaypen |89,532 |3 |Kaleum, Lamam, Lamman |
|Expansion PFAs in 9 SUFORD provinces | | | |
|Attapeu |Nam Kong |88,559 |4 |Phouvong, Sanamxai, Sanxai, Xaysettha |
|Bolikhamxai |Huay Sup-Namtek |8,590 |3 |Bolikham, Thaphabath, Paksan |
|Bolikhamxai |Phou Tum |12,179 |1 |Bolikham |
|Champasack |Nongtangok |58,000 |2 |Mounlapamok, Sukuma |
|Vientiane |Houay Siat |36,479 |2 |Kasi, Met |
|Vientiane |Phou Phaphiang |36,107 |2 |Saysomboun, Vangvieng |
|Vientiane |Phou Samliam |44,780 |2 |Hom, Saysomboun |
|Xaiyabouly |Huay Gnang |36,717 |1 |Hongsa |
|Xaiyabouly |Kengchok-Nam Ngim |114,943 |2 |Phieng, Xaiyabouly |
|Xaiyabouly |Pha Nang ngoi |29,144 |2 |Ngeun, Xienghon |
|Xaiyabouly |Pha Nangnuane |48,174 |2 |Khop, Xienghon |
|Xaiyabouly |Phou Phadeng |16,393 |1 |Botene |
|Xekong |Dakchang |38,461 |2 |Dakcheung, Kaleum |
|Xekong |Dakmong |5,028 |1 |Dakcheung |
|Xekong |Namdee |11,760 |1 |Dakcheung |
|Xekong |Phoukateum |21,338 |1 |Kaleum |
|Xekong |Prong |16,990 |1 |Dakcheung |
|Xekong |Xienglouang |5,396 |1 |Dakcheung |
|Expansion PFAs in Northern Lao | | | |
|Bokeo |Phouviengxai |44,894 |1 |Pha Oudom |
|Bokeo |Sammuang |78,699 |2 |Houaysai, Ton Pheung |
|Louangnamtha |Nam Fa |24,649 |1 |Long |
|Louangnamtha |Phou Led Longmoun |20,150 |2 |Nalee, Viengphoukha |
|Oudomxai |Namnga |98,786 |3 |Beng, Nga, Xay |
|Oudomxai |Namphak |52,118 |3 |La, Namor, Xay |
|Oudomxai |Saikhong |69,791 |3 |Houn, Nga, Pakbeng |
|12 provinces |41 PFAs |2.30 M |63 | |
Table 5: SUFORD-AF district and Expansion districts[4]
|Province |SUFORD-AF |Expansion |Total |
| |Districts |Districts |Sub-FMAs |
|Attapeu |3 |1 |4 |
|Bokeo |0 |3 |3 |
|Bolikhamxai |5 |1 |8 |
|Champasack |3 |2 |5 |
|Khammouane |4 |0 |4 |
|Louangnamtha |0 |3 |3 |
|Oudomxai |0 |7 |7 |
|Salavan |6 |0 |6 |
|Savannakhet |5 |0 |5 |
|Vientiane |6 |2 |8 |
|Xaiyabouly |3 |5 |8 |
|Xekong |3 |1 |3 |
|Total |38 |25 |63 |
2 Demographic data
The SUPSFM project will target 983 villages in 59 districts in 12 provinces. According to the Forest Inventory and Planning Division (FIPD), the target population is estimated around 543,794 people. Khammouane province comes first in terms of number of village (162 target villages), followed by Sayabouly (156 villages) and Vientiane Province (131 target villages). Louang Namtha is the smallest province both in terms of target villages (8 villages in 2 districts) and target population (2,566 people/1,294 women).
Table 6: List of SUPSFM Project target provinces, districts and number of target villages
|Province | |District names |Number of Villages |Population |Female |
|Attapeu |4 |Phouvong, Sanamxay, Sanxay, Saysetha |49 |33,549 |17,707 |
|Bolikhamxay |5 |Bolikham, Bolikhan, Pakkading, Paksan,|52 |42,919 |20,358 |
| | |Viengthong | | | |
|Khammouane |4 |Boualapha, Mahaxay, Xaybouathong, |162 |49,480 |No data |
| | |Xebangfai | | | |
|Oudomxay |6 |Houn, La, Namor, Nga, Pakbeng, Xay |44 |18,599 |9,042 |
|Savannakhet |5 |Phalanxay, Phin, Songkhorn, |78 |37,451 |18,800 |
| | |Thaphanthong, Xonlabouli | | | |
|Xayabouly |7 |Boten, khob, Ngeun, Paklai, Phieng, |156 |123,577 |60,284 |
| | |Xayabouly, Xienghone | | | |
|12 provinces |59 districts | |983 villages |543,794 |243,058[5] |
1 Luang Namtha Province
The mountainous Luang Namtha province has an area of 9,325km2 and is located in the northern Lao PDR. The province shares borders of China (140km), Myanmar (130km) Oudomxay Province (230km) and Bokeo Province (100 km). The Mekong River constitutes the NW border of the province. There are three large rivers that drain westwards/southwards into the Mekong: Nam Tha, Nam Pha and Nam Long. The province is divided into five administrative districts, namely Namtha, Sing, Long, Viengphoukha, and Nalae. Luang Namtha Province is a center for commerce between China, Laos, and Thailand
2 Bokeo Province
Bokeo province locates in the northwestern part of the Lao PDR, and shares border with two neighboring countries and 3 other provinces as follows: On the west with Thailand forming a distance of 145 Km and with Myanmar 98 Km; with Luangnamtha province on the northeastern part (100 Km), with Oudomsay province on the eastern part (100 Km), and with Sayabouly province on the southern part (35 Km). The mountainous area covering 70% of the total area of 619,600 ha forms most of the landscape. The province comprises 5 districts, namely Houaixai, Tonpheung, Parktha, Meung, and Phaoudom, in which the last district has been included in the national list of 47 poorest districts. This is a home of multi-ethnics where 13 different ethnic groups living together, such as Khmu, Leu, Lao Hmong, Lamed, Lahou, Youan, Iumian, Tai, Samtao, Akha, Phounoi and Thaineua. Based on the statistic provided by the Provincial Department of Planning and Investment in 2010, Bokeo has a total population of 158,638 people (79,516 are women) living in 27,606 households.
Tonpheung district situates 52 Kilometers away from the provincial city covering the total area of 715,000 ha. The district comprises of 50 villages, grouping in 9 development clusters and 1 large development village (Namkeung-kao). The total population is 29,748 (13,219 women, living in 5,123 households. Paddy rice cultivation is the main occupation of the population, while livestock raising and planting of other crops are other options for their additional income generation. In Tonpheung district, the development of tourism sector is currently the main focus, for instance the integrated tourism development project operated by Dok-nguikham Company Ltd., and a Souvannakhom tourism site where a large Buddha statue existed. The district shares the western borderline with Thailand forming a distance of 45 Km and with Myanmar 44 Km.
Phaoudom District The district locates 71 km away from the provincial capital in the southern direction. The mountainous landscape covers 65% of the total area of 1,579,000 ha. The total population of 38,359 people (19,326 women) comprise of different ethnic groups, including Khmu 35.9%, Lamed 34.8%, Lao 11.2%, Lue 10.3%, Hmong 5.3%, Taidam 2.2%, and others 0.3%. The population density is 24 person/Km2.
Houayxai District is the municipal district of the province. With a total land area of 1,860,500 ha, the mountainous landscape covers the largest part. The district administrative arrangement is divided in 14 development clusters, comprised of 89 villages and 10,761 households. From the total population of 151,156 people, more than half are women counting at 74,819 people. The district shares borders with other districts, provinces and neighboring country: with Tonpheng and Meung districts on the northern side; with Parktha and Phaoudom districts on the southern side and with Luangnamtha province (Viengphoukha district) on the eastern side and with Thailand on the western side.
3 Oudomxay Province
Oudomxay Province is located in the center of mountainous northern region of Lao PDR. It covers a total area of 15,370 km sq. Mountain land with numerous watersheds, accounts for 85% of this area, and there are about 45,000 hectares of agricultural land lying in five main plains. An estimated 90% of the mountainous area is still forested. Total population is 236 525, with density of 15 persons per km2 for the whole province, ranging from 7 in Namo and 29 in Pakbeng. There are 7 districts and 277,953 people divided into 14 ethnic groups (Khamu, Hmong, Samtao, Leu, Tai, Lamet, Akha, Bit, Hor, Mien, Kong, Sat, Phusang and Yang).
A large proportion of population has a tradition of rotating swidden cultivation and more than half of the population (57%) is below poverty line. Oudomxay is one of the major opium growing areas of the country, 1/3 of villages grow opium in upland farms. According to the Justice Provincial Department, the main issues pertaining to justice are break of loan agreement, land – mostly inheritance – dispute and divorce.
3 Ethnicity profile
With a population of over seven million, Laos is the most ethnically diverse country in mainland Southeast Asia. As is the case elsewhere in Southeast Asia, the main socio-economic division in Laos is between upland dwellers and inhabitants of the lowlands. This dichotomy summarizes roughly the division between Tai societies (Buddhist, paddy rice growers, literate) and those who are animist, illiterate, egalitarian and practicing swidden agriculture. However, such a dichotomy risks over-simplifying very complex cultural configurations.
The ethnic Lao are culturally and politically dominant and make up about half of the population. The term ‘Lao’ is a political notion and every citizen is designated this label, which refers to political citizenship.
The population of the Lao PDR consists of 49 ethnic groups (with 160 sub-groups) and is classified into 4 ethno-linguistic groups, namely Lao-Tai, Mon-Khmer, Hmong-Iumien, and Sino-Tibetan. In reality there are many more ethnic groups in the country, some estimates state that there are as many as 236 (Chamberlain, 1995).
Table 7: Ethnic classification in Lao PDR
|Ethnolinguistic ‘superstock’ |No of Groups |% of Poppulation |
|Mon-Khmer |32 |23.0% |
|(Khamuic, Palaungic Katuic, Bahnarique and Vietic | | |
|sub-groups) | | |
|Lao-Tai |12 |66.2% |
|(Tai Dam, Deng, Neua, Khao Sek, Lao) | | |
|Hmong-Mien (Miao-Yao) |2 |7.4% |
|(Hmong Khao, Mien, Yao) | | |
|Sino-Tibetan |7 |2.5% |
|Tibetan-Burmese (Akha, Lahu, Phounoy, Lao Seng) | |0.2% |
|Chinese Hor | | |
|Total: |49 | |
Many ethnic groups living in Laos are in fact transnational minorities that are also found in neighboring countries. This is the case for many Sino-Tibetan, Hmong-Mien and Mon-Khmer groups, and also for the ethnic Lao majority (there are more than 20 million ethnic Lao living in north-eastern Thailand compared to 3 million who live in Laos).
The multi-ethnic Lao people enjoy solidarity and equal rights before the law. Article 8 of the 1991 Constitution presents the Lao State as multi-ethnic and forbids discrimination based on ethnicity:
“The State pursues the policy of promoting unity and equality among all ethnic groups. All ethnic groups have the rights to protect, preserve and promote the fine customs and cultures of their own tribes and of the nation. All acts of creating division and discrimination among [or] between ethnic groups are forbidden. The State implements every measure to gradually develop and upgrade the economic and social level of all ethnic groups”.
1 SUFORD
During SUFORD (2003-2008), 58% of the target communities belonged to Lao-Tai linguistic family; mostly Lao and Phouthay ethnic group. In the 4 provinces initially targeted by SUFORD, a great majority of ethnic minority belonged to Katuic speaking groups. About 1.3 million people living in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam speak Katuic languages; the vast majority of which (more than a million) belong to the Kui-Bru (West Katuic) subgroup, living mostly in eastern Thailand and Cambodia. The greatest diversity of Katuic languages lies in Saravane and Sekong provinces and adjacent border areas of Vietnam. Katuic speaking groups of the Mon-Khmer accounted linguistic family accounted for 14% of the villages and about one third were ethnically mixed; this means that there were both linguistic family (Lao-Tai and Mon-Khmer). Katang was the second most important group found in the target area with 74,081 people (12.2%) and altogether with ethnic Lao and the Phoutai, the only Mon-Khmer group to be found in all targeted districts. Phoutai come third with 60,363 people (9.9% of the population). Makong come fourth with 27,484 people (4.5% of the population) and are found in 16 districts. In fact, Charouy and Chari groups found in Khammouane province are included under Makong in the 1995 census. Finally, Xouay come in the fifth position and are found in 17 out of 18 target districts.
2 SUFORD AF
Moving from SUFORD to SUFORD-AF, the project has shown an increase in cultural diversity in the SUFORD-AF provinces. The ethnic groups under SUFORD and SUFORD-AF comprise Harak (Alak), Tarieng, Tri, Souay, Brao, Khmou, Hmong and Mien and others. Mon-Khmer accounted for 28% in SUFORD to 40% in SUFORD AF.
SUFORD-AF differs from the original SUFORD Project due to the increased cultural diversity of the villages in the Project areas. The new project provinces and districts vary in social characteristics: predominantly Lao closer to the river and moving eastward decreasing irrigated rice cultivation and increasing shifting cultivation and to the poorest villages located on remote upland locations. Villages are generally organised along ethnic lines, though in some cases larger villages will consist of more than one ethnic group inhabiting different hamlets or neighborhoods. The Lao government’s resettlement programs introducing new groups in existing villages or establishing new villages in PFAs (e.g. in Bolikhamsay) constitute a new and emerging challenge.
Increased cultural diversity in the new project provinces generates increased challenges.
The risks and issues concerning ethnic groups and the project stem from the considerable variation in terms of social organization, culture, land use practices, food security, Lao language competency, resource access, gender roles and participation in local development planning processes. Many ethnic groups are also more vulnerable and liable to risks and challenges such as (a) potential changes to traditional & current land-use practices, (b) cultural forests, (c) Lao language, (d) weaker capacity of particular local communities to participate in development activities, (e) weak capacity of PAFO & DAFO staff to work with vulnerable ethnic groups, lack of language skills, gender and cultural sensitivity, and (f) lack of adequate attention on the part of government programs to the traditional practices of ethnic communities, especially in relation to shifting cultivation.
3 SUPSFM project beneficiaries in 3 new provinces
There is an increased ethnic diversity from SUFORD (Lao-Tai and Mon-Khmer), SUFORD AF (Lao-Tai, Mon-Khmer and Hmong-Iu-Mien) and SUPSFM (Lao-Tai, Mon-Khmer, Hmong-Iu-Mien and Sino-Tibetan). One major difference is the inclusion of ethnic Sino-Tibetan linguistic ethnic groups, which are populating certain areas in Luangnamtha and Oudomxay. Lao-Tai reduces from 58% of target population in SUFORD to 48% in SUFORD AF new target villages to 14% in SUPSFM (Oudomxay and Louangnamtha). In SUPSFM target area (Louangnamtha and Oudomxay), Hmong-Iu-Mien and Sino-Tibetan will account for 40% of the target communities.
Increased cultural diversity in the new project provinces generates increased ethnographic challenges. Ethnic groups have different livelihood strategies, gender relations and overall worldviews that need to be considered in implementation. The risks and issues concerning ethnic groups and the project stem from the considerable variation in terms of social organization, culture, land use practices, food security, Lao language competency, resource access, gender roles and participation in local development planning processes.
Amongst the villages visited during the SUPSFM survey were ethnic groups such as Thai Dam, Hmong, Kamou, Akha and Lahu, with the latter two being Sino-Tibetan ethnic groups. Although on the surface there might not seem to be any salient differences between these groups, further research in the implementation phase is recommended to assess any differences in natural resource management, natural resource tenure, gender dimensions, and social organization. Safeguards, which applied for previous SUFORD-AF, will continue to apply and due to increase of ethnic minority groups in the project area as seen from table X, will be even more important under this project.
Table 8: Number of village per ethno linguistic category in SUFORD, SUFORD AF AND SUPSFM[6]
|Phase |Provinces |Hmong- |Lao-Tai |
| | |Iu-Mien | |
|Amount: |17 |14 |28 |
|Names |Bolikhan, Dakcheung, Hom, Kaleum, |Bachiang, Boualapha, |Bolikham, Boten, |
| |Long, |Feuang, Khop, La, |Houayxai, Houn, Kasi, Khongxedon, Lamam, Laongam, Meune, |
| |Meung, Nalae, Namor, |Mahaxay, Met, Pathoumphone, |Ngeun, Pakkading, Paklai, Paksan, Pakxan, Palanxay, |
| |Nga, Pakbeng, Phaoudom |Sanamxay, Sukuma, |Phieng, Salavan, Sanakham, Saysetha, Songkhone, Vangvieng,|
| |Phin, Phouvong, Sanxai |Tumlane, Xaybouathong, |Vapi, Xanasomboun, Xay, Xaysomboun, Xebangfai, |
| |Taoy, Thapangthong |Xbouli, Xienghone |Xienglouang, Xonlabouli |
| |Vienthong | | |
|Population |87,913 |165,835 |290,046 |
|Nb of women |43,596 |72,316[9] |141,806 |
Sanxay district in Attapeu is the poorest district of the country followed by Kalum in Sekong and Phouvong also in Attapeu. The table below displays the list of the 17 poorest districts and their rank according to the NGPES.
Table 11: Rank of the 17 poorest districts targeted by the SUPSFM project per province
|Province |District |Poverty Rank |Population |Female |
|Attapeu |Sanxai |1 |11,478 |5,692 |
|Attapeu |Phouvong |3 |6,912 |3,530 |
|Oudomxay |Pakbeng |7 |742 |352 |
|Louang Namtha |Long |10 |1,261 |601 |
|Sekong |Dakcheung |17 |6,103 |3,080 |
|Bokeo |Meung |20 |2,493 |1,166 |
|Vientiane |Hom |32 |543 |275 |
|Savannakhet |Phin |35 |4,698 |2,358 |
|Savannakhet |Thapangthong |42 |13,288 |6,670 |
4 Vulnerable groups
Poverty and ethnicity
While poverty levels are high across the country, districts identified as the poorest are indicative of the correlation between poverty and geography (highest in upland, remote and inaccessible locations); ethnicity (with ethnic minority groups, particularly those belonging to the Mon- Khmer ethno-linguistic group being amongst the poorest) and severity of UXO contamination, with communities living in the most contaminated locations being among the poorest in the country. As shown in the table below, if the Mon-Khmer represents only 20.6% of the country’s population, they account for 54.3% of the country’s poor.
Table 12: Ethnic Groups and Poverty in Lao PDR 2002-2003
| |% of National |Incidence of Poverty |
| |Population |Headcount Index (% of population) |
|Total Lao PDR |100.0 | |
|By Geographic Area | | |
|Urban |23.0 |19.7 |
|Rural |77.0 |37.6 |
|With all-season road | |31.4 |
|Without all-season road | |46.2 |
|By Ethnic Group | | |
|Lao-Tai |66.6 |25.0 |
|Mon-Khmer |20.6 |54.3 |
|Hmong-lu Mien |8.4 |40.3 |
|Chine-Tibet |3.3 |45.8 |
Source: World Bank 2005 based on LECS3[10]
Ethnic minorities are unequivocally the most vulnerable groups in Laos. They are at the very bottom of the social structure, stereotyped as backward, environmentally destructive and counterproductive. They also face territorial, economic, cultural and political pressures.
Disabled people
A total of 70,261 people in 65,015 households in the Lao PDR are reported as having a disability. This comprises about 8% of all households and about 1.3% of the total population. When compared to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) estimate that up to 10% of a population will have a disability, these figures for the Lao PDR appear to be very low. The main challenge relating to disabled individuals in Lao PDR is that there is no accurate or precise data on disability nationwide and no nationally recognized classification of disability (Lao Socio-Economic Atlas). While most people with a disability are found in urban areas, many rural areas are affected by UXO contamination including eastern Sekong & Saravane provinces in Southern Laos and Xieng Khouang and Houaphan provinces in the Northern Part of the country.
5 Economics and livelihood
Out of the ten village only one village accounted approximately 90% of average wealthy (1,080,000 -5,000,000 LAK/month) households. One village had about 50% of average wealthy households. The remaining eight villages were categorized as poor (1,080,000 LAK/month) households. Only one village does not make use of any credit system, all the other communities are receiving credit from friends or relatives, or in some case the village saving/development fund. Most household loans vary between 0-5,000,000 LAK some households loan up to 10,000,000 LAK and occasionally they loan beyond the 10,000,000 LAK. Poor households are primarily relying on fishing, hunting and NTFP collection (score 33) as their livelihood strategy, livestock raising (18) and lowland rice cultivation (15) are almost half less important. Average wealthy households seem to be most reliant on livestock raising (11) and cash crop farming (10). Fishing, hunting and NTFP collection amongst these households is almost half less important (6). Upland rice farming and upland gardening is significantly higher in importance amongst the poor households compared to the average wealthy households. Any access or user restrictions to natural resources inside PFAs deriving from this project would increase the vulnerability of the communities, especially for those poor households who are have a high level of dependency on NTFPs for their livelihood. This issue is further discussed under Section 3.2.
Trends and seasonality
Important recent cash crops in Long district are banana and rubber. In Oudxomay districts these products were complemented by production of cotton for the provincial handicraft industry. In both Luangnamtha and especially Oudomxay the corn is also important cash crop for farmers. Chinese traders have approached villages which are located near the paved road in the valley and agreed with them to lease their paddy land for banana plantation and there sloping land for rubber plantation. Anecdotal evidence suggest that these entrepreneurs are part of a Chinese conglomerate, who operate according to the 2+3 method. This means that villagers will provide labor and land and the Chinese company provides financial investment, technical assistance and market. Contract being made are not very favorable for the farmers and by leasing out their farmland for several years makes them often reliant on the income from labor in the fields, hence the villagers become very vulnerable for shock or market fluctuation. To offset this vulnerability the villagers have been reported to encroach certain parts of the conservation and protected forest areas to grow upland rice. This issue will be further explored in Section 3.2.
Social structure and grievances
Most of the villages have established some type(s) of village organizations and committees. The organizations mentioned most often are the Micro Credit and the Livestock organizations each four times. Second most common is the Farmer organization, which is established in three villages. Rubber, rice bank and handicraft groups have been established each two times. Village Forestry organization and Bamboo organization are only mentioned ones. Village grievances committees said to have been established in most of the villages, however they are not the only ones dealing with grievances, since communities often also use the village headman, family and village elders for grievance resolution. The main type of grievance is between families, secondly most important are the grievances related to forest. Grievances regarding NTFP’s, aquatic life are less important and conflict regarding land is considered as least important.
6 Education
According to the 2005 census 23 percent of the population had never been to school, 28 percent were at school and 47 percent had left school. A much higher percentage of women than men had never been to school, 30 percent for women compared to 16 percent for men. 12 percent of Lao had never gone to school and a few other groups have attendance below 20 percent. Among the larger ethnic groups 33 percent of Khmou had never been to school, 42 percent of Hmong and 25 percent of Phouthay. For Tri, Akha and Lolo the percentages of never been to school are as high as 75 percent and more. However, there have been improvements for all ethnic groups but females are behind in all groups; low differences among some groups such as Lao, Ngouan, Thaineua, Thaen and Moy or large differences for groups like Lamed, Katang, Ta-oy, Cheng, Sdang, Pacoh and Hmong.
Table 13: Percentage – Completed Primary School in 1995 and 2005
[pic]
Table 14: Percentage – Completed Lower secondary School in 1995 and 2005[11]
[pic]
Literacy rate
The literacy rate differed considerably among the ethnic groups (see table 4.9). The rate was higher than national average for Lao ethnic group was 85 percent, Moy 84 percent, Ngouan 81 percent, Thainuea 80 percent, Tai 77 percent and Lue 76 percent. The rate was in particular low for Lahoo, Akha, Lolo and Tri. With the exception of Lao the literacy rate for the minorities were 55 percent. This is relatively low compared to Lao ethnic group, for female minorities 41 percent of which Lao females 79 percent, and for male minorities 70 percent of which Lao male 91 percent. Thus women in particular are lacking behind men among minorities.
Table 15: Literacy rates by Ethnolinguistic Groupings (1995)
[pic]
Taking into account ethnic minorities’ low level of literacy and proficiency in Lao language, SUPSFM should consider developing ethnic-gender sensitive training material in local languages or using local facilitators and all information supplied orally should have written text accompanying and poster or other type of material should be considered as well.
SUPSFM should adopt a formal strategy on ethnicity and develop a culturally sensitive approach to programming to ensure that ethnic minorities and vulnerable segments are not marginalized in the process and that resources are mobilized to increase knowledge about ethnic groups and involve ethnic issues in project planning, monitoring and evaluation. The low literacy level of the Tibeto-Burmese groups will be a main constraint in implementing the SUPSFM project in the three northern provinces. Local languages should be used and promoted as much as possible during activities at field level and during training in order to ensure beneficiaries understanding. Manuals, project information and documentation should be made available in local languages as much as feasible.
4 Health
1 Human trafficking
Human trafficking is on the rise in Asia as people flee poverty and conflict. Better transport and communication links contribute to the problem. According to a recent study by the Swedish Government, human trafficking ranks third, (after drugs and arms smuggling), in the scale of organized crime. Women and children are the most vulnerable. They are used for commercial sex, domestic labor, and construction work. Children are also in demand for factory or farm work or in the entertainment sector. Trafficking amounts to a gross violation of human rights and hampers the struggle to end poverty and gender inequality in Asia. One effective way to reduce the degrading trade is to address the factors that render women and children vulnerable.
2 HIV
Official data on blood tests for HIV/AIDS indicate increasing levels of incidence: the number of deaths from HIV/AIDS has also increased from 72 between 1990 and 2000 to 24 in 2001 alone.[12] A recent study by CARE International’s STD Training and Education Materials Project in Louang Prabang and Oudomxay suggests that outreach program should focus more on “at risk” populations groups, namely female traders, truck drivers, male government officials, commercial sex workers, and ethnic minorities[13]. The Project may lead to negative impacts in terms of higher exposure of local population to HIV/AIDS and STD. In Louang Namtha, the numbers of nightclubs/bars and women selling sex in towns (and recently villages) along the road is growing steadily. Against a backdrop of rapid proliferation of commercial sex sites, the specific nightclubs and bars are constantly changing, with venues closing and new ones opening. Lyttleton escribed well the expansion of sexual networks in Louang Namtha: … Remoteness and limited range of multi-partner sexuality coupled with the absence of needle based drug abuse are key issues in the apparently low rates of HIV infection in most of Lao PDR. Route 17B represents the concrete dismantling of elements of these boundaries. Multi-partner sexuality is typically associated with the ethnic peoples living in and around Sing and Long. However when sexual interactions create networks that extend beyond cultural groupings the potential for infection is increased dramatically. [14]
3 Use of health services
Utilization of health care services is very low (0.1 annual patient visits per person in some rural districts). Less than 30 per cent of people in need of medical services turn to the health system for help (MIC survey, 2000). Barriers to utilization include language and cultural barriers, poverty and lack of money to purchase services and medicines, limited education and distance/lack of roads to access health centers.
For those who do seek treatment, the quality of curative services is extremely poor: treatment guidelines are outdated and often not followed; skilled human resources are scarce; and facilities are often in poor condition and lack basic equipment. Financial resources are scarce and inequitably distributed. Capacity of health sector workers, administrators and managers is very low.
5 Livelihood settings
Although most of these groups practice swidden or rotational rice cultivation as their main livelihood strategy, differences are observed in exact time and resource allocation per livelihood activity. In addition to cultivation and other farming practices, ethnic groups vary in their off-farming practices, use of the forest, gender issues, and other cultural practices that shape their overall lifestyle. The groups have considerable variation in terms of social organization, culture, land use practices, food security, Lao language competency, resource access, gender roles and participation in local development planning processes. Many ethnic groups are vulnerable to shock, trends and seasonality. These include, however are not limited to: resettlement to lowland areas with limited agricultural land combined with a need to continue use their old and far away areas, changing market prices, in and out migration.
While looking at the livelihood strategies of these ethnic groups it can be observed that food security is often a primary concern for ethnic minorities. Non Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) are an important source of nourishment and they are also a major source of income. Rural people are generally highly dependent on forests especially as sources of food, raw materials, traditional medicines and revenue. In many areas, villagers may obtain half of their income and also protein from NTFPs. It is often the poorest that are most dependent on NTFPs and for whom forests act as a safety net during times of need. Between 20-55% of household subsistence and/or income may be derived from NTFP, but this figure may rise as high as 90% for the poorer households. There is a very close link between the forest and women‘s life, as they are the persons who visit the forests regularly to collect fire wood and food e.g. vegetables, bamboo shoots, mushrooms, wild berries, and medicinal herbs so they know the forest intimately.
1 Land issues
Land is, of course, the most valuable and, often, a sacred asset held by communities. Access to land and resources are traditionally associated with particular ideas of territoriality; whereby, land is managed by a community that has exercised communal rights over that land. In essence, management of land is governed by the consensus of the socio-political group - or emanates from the group it governs. Concepts of land ownership and entitlement to land use vary from ethnic group to ethnic group.
The clash between customary uses of land and the allocation or confiscation of customary land for development under state law or policy has had a deleterious, occasionally devastating, impact upon some ethnic communities. The lack of formal recognition of the full range of customary land usage practice means that ethnic groups have an inadequate legal platform for mounting their claims so they might be considered by courts. While there have been some adjustments made that allow for greater recognition of customary land rights - e.g., of subsistence needs in the Decree on the Management and Use of Forest and Forest, Land 27 and the recognition of communal land contained in Directive 564 under the National Land Management Authority (NLMA) – there still remain large gaps, with the law only offering limited recognition of rights and reliable implementation of protections of customarilymanaged land, as well as a lack of progress made in relation to informing and empowering
communities to act upon their rights when land disputes arise.
Engaging with customary law authorities on the customary use of land, and achieving a clearer and more comprehensive legal regime protecting customary use of land, should contribute to the sustainability and stability of economic development efforts. Aside from causing great unhappiness and undermining ethnic communities’ livelihoods and ways of life, the failure to provide due recognition of customary land rights, or just compensation, can create tensions that threaten to turn into protest or even criminal damage against state and commercial interests; potentially creating instability and making Lao PDR a less desirable place for investment and economic growth. Moreover, some customary concepts of responsibility are not upheld in state law.
2 Livelihood and agricultural production systems
Agricultural system practices are dynamic and influenced by many factors such as land availability, land quality, land tenure, population pressure, climate, market facilities, labor availability, food preferences, ethnicity and government policy. Agriculture is a key economic activity in Lao PDR, of which rice is the most important crop, contributing about 60% of total agricultural production. Over 90% of rice is grown under rain-fed conditions. In the lowland environments this accounts for 70% of the area and 76% of total rice production while in the upland environments, rain-fed production accounts for about 21% of the area and 14% of total rice production.
Livelihood and land use systems in Laos have been described by Raintree and Soydara (2002). They stressed that most rural households in Laos practice "multi-livelihood" strategies that involve a mixture of subsistence and income-earning activities. Recent studies indicate that rural villages engage in no fewer than 8 and sometimes as many as 15 distinct activities; combining hunting and gathering with agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry and forestry to achieve a measure of livelihood security. The principle elements of livelihood security are farming systems, dependency on the forest and the harvest of wild animal and plant NTFPs.
There are basically three main systems of agricultural cultivation in project areas: lowland rice paddies (both irrigated and rain-fed, though there is very little irrigation in the SUFORD or SUFORD-AF project areas); upland rotational (swidden or shifting) cultivation; and plateau plantation agriculture. Raintree and Soydara [2002] stressed that these three systems are actually points on a continuum of practices that most often grade into one another. Any one of these systems is almost never practiced to the exclusion of the others, particularly at the points of transition from lowland to upland and upland to highland. The characteristics of these three systems are described as follows.
Lowland rain-fed systems involve one annual cropping of traditional paddy rice varieties (2-4) with yields between 1 and 3 tons/ha. Buffalo and cattle are used as draft animals, for cash income and sometimes for meat. They are free-ranging during the dry season and confined by tethering, often in adjacent forest areas, during the wet season. Domestic pigs, poultry (chickens, ducks and turkeys) and aquatic/terrestrial NTFPs are important for food and cash. One to four month rice shortages are common and household incomes are generally low.
Upland rain-fed systems involve rotational swidden cultivation of rice (yields of 1.5 - 2 tons/ha), inter-cropped with cucumber, chilis, taro and sesame with fallow periods of 3-10 years. Maize for sale and animal fodder is the second most important crop, but sweet potato, ginger, cassava, groundnuts, soybean, sugarcane, papaya, coconut, mango, bananas and citrus are also important. Melons and watermelons may be important dry season crops. There is a very high dependence on animal and plant NTFPs both for subsistence and for cash income to purchase rice. Adoption of rain-fed paddy is common wherever topography and soils (both serious limitations) allow. Three to four month rice shortages are characteristic of these communities, along with low income, poor health, high infant mortality, low life expectancy, and little access to services.
Plateau farming systems in the project area are principally situated on rich volcanic soils (i.e. Bolaven Plateau) that allow commercial cropping of coffee, tea, and cardamom, supplemented by tree fruits and vegetables in home gardens.
1 Rubber plantations
The cross-border rubber sensation, seemingly sudden, stems from a mix of policy and market factors. On the Lao side, the provincial government explicitly promotes rubber as a means to stabilize shifting cultivation and alleviate poverty. Across the border, China’s rising demand for natural rubber, driven by its rapid economic growth, is trapped with a stagnant domestic supply and soaring world prices for natural latex. Owing mostly to land scarcity, Chinese investors and villagers are increasingly looking to its neighbors for potentials in rubber cultivation. The Chinese government also encourages rubber investments abroad by offering favorable policy incentives and generous subsidies to businesses through the Opium Replacement Special Fund. Lastly, Luang Namtha villagers, inspired by their Chinese peers, have increasingly come to regard rubber as a promising pathway to a prosperous future.
2 Chinese mu
In northern Laos, farmers are often not using the national or international measurement system, but the Chinese area unit system. This indicates well the importance of the Chinese trading network with farmers who calculate the yield of their crops in unit per 1 mu (亩) = 10 fen (分) = 0.067 hectare. There is also Chinese technical assistance often based at community level that provides seeds, technical support, and market.
3 Forest Use and Management (shifting cultivation, legal systems traditional versus state, land rights)
1 NTFPs
Biodiversity is of critical importance to many people's livelihoods in Lao PDR, as well as the national and local economy through the use and trade of non-timber forest products (NTFPs). It is estimated that about half of the cash income in rural households in Lao PDR is derived from NTFPs (STEA, 2004). NTFPs also provide an important source of food and medicine for subsistence use in most local communities. A very high diversity of forest products have been recorded as being part of the daily diet of rural Lao families. Over 700 edible NTFPs have been recorded so far, including edible shoots and other vegetables, fruits, tubers, mushrooms and wildlife.
There are limited previous studies of NTFP harvesting and trade in northern Lao PDR. Studies that have been conducted indicate that NTFPs are commonly used by villagers are of significant importance for food security and livelihoods. NTFPs are especially important for families in upland areas, where shifting cultivation is commonly practiced. In a study of NTFPs in upland areas of Lao PDR (Foppes and Ketphanh, 2005), NTFPs provided an average of around 45% annual family cash income. It was also highlighted that cash income is only a minor part of total family income. Most NTFPs collected are directly consumed by families. As most households in upland areas are unable to produce enough rice to feed their family all year round, collection of NTFPs is important coping strategy, particularly for poor families. NTFPs therefore play an important role in maintaining food security.
2 Opium cultivation
The Lao government has also banned opium cultivation, declaring the country opium-free in 2006. But in 1997 about 60% of highland villages in Long district in Luangnamtha province grew opium. The total area and volume of production is high compared to other districts in the province, including Muang Sing. In 2002 the area of poppy cultivation in 53 cultivating villages in Muang Long was estimated as 638ha. Or 47% of the total area of poppy cultivation in Luang Namtha province. The volume was 4.8 tonnes or 51% of the total volume produced in the province. Opium productivity in Muang Long in 2002 was also the highest in the province at 7.3 kg per ha. Some highland villages grew opium extensively such as Jakhamlu (30ha) and Mone Laem (59ha). The Hmong village of Mone Laem has long been (and still is) a source of opium for local villages that do not grow opium and surpluses were traded across national borders (in particular to Myanmar). Subsequent near-eradication of opium over such a short period has placed a heavy economic burden on highland communities.
Opium is still cultivated in northern Laos; existing only in very remote and isolated areas, cultivation in Laos increased from an estimated 1,600 hectares in 2008 to about 1,900 in 2009. The factors driving the recent increases are diverse and complex. Opium cultivation is strongly linked to poverty, which is not just a function of income, but is driven by a range of socio-economic and security related factors.
6 Exposure to external market
1 Traders
The upgrading of route 17B that connects the Sing market with the now bimonthly Xiengkok market has ushered in a wider network of trade and far broader expansion of people movement into the towns and rural communities and back and forth across borders. The types of goods and their trade have also been transformed. In a microcosm of global changes throughout the world, increased flows of people, trade items and ideas move into and through the area, in turn, leading to changing lifestyles in a broad range of sectors.
Route 17B links China with the Mekong across river from Burma and upriver from Thailand. The Xiengkok border post provides a ready access point for Thai and Burmese traders and travellers who reach Lao territory from the river. From the Burmese town of Chiang Lap (a large Lue town about 15 kms upriver) traders come to sell goods such as cotton, cosmetics, silk, perfume, soap, tobacco, food, coconuts, dried fish, and fresh-water seaweed at the bimonthly market in Xiengkok. Others come to purchase buffaloes and cattle in the mountain regions.
An arrangement between Muang Long and Tachilek in Burma allows officials to get together each year for sports and arts exchanges. Along the way, Burmese men who visit Lao will occasionally spend time in the growing number of bars that provide hospitality services. Thai traders usually come to buy timber and buffalos.
An influx as Lao and Chinese trade agreements were reached that opened up economic relations between the Laos and China. Since then there has been a dramatic increase in the numbers of Chinese, some working legally, others operating clandestine trade (such as in protected animal and plant species) beneath facades of legitimate businesses.
While only a small number of petty traders come from Thailand and Burma, they are eclipsed by the current Chinese influence, which ranges from individual traders selling any number of items from vegetables to nail-clippers in the market or travelling medics selling injections and vitamins in the more remote villages or the entrepreneurs who trek through the mountains collecting human hair for doll factories, or less scrupulous traders buying endangered turtles through to small factories producing animal feed, processing rice, liqueur or wood, and a copper mine. They themselves are ethnically diverse - Chinese Akha, Chinese Lue and Chinese Haw - and this has significant implications for the differing styles of social interaction that emerge as a consequence of their presence.
2 Infrastructure and existing markets
Louang Namtha, Oudomxay and Bokeo are surrounded by three countries with booming economies.
There is a long shared history of trade and exchange between the people of Luang Namtha and those of the Chinese province of Yunnan. These provinces not only share a common border but also share the same history with a big percentage of the population being related or sharing family networks. Because of such strong connections, the people on both sides of the border have long established business relationships which have now become even deeper.
Louang Namtha province has five check-points – three of which are major. The most important is Nateui International Check-point - a gateway for overland travel and trade between China, Myanmar and Thailand - about 20 km from Mohan in China and 37 km from Namtha town. It is the main frontier for Chinese-Lao trade. Pangtong Check-point in Sing District is used for most of the informal Chinese trade not only facilitating trade with Luang Namtha but also with other parts of the country including Oudomxay and Xayaboury. Last but not the least, is Siengkok Check-point bordering on Myanmar and acting as a major channel for transit trade with Thailand. Luang Namtha has two other checkpoints - Huakong which shares borders (across the Mekong river) with China and Thailand and is used mainly for patrolling the waterways - and Ban Mom - a traditional checkpoint in Sing District – which is mainly for immigration and where technically no trading activity is allowed.
Traders (local and foreign) complain about lack of supplies and low quality; they are eager to buy larger volumes and pay higher prices for better quality. According to Vernon (2006) priority products for the uplands should be forages (especially legumes such as stylo), cattle, goats and soybeans. Several NTFPs are also recommended. In the case of Oudomxay, all of these products are currently produced and have ready markets. These products can also improve agricultural sustainability. Planting of tree crops (e.g. for timber) using funds raised from the sale of carbon credits also appears to be a promising opportunity.
Maize is the main export crop in Bokeo province. Cultivation has expanded considerably in recent years, particularly along the river, on the border with Thailand. While nearly all production is sold across the border and channeled to the Thai animal feed industry, in recent years part of the harvest has been exported to China through Luang Namtha province. In Bokeo individuals, companies or farmer groups are given exclusive purchasing rights over small maize production areas, usually within a cluster of two to five villages. In exchange, these agents must provide production services within the allocated area and purchase the local harvest. At a minimum, monopsonistic agents must supply hybrid seed on credit, with its cost and perhaps some interest being deducted upon the sale of the crop. The sale of fertilizer on credit is also common; land preparation services and the supply of herbicides less so. The policy of allocating specific production areas to contracting agents was already in place in early 2009.
Most of the villages visited had all year access to the district markets which were most of the time not further away than 20 kilometer. Villager do visit the district markets on regular basis varying from everyday to 1-2 per week. Products available on these markets include, however are not limited to: cooking utensils, linen, farming hardware, construction materials, agriculture chemicals, food products etcetera. Villagers could either use public transport, which was daily available in most villages or own private transport. All but one village were connected to the electricity grid and most of them had access to protected spring water. UXO was not considered an issue in the area. Whereas almost every village had a primary school, only two villages had a secondary school. Village dispensaries and village health centers were only sporadic available.
Village development activities, plans and expected impacts
Most of the villages received some external development assistance and have plans to develop the village further. The assistance varied from livestock and poultry raising (5 villages) to environmental health and family planning activities (4 villages each). Amongst the topic most mentioned when discussing village future development plans were livestock and agriculture expansion, second most important for the communities seem to a variety of infrastructure improvements. Most of the communities belief that the project will have funds available to improve the livelihoods and that improvements will be made to the forest. Some communities are hoping to receive support in the form of livestock and agriculture. All but two communities believe there will be no negative impacts. The only negative impacts expected are when communities do not follow the plans which will be mutually prepared and agreed upon.
Constraints
• As pointed out by Vernon, a serious constraint on the development of agriculture in Oudomxay is overregulation of trade by the government. There are too many quotas, fees, taxes, licenses, documents and price controls. To take one example, a farmer wanting to sell his buffalo in Vientiane would have to waste one or two weeks obtaining 9 official documents and paying numerous fees and taxes. Taxes and fees paid by traders are actually deducted from the price paid to the farmers; in other words it is farmers (even those who are very poor) who are paying for the taxes and fees collected from traders by the government. The only way traders can survive government regulations is by being dishonest, for example, when exporting 16 tons of NTFP they may declare and pay taxes/fees for only 4 tons.
• Another anomaly is that the Lao government puts its own exporters at a disadvantage compared with Chinese traders. Lao traders are required to obtain licenses, quotas and pay fees and taxes, but very often Chinese traders avoid all these costs and simply pay bribes at the border; consequently their marketing costs are often lower than those of Lao traders so they are able to pay farmers higher prices. This is good news for farmers, but bad news for Lao traders.
• The fact that farmers in Bokeo do not have the right to sell to anyone but the authorized buyer is particularly costly when the agent in question is exploiting his or her monopsonistic position to offer poor services to farmers, charge them high prices for inputs, pay low prices for their crop, or a combination of these. The policy also creates plenty of opportunities for rent-seeking by well-connected individuals, who may gain exclusive marketing rights on account of their influence over local government officers and perhaps the payment of bribes. While complaints from farmers and local officials may result in the re-allocation of purchasing rights, monopsonies are not subject to any periodic assessment. There is therefore too much room for discretionary decisions from local government structures. Ideally, the allocation of maize trading licenses, and any decisions about who gets such rights and over which areas, should be based on a formal and independent review system (Wandschneider, 2011).
3 2+3 Contract farming
In the investment for industrial tree plantation, the Government promotes the “2+3” contract farming. This type of investment involves the joint participation between the villagers (land owners) and the investors whereas the inputs from villagers are the land and labor while the investors have to take care of capital, technical inputs and marketing. The sharing of benefit will be calculated based on the amount of production or interest gained in which the villager will receive 60-65% and the investor 35-40% depending on the agreement initially reached by both parties. The villager’s owned land is mostly a private land with or without documents, in the form of small plots which can be less than 1 ha, and scattered in many places. The participation of the villagers is on the voluntary basis of each family.
The Luang Namtha government officially promotes a 2+3 contract farming model with generally 70% of the proceeds (profit or products) going to villagers and 30% going to the investor. The province felt that this arrangement, compared to concession, provides villagers more secure access to their land and a stronger sense of ownership in the plantations (Shi, 2006).
In Oudomsay province such contract farming modality has been widely implemented. In Oudomxay province, there were 10 projects in which the investment contract were concluded under the 2+3 contract farming with the total approved area of 28,109 ha, including the plantation area for rubber, cassava, banana and jatropha.
Shiw’s survey on the ground (2006), however, indicates a vastly different picture than the official version. With few exceptions all villages contracting with large investors in Sing and Long operate under a “1+4” model: villagers give only land; companies do planting and maintenance with hired labor (either from the village or elsewhere) for a certain number of years, until a partition of tree, land, latex or profit occurs. Villagers then typically get no more than 30% of the partition, companies claiming the rest.
4 1+4 Contract Farming
This modality is also called the “concession-like contract farming”. Villagers are providing investors with land (village land), which was often already given out and promised (in terms of size) in a deal beforehand between district authorities and investors. Often the village head is responsible to find the amount of land required. The land plots are normally much bigger than those provided to investors within 2+3 modality. The whole area will be planted by the company, and after an agreed number of years the responsibility of handling a certain proportion of the planted land will be given back to the villagers. From this moment on villagers will have to take care of this area. The larger rest of the land will be further developed by the company, using also its own labor force. Such contracts may last up to 20 years. The benefit for the villagers derives actually only from the profit they will achieve from the production on their own village land. They will also be responsible to sell the products. The share of benefit will be based on the number of trees after 1- 8 years of planting with many different rates, whereas villagers will get 15-60% and the company 40- 85% of the total number of rubber trees, depending on the agreement reached by both sides. Most of such contract farming is done on communal village land, former production forest, fallow forest after shifting cultivation and sometimes even on agricultural land. Land areas can be as big as 500 ha, but are at least 50 -100 ha big in most of the cases. Contracts are often not clear about sharing the benefit. Until now all companies involved in 1+4 contract farming are still responsible for the whole planted area. With beginning of next year some first plantations will go back into the responsibility to villagers for the first time. Then it will be seen how the handling of those plantations will be managed and by whom. In louang Namtha province, out of the total 147 projects which use state land for concession, lease or 1+4 contract farming: 103 projects are implemented and active; 2 projects have not shown any activity so far; 1 project was stopped temporarily; 18 projects were approved but have never started (e.g. because of running out of
funds, unsuitable land); 19 projects already were completed according to the contract, were cancelled or stopped before the end of the contract period (Inthavong, 2009).
5 Tourism
Lao PDR possesses a scenic and often mountainous natural environment, and contains a population with many traditional cultures; characteristics that form the basis for the promotion of tourism development in the country. Lao opened its borders to international tourism in 1989 and, since then, the industry has developed rapidly to become one of the country’s largest and most dynamic earners of foreign currency income. Tourism is an important and growing component of the Lao PDR economy. Tourism is one of the main industries driving Laos economic growth and is included among the GOLs 11 priority sectors to support national socio-economic development. Tourism contributes to national and local economies by:
▪ Introducing foreign currency;
▪ Facilitating domestic financial liquidity;
▪ Supporting investment in domestic sectors such as hospitality and transport;
▪ Creating significant employment opportunities; and
▪ Distributing income to rural and remote areas.
The tourism sector also constitutes one of the 11 flagship programs in the 10-year strategic framework of the Greater Mekong Sub-Region (GMS) Economic Cooperation Program. This recognizes the important contribution that tourism makes to socio-economic development (especially poverty reduction) and conservation of natural and cultural heritage resources.
According to the Lao National Tourism Administration (LNTA) the international tourist arrivals in Lao grew from 14,400 in 1990 to 2,008,363 in 2009, an average growth rate of 20.53% per annum. In 2009, over 2 million tourists generated approximately US$268 million, making tourism the third most important sector in the Lao economy in terms of revenue, after mining (1st) and hydropower (2nd) sectors. Tourist stays in Lao are becoming longer. The average length of stay by tourists between 2001 and 2009 is approximately one week (rounded 6 to 8 days) compared with an average stay of five (5) days between 1993 and 2000 (LNTA, 2008).
In the northern provinces of Luang Namtha, Bokeo and Oudomxai there is a burgeoning tourism sector, originally from a trickle on from the UNESCO World Heritage listing of Luang Prabang but now forming into its own niche on the back of cultural and ethnic minority aspects and wilderness. Ecotourism is promoted widely by the provincial ecotourism offices, with a number of private operators offering activities in protected areas and Production Forest Areas (PFAs) including guided treks, bird-watching, home-stays, camping trips, mountain-biking and rafting expeditions.
Environmental setting
1 SUPSFM Components
SUPSFM Component 1: will provide continuing implementation support to Production Forest Areas (PFAs) with existing forest management plans, and initiate forest management planning in additional PFAs in existing SUFORD and SUFORD AF provinces. Environmental settings for these areas has been documented under previous studies, including the ESIA for SUFORD (2002) and ESIA for SUFORD AF (2008). Refer to these documents for the environmental context of SUFORD activities. This ESIA does however discuss the impacts of new SUPSFM activities of Component 1 on these environments, but does not outline the environmental setting in detail.
SUPSFM Component 2: will focus on supporting the adoption of a landscape management approach for forest and biodiversity resources in Northern Laos, and include PFAs in the provinces of Oudomxay, Luang Namtha, Bokeo and Xayaboury. Landscape-PSFM offers a cross-sectoral and integrated approach to manage development activities, minimize negative environmental impacts, mitigate climate change, and reduce poverty. This approach has not yet been implemented in Lao PDR. The model will be developed in close collaboration with both ADB and KfW and the focal area will include contiguous production, conservation and protection forests. The following sections refer primarily to descriptions of environmental conditions for northern PFAs that will be funded under this component.
SUPSFM Component 3: is intended to strengthen legal and regulatory frameworks for implementation of PSFM and REDD+ at sub-national levels, and frameworks for Landscape-PSFM and will be developed at the national level. Support will also be provided to enhance monitoring and dissemination of information in relation to timber management and salvage logging. As it is focused on the regulatory aspects of forest management on-ground activities are not part of this component and do not require any impact assessment. Signficant support will also be provided under this component to strengthen forest law enforcement at national and sub-national levels. FLEG support is expected to have a wholy positive impact on forest and biodiversity management especially as synergies are expected from the increased inter agency coordination achieved through the implementation of the landscape approach.
SUPSFM Component 4: This component will cover project management at the national and sub-national level, Technical Assistance, and Monitoring and Evaluation. The Government of Finland - Technical Assistance will provide national and international consultants, and, capacity building and training to support expansion of SU-PSFM in PFAs, strengthen forest law enforcement and governance, support forest sector policy reform, build capacity for participatory land use planning, support development of sustainable livelihoods, and undertake analytical work as required to meet the overall objectives of the SU-PSFM project. On-ground activities are not part of this component and impact assessment is not required.
1 Regional Environmental Setting
Physiography and Vegetation
The region of the LPSFM component is part of the Northern Highlands physiographic unit of Lao PDR. This area covers most of northern Lao PDR and consists of rugged hill and mountainous topography, mostly between 500 and 2000 m ASL (Above Sea Level). Almost all of the Northern Highland area drains into the Mekong River.
The provinces of Bokeo, Luang Namtha and Oudomxay intersect the Northern Indo-china Subtropical Forests Eco-region (Xayaboury lies further south), as defined by the World Wildlife Fund for Nature (). The geographical extent of this large eco-region includes parts of the highlands of Myanmar, Lao PDR, and Vietnam, as well as southern China. The area is generally mountainous, with peaks reaching up to 2,000 m ASL, while the major river valleys lie at an elevation of 200-400 m ASL. In Xayaboury elevation ranges between 450 to 750 m ASL.
The vegetation of this ecoregion is typically tropical forest. Types of forest occurring in the area include tropical seasonal rain forest, tropical montane rain forest, and evergreen broad-leaved forest and monsoon forest (Wikramanayake et al., 2002). The area is characterised by mountainous terrain and forested hillsides but lacks large areas of suitable land for permanent agriculture and for paddy rice cultivation.
The Northern Indo-china Subtropical Forests Eco-region is home to an unusually large number of unique mammal, bird, and plant species. More than 183 mammal species are known to occur in this ecoregion, of which four are endemic and five near endemic. Mammals of conservation significance recorded include the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), gaur (Bos gaurus), southern serow (Capricornis sumatraensis ), banteng (Bos javanicus), and red panda (Ailurus fulgens). The ecoregion also supports a very high diversity of birds, with at least 707 species recorded. Avifauna species include Ward's trogon (Harpactes wardi) and the near endemic short-tailed scimitar babbler (Jabouilleia danjoui) (Wikramanayake et al., 2002).
Geology and Soils
The northern part of Lao PDR is characterised by complex geology, with sedimentary rocks of Palaeozoic age, comprising shale, siltstone and sandstone interwoven with volcanic rock, such as andesite, dacite and rhyolite. Limestone of Permian to Carboniferous age is also found in the area. The rocks are covered by quaternary soil deposits and alluvial soils. The bedrock is fractured and folded. Due to its steep terrain, the majority of soils are classified as shallow or undifferentiated soils.
Surface Water
Lao PDR has the highest per capita availability of renewable freshwater resources in Asia. In 1998, the United Nations concluded that “the quality of water in the Mekong and its tributaries in Lao PDR is quite good, and not significantly affected by human activities” (UN, 1998). High sediment load is a natural phenomenon experienced in northern highland streams during the wet season. The problem is exacerbated in catchments subject to deforestation and shifting cultivation practices which promote sediment transfer to streams and increase sediment load. Water hardness is common in streams that flow over limestone areas. In general, rivers in northern Lao PDR are characterised by high ionic content in the dry season which drops during the wet season due to dilution. Pesticide use is rising and is largely unregulated and not monitored. Poorly managed mining activities can also have detrimental impacts on water quality. Little is known about aquifer systems (quality or quantity) in northern Laos.
Fisheries
Different life-history stages of fish normally require separate habitats to optimize survival, growth and reproduction. Migration enables the necessary shifts to be made between habitats, but the distance travelled is dependent on habitat distribution and life-history stage. Migrations are usually undertaken for at least three reasons: trophic, dispersal-refuge and reproduction. A fourth type of migration is when fish make an avoidance reaction in response to temporary or seasonal adverse conditions. Some migrations may involve a movement of only a few meters, whilst others may involve vast distances covering hundreds or thousands of kilometres (Warren and Mattson, 2000). Migratory fish populations of the northern Laos are not well described in the literature. In turn, the spawning grounds for many Mekong fish species have still not been identified. However, large quantities of ripe fish move into many of the tributaries in Lao PDR as well as Thailand and Northern Cambodia, so it is likely tributaries that contain PFAs and are directly linked to the Mekong, such as the Nam Fa and Nam Kha contain key spawning habitats (Poulsen et al. 2004). Impacts of hydropower development on fisheries in Laos have been well summarized in a recent article by
2 SUFORD and SUFORD AF Forest Zonation
Many of the project areas (existing and new) have high significance for terrestrial ecosystem conservation because of significant forest diversity. Lowland rainforests are the most threatened forests in Laos (and most of Southeast Asia), due to their easy conversion to permanent agriculture, and their accessibility for logging, hunting, NTFP extraction, and road-construction. FIPD land classification maps show that the original SUFORD project areas contain a mix of lowland Semi-Evergreen and Dry Dipterocarp Forests and riverine wetlands, while SUFORD-AF project areas are dominated by Mixed Deciduous, Dry Dipterocarp, and Savanna Forests at lower elevations and Lower Montane forests on upper slopes (UOL, 2008).
Three of these habitats are weakly represented in the Lao national protected area system: Semi-evergreen, Dry Dipterocarp and freshwater wetlands [Berkmüller, 1995]. They are priorities for conservation and wise management wherever they occur in project areas. The most important are the Semi-Evergreen Forests and wetlands, but Dry Dipterocarp (along with Mixed Deciduous) forests are becoming a priority because of the mistaken impression that they are “degraded” and thus candidates for conversion (UOL, 2008).
The following section presents a very brief and simple description of major forest formations in SUFORD and SUFORD-AF based on nomenclature employed by Whitemore [1990] and Rundel [2001], as presented in UOL, 2008.
The boundary between evergreen and semi-evergreen rainforest is difficult to delineate and thus most forest statistics combine the two, however, there are important ecological differences.
Lowland Evergreen Rainforest is the most luxuriant and complex of all plant communities. The main tree canopy regularly achieves a height of 45 m or more. These forests are characterized by tremendous species diversity, often containing as many as 10,000 plant species and 1500 genera. True evergreen rainforest in Laos is confined to escarpments of the Boloven Plateau and windward slopes of the Annamite mountains; areas with over 2500 mm of precipitation annually and a one to two month dry season. These forests are dominated by the family Dipterocarpaceae, the most common genera of which are Shorea, Dipterocarpus, Anisoptera, Hopea, and Vatica. Semi-Evergreen Rainforest occurs as a transitional belt between evergreen rainforest and seasonal (monsoon) forests. It occurs in areas of the Mekong lowlands and uplands with annual rainfall between 1400 and 2600 mm and a two to five month dry season. There is somewhat less species diversity, a slightly more open canopy and a somewhat smaller stand structure than in evergreen rain forests. In addition to the Dipterocarp genera noted above, deciduous trees such as Walsura, Lagerstroemia, Irvingia and Koompassia may comprise up to one third of the upper canopy, and the lower canopy may contain genera normally characteristic of drier forest formations such as Albizia, Pterocarpus, Dalbergia, Diospyros, Sindora and Tetrameles. Semi-Evergreen rainforest constitutes the richest lowland forests in the current SUFORD PFAs but is absent from SUFORD-AF PFAs.
Monsoon forests (which include Mixed Deciduous Forest, Dry Dipterocarp Forests, and Savanna Woodlands) are more commonly known in Asia, are more or less open-canopied formations growing in areas with a distinct dry season (usually more than three months with rainfall less than 60 mm) and generally at elevations below 800 to 1000 m. Distinct dry seasons may be the result of either macro-climatic air movements or topography where ’rain-shadows’ occur in the lee of the mountains. Different formations occupy habitats of increasing drought severity, but there is a complex interaction between local variations in rainfall, soil moisture and soil texture. This mosaic of ecosystems has been made even more complex by the actions of human cultivation, livestock grazing and regular, usually anthropogenic, low intensity fire. In fact, fire has exerted such a dominant, historic influence over the composition and structure of many of these forests that they are often termed “fire-maintained” forests. Any attempts to prevent fires in these ecosystems invariably results in the build-up of understory fuels, resulting in subsequent high-severity, and often catastrophic fire. For purposes of this discussion, monsoon forest will be considered to fall within three broad types: Mixed Deciduous Forest, Dry Dipterocarp Forests, and Savanna Woodlands. These may be artificial differentiations, since there does not always seem to be well-recognized boundaries between the three types. Nor is it often possible to separate climatic climax monsoon forest from fire-maintained edaphic climax forests or degraded forests. This creates significant interpretive problems in forest-change mapping programs.
Mixed Deciduous Forest occurs in areas with fairly high rainfall (> 1,500 mm annually) but with a strong dry season of four to five months. It is semi-closed forest, often of good height (30-40 m), in which the upper story is composed largely of deciduous species. A bamboo understory is common, mixed with evergreen shrubs and small trees, though under-stories are often depleted by over-grazing. The most characteristic tree genera occurring in deciduous forest include Acacia, Afzelia, Albizia, Caesalpinia, Cassia, Dalbergia, Diospyros, Irvingia, Lagerstroemia, Pterocarpus, Sindora, Terminalia, Xylia, and Dipterocarps such as Shorea, Vatica and Dipterocarpus. Certain Dipterocarp species such as Dipterocarpus alatus and Hoopea odorata may be present in riparian areas along stream courses. This formation comprises the overwhelming majority of potentially harvestable forests in the SUFORD-AF PFAs.
Dry Dipterocarp Forests are characteristic of lowland areas with annual rainfall of ................
................
In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.
To fulfill the demand for quickly locating and searching documents.
It is intelligent file search solution for home and business.
Related download
- site manager s operations manual for listserv version 14 5
- texts and other tools
- running head 2020 vision of a foreign language
- the rise of youth counter culture after world war ii and
- introduction university of sussex
- cse 142 homework 6 university of washington
- white paper gsa advantage
- annual refresher test questions
- table of contents esia
Related searches
- table of common cardiac medications
- mbti table of personality types
- time table of examination 2019
- complete table of values calculator
- table of values equation calculator
- table of values generator
- graph table of values calculator
- linear equation table of values
- table of standard scores and percentiles
- table of derivatives pdf
- table of integrals exponential functions
- table of exponential integrals