CHOM THONG DISTRICT, NORTHERN THAILAND

HISTORY AND CONTEXT

Chom Thong district is located in Chiang Mai Province in northern Thailand. The Karen established the village of Ban Klang along the banks of the Mae Klang River 200 years ago. In 1972, Doi Inthanon National Park was demarcated in the uplands above the village which includes Thailand's highest peak, Doi Inthanon. Parts of the park and upper watershed are the home of the Karen, Hmong and other ethnic minority groups. Water from the Mae Klang river, which originates in the upper watersheds of Doi Inthanon, irrigates longan fruit (lamyai) orchards and paddy fields in the lowlands of Chom Thong.

In 1985, in response to accelerating forest depletion in Thailand, the government set a goal to maintain at least 40 percent of the nation's land as natural forest. To achieve this goal, the government extended and strengthened state control over reserve forests and protected areas including national parks, wildlife sanctuaries, and watershed areas. Communities were not permitted to live in or use and harvest resources in the strictly defined protection zone, Watershed 1A, and were allowed only limited use and harvesting in the buffer zone (see Figure 14).

The government regulations have brought dissension among upland communities, especially in the north, where inhabited forestland has been designated protected or conservation areas, artificially creating "illegal" residents out of many upland communities. While many RFD officers feel it is better to develop management partnerships with forest-dependent communities, other government planners and administrators contend that the only alternative is to remove established upland communities and resettle them in the lowlands.

In the last two decades, businessmen from Bangkok and Chiang Mai have purchased land and orchards in the lowland areas and expanded longan cultivation on land near Chom Thong. Longan orchards have increased more than six times since 1975, an area of about 50 square kilometers. This growth has encouraged a parallel increase in the consumption of water for irrigation. The lack of water has sparked a reevaluation of the district's resource management systems causing a serious rift between the lowland and upland people.

Traditionally, lowland Thai farmers managed their water resources through their water users' organization (muang faai), which operated 15 weirs and three reservoirs in Chom Thong district. But, in 1989 they established the Chom Thong Watershed and Environment Conservation Club, which eventually included the operation of all the weirs in the district. In this conflict, the club has become allied with the Dhammanaat Foundation for Conservation and Rural Development, which was founded by a Buddhist monk, Phra Ajam Pongsak Tejadhammo, the current president.

RESOURCES IN CONFLICT

The issues in the Chom Thong district have intensified the debate about the relationship between lowland and upland communities. Communities in the lowland, supported by various interest groups, have demanded that upland ethnic minority villagers be resettled in order to place their lands under protection and conservation. On the other side of this debate, the upland people and their supporters maintain that rights of indigenous upland communities to practice sustainable forest management are being usurped and that the decrease in water is being caused by changing weather patterns and growing agricultural pressures in the lowland.

An example of how these divergent views have created serious conflicts among the people of Chom Thong occurred when there was a drastic loss of fruit trees during a severe drought in 1998. The conservation club blamed the upland villagers who they said started many forest fires in order to open new farms. By disturbing the watershed, club leaders claimed the Karen were responsible for diminishing the water flow. When asked about this, upland villagers retorted that businessmen who wanted to build resorts in the national park started the fires. According to Mr. Kerd Panakumnerd, a Hmong community leader:

The Dhammanaat Foundation has focused their efforts in this area by trying to restore the watershed forests, promote agricultural development in the lower valleys, and resettle the upland villagers. They initially saw their role as one of educating the villagers as to the nature of the watershed process and assisting them in creating a more sustainable system for watershed management, but they have become increasingly rigid in establishing fenced-off areas of conservation and restricting access. The first barbed wire fence was put up in 1984 in the uplands near Pa Klauy, becoming a symbol for the values held by the foundation. But, it was the proposal of resettlement that has become the most controversial issue. M.R. Smansnid Svasti, vice president of Dhammanaat is a firm believer that only resettlement can protect the watershed:

Mr. Thao Sae Va also noted that the Hmong villages were trying to adapt their behav- ior to minimize their impact on the watershed. He noted that the Hmong community had reduced its land use by half, with the average household only owning approximately one hectare (5 to 6 rai).

THE NORTHERN FARMER'S NETWORK

In response to the growing conflict throughout northern Thailand, the Northern Development Foundation (NDF) assisted in the formation of the Kor Gor Nor or Northern Farmer's Network (NFN) which links 107 villages located in 14 sub-watersheds in the upper northern region of Thailand (see Box 14). Many of the villages fall within the proposed or established boundaries of 19 different protected areas. The network strives to promote community forestry and local participation in natural resource management. It also promotes the application of indigenous knowledge to management strategies. The member villages of the NFN are predominantly upland and highland villages of ethnic minority groups, predominantly Karen, Hmong, and Lahu peoples, though other ethnic groups, as well as lowland Thai communities, are starting to join. The network operates in Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, Mae Hong Son, Lamphun, Lampang, Tak, and Kamphaengphet provinces, with its regional office in Chiang Mai City.

NFN member villages are all heavily dependent on forests for subsistence and for meeting nutritional, health, spiritual and sometimes economic requirements. All NFN members possess forest management committees and promulgate forest use regulations in addition to managing community forest funds through annual household fees. Along with the forest committee, each member village belongs to a cluster of communities sharing the same watershed. Representatives from watershed networks participate in NFN regional meetings held monthly. NFN coordinators rotate the monthly meeting among member villages to better expose one another to specific local issues. The NFN operates through elected executive and working committees.

NFN member communities agree that cooperation with lowland communities is a key to sustaining the upper watersheds, and that a decentralized approach that empowers each village to control its own resources is in order. At the same time, the NFN acknowledges that both highlanders and lowlanders will need to conserve these resources carefully as populations expand.

The primary objective of the NFN is to encourage the government to involve local communities and People's Organizations (POs) in natural resource management and in the development of policies and legislation that affect them, particularly in the areas of community forestry and dam construction. The NFN works to build the capacity of local leaders and groups, including women's groups and youth groups. The NFN has a clear role in building alliances among villages, and in supporting local village responses to land and forest issues. The NFN strategy is for villages to exchange experiences and lessons learned and to seek ways of developing more appropriate and sustainable approaches to centralized state resource management policies.

The NFN has increased awareness of government policies in rural areas and begun to work with local communities to map traditional land use areas, now called "community forests" so that protected area boundaries can be renegotiated where they overlap. Traditional land use regimes are documented to help local people communicate with both the government and society at large to demonstrate their capacity and willingness to manage forest resources in a responsible and sustainable manner.

NEW PRODUCTION AND MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

As members of the NFN, the Karen and Hmong communities in the upper watershed of Chom Thong district, with their support of other NGOs, have tightened rules for forest use. In response to these new management strategies, Mr. Thao Sae Va stated:

But, concerning the prospect of the Hmong and Karen communities being forced to resettle, Mr. Thao Sae Va commented:

The villagers in the Mae Kiang watershed are typical of many residents in upland settlements. They have changed their traditional practices, learning new resource management skills, and have responded to local RFD requests to stop shifting cultivation, even though many of these traditional systems work within the regenerative capacity of the forests. Many villagers in the highlands are willing to reforest former fields now left fallow. They are also strengthening their organizations to protect their forests against fire and illegal loggers.

This conflict underscores the tactic of exploiting tensions that influential lowlanders often use to assert their rights to access natural resources. Unfortunately, as this case study demonstrates, they are highly divisive. By demanding the removal of certain upland/highland communities, some environmentalists are eliminating potential allies in the effort to conserve natural environments. Upland communities, especially when given assistance and support, are highly effective forest-fire fighters and protectors of the watershed. Evidence from other countries in similar situations indicates that forest cover quality and the hydrological functioning of watersheds will return if communities are able to mobilize and establish "social fences" to control and restrict access. Reflecting on the increasingly stigmatized identity of his community, Mr. Thao Sae Va concluded:

Ethnic minority communities located in the Mae Klang watershed, both within Doi Inthanon National Park and on its periphery, have formed the Watershed Forest Committee under the broader framework of the Northern Farmer's Network (see Figure 15). The Watershed Forest Committee is made up of two member representatives from each of the 11 participating villages. Each village also maintains a forest committee with 5 to 7 members. Village activities include monitoring forest use, surveying, and fire fighting. In recent years, the committee has formulated a number of rules for member communities. These include:

These rules reflect the growing concerns of upland ethnic minorities over tenure security, threats to the environment, and their increasing commitment to sustainably manage the resources upon which they depend.

There is increasing pressure on the Thai government to ratify a Community Forest Bill that effectively grants all members of the community the legal right to participate in the management of both conservation and non-conservation forest. At the moment, the government still retains the authority to resettle people if it decides that an area should be classified as "natural habitat." According to Professor Anan Kanchanapan of Chiang Mai University, what is needed is a policy that does not engender conflict between communities but stresses a form of participatory management that includes both lowland and upland people. He believes that academies can assist policy makers and government officials by providing them with well-researched information about the value and purpose of upland management strategies and how watershed policies can incorporate them. He writes:

LESSONS LEARNED

Ethnic minority communities in the Mae Klang watershed are experiencing increasing pressure from lowland Thai communities that are competing with them for land and water resources. They also feel threatened by the government whose policies and programs restrict the use of Class 1A Watershed, expand protected areas, and restrict tree cutting, the use of fire, and opium growing. At the same time, upland and highland communities are demonstrating a number of positive adaptive responses, including making greater efforts to conserve and protect forestlands, and respond to the management goals of government and lowland communities. This case yields a number of important lessons.

• Forest-dependent communities are very aware of the social and environmental pressures that they face and they are willing to take action to respond to strengthen their tenure security by banning timber sales, banning the clearing of forest for new agricultural land, and strictly controlling the use of fire.
• Upland villagers in northern Thailand are concerned that they will lose control over their resources to land speculators and that they are attempting to protect their cultural community through prohibitions on land sales to outsiders.
• Better coordination among watershed communities facilitated through networks and federations can accelerate learning regarding ways to stabilize natural resources and reduce conflict with neighbors. Efforts to deal with outside stakeholders through facilitated dialogue have allowed new modes of dispute resolution to evolve.
• Watershed organizations can provide useful mechanisms to coordinate use and protection activities. Federations can allow for better regional exchange and representation with local government.
• NGOs and university-based scientists can contribute to facilitating communication among forest-dependent communities and government agencies.
• The absence of a clear national policy framework supportive of community forest management has made it difficult to resolve fundamental questions regarding the role of residents in managing the natural environment in which they live and subsist. Without enabling national policies, stakeholder dialogues and participatory management initiatives are limited to localized areas and pilot projects, constraining devolution and decentralization processes that could allow more effective systems of forest management to emerge. Thailand teaches us that much can be done in developing CFM initiatives without a formal national policy, but that it is also difficult to move forward with national management transitions without clear policies and a strong political commitment for their implementation.

CHIENG HAC COMMUNE, VIETNAM

Indigenous communities in the upper watersheds of Vietnam are adapting their forest management practices to a rapidly changing social, economic and demographic environment. Vietnam's 52 ethnic minority groups populate many of the nation's forest-dependent settlements. This case study draws on the experiences of the inhabitants of Chieng Hac commune, including that of Ban Tat, an upland Tai community, and of the Hmong of Khao Khoang, who reside in settlements 500 meters above their Tai neighbors.

These two villages are located in Son La province within the Da River Watershed in north-west Vietnam, one of the poorest and least developed regions in the country (see Figure 16). Largely isolated from the outside world until road links were constructed in recent decades, Son La province is now confronting new pressures on their environment from growing national and world markets and an increasing government presence in their lives.

HISTORY AND CONTEXT

In Son La Province, over 70 percent of the population is Tai which are organized around chau, the river valleys that historically defined the ethnic groups' political and administrative territories. The Tai are believed to have migrated into northwest Vietnam from southwest China 700 to 800 years ago who were seeking reliable water sources and valley bottoms to establish wet rice fields and fishponds, grow dry land crops and establish orchards. So great was the concentration of Tai in northwestern Vietnam and northeastern Laos that they formed a political confederation termed the Sip Song Chau Tai (Twelve Tai State Confederation). The Tai presence in Yen Chau, the current administrative center, is striking. Many district officials are of Tai descent including the woman who heads the present district people's committee. Fundamentally oriented towards irrigated rice cultivation, the Tai have been concerned with water resource management, irrigation channel maintenance, rotation of hillside crops, and the planting of grasses and trees.

During the past 30 years a growing number of the Kinh, members of the dominant lowland majority group that have traditionally inhabited the densely populated Red River delta, have moved into the Da River watershed motivated by the New Economic Zone policy of the 1960s and other programs. Many Kinh came to work on state forest enterprises, clearing large tracts of timber. It is estimated that up to 75 percent of the deforestation occurring over the past thirty years has resulted from state forest enterprises, collective logging operations, and migrant land clearing. Kinh population in the Da River watershed is concentrated near the provincial capitals of Son La and Lai Chau and around provincial agricultural and forestry enterprises.

The Hmong are believed to have begun immigrating into the Da River area approximately 300 years ago but the migration of these people from isolated regions of southern China into the uplands of northwestern Vietnam and across the border with Laos continues even today. The 170,00 Hmong of the watershed are concentrated in upper mountains and plateaus. They practice shifting cultivation on hill slopes, plant dry rice and com, and grow opium poppies in the winter for sale or barter, though recent government policy changes have restricted this practice. The productive potential of the soil and water resources of upland Hmong communities is generally much less than that of the lowland Tai. To maintain the productivity of their farms, the Hmong shift their fields and their settlements periodically. One study of 170 Hmong villages in Bac Ha district in the Da River watershed found that 62 percent of the villages moved between 1974 and 1989. Although the government has established policies and programs as alternatives to shifting cultivation, it is not clear how far they can be implemented or what options are available for swidden farmers.

The Da River watershed has been profoundly changed by the construction of the Hoa Binh dam built between 1979 and 1994 at a cost of $2 billion. Damming the Da River resulted in the inundation of 200 square kilometers of surface area, extending 230 kilometers upstream. As a consequence, 58,000 people were relocated, largely Tai, Hmong, and other ethnic minorities. Displaced families, after losing their wet rice paddy lands and dry fields, had to open new forests, clearing 2,000 hectares annually and placing additional burdens on the watershed. Erosion levels and the heavy sediment loads filling the reservoir have increased to such a degree that engineers have been forced to reduce the projected life of the dam from 100 years to 50 years.

A second dam is being planned upriver from Hoa Binh near the provincial capital, Son La. If constructed, an additional 120,000 people could be displaced, with a further loss of productive agricultural land and even greater pressure on the upper watershed. While the second dam could provide much of the power needs for the transformation of the delta over the next 35 to 50 years, it would greatly exacerbate problems already faced by resident communities.

BAN TAT

The village of Ban Tat was established approximately 100 years ago, although the ancestors of most residents have lived in Yen Chau district for at least 300 years. Before 1954, the entire area was largely covered by old growth evergreen forest, with only seven families inhabiting the village. The original settlers depended primarily on irrigated rice cultivation, home gardening, and fish raising. By 1975 the village population grew to 76 families, and today there are 101 households in the community. Water shortages prevented the expansion of the irrigated rice area. The growth of the village required much of the surrounding forestland to be cleared for cassava and cornfields. In recent years, village households have gone farther into the uplands to open forests for additional dry land fields. In some cases they travel up to 7 kilometers from the community, which is located at 250 meters on the banks of the Sap River, up to elevations of 700 to 900 meters (see Figure 17).

Ban Tat village has a traditional system of forest protection under the leadership of an older man known as the Xompa (forest observer). The Xompa was responsible for overseeing forest use including: 1) ensuring the strict protection of upper watershed forests, 2) designating production forests and allocating selective cutting rights for housing and tools, and, 3) mobilizing the community to control forest fires (see Box 15). The Xompa system has disappeared in recent decades replaced by the increased authority of the commune over forest resources.

According to Mr. Lo Van Beo, the headman of Ban Tat:

Mr. Beo noted that before 1992, each village made its own forest use. He suggested that a new Xompa be chosen and that each household should assign one member for forest protection and management activities. Mr. Lo Van Lai, one of the oldest men in Ban Tat, echoed the headman's sentiments:

Forest Production and Management

In the local Tai dialect Ban Tat means "the village with narrow paddy fields," reflecting the difficulties farmers have experienced in creating fields for irrigated rice. Of Ban Tat's 1,342 hectares, fifty percent is natural forest with extensive old growth and secondary forest visible on the ridges and hills above the village. Most of the remaining hectares consist of dry land fields under rotating fallow and cultivation with only seven hectares as irrigated fields. Most households in Ban Tat cultivate cassava and corn on the sloping land above the village, supplemented by cattle raising, small orchards, and fishponds. The community lives in long, raised wooden houses where 2 to 4 nuclear families reside. Most houses are clustered just near the road. The buildings are situated in large compounds with fruit tree and vegetable gardens in small bamboo-fenced enclosures. Each house yard possesses a fishpond with the animal pen situated on the side. Home gardens, aquaculture, and animal husbandry systems exchange nutrients efficiently and are highly productive sources of protein and vitamins, as well as important for generating cash.

The Tai of Ban Tat rely on nine major resource-use systems to meet their needs for subsistence foods and cash (see Figure 18). Each land utilization category has evolved to reflect the elevation, microclimate, soil, and water characteristics of specific environments. Important agroforestry and forestry practices include the following:

Primary or old growth forest is called Pa Dong. These forests are usually located on ridge or hill tops. The Tai understand the need to protect the upper watershed to ensure reliable and even flows from springs to downstream rice fields and fishponds. In many cases these forests are also located on steep limestone bluffs where farming is impractical. Some Pa Dong are believed to be the home of spirits and ancestors.

Villagers in Ban Tat see a number of threats to the forest such as opening new cassava fields in sites that are too steep or that lack adequate soil fertility. Forest fires are also a danger, both those that escape when agricultural fields are burned in preparation for cultivation, as well as those set by hunters. The natural regeneration of forests in the area has also been suppressed by past commercial grazing in the highland watershed.

Village elders in Ban Tat note that it is between October and April when farmers clear and burn the forest in preparation for planting, that the need for fire protection is the greatest. Community members report that they are learning to control forest fires more effectively. Before 1982, there were about 20 fires a year in Chieng Hac commune, but during the 1990s averaged about 10 fires a year, each burning approximately 10 to 20 hectares.

Black Tai elders of Ban Tat Village, Vietnam discuss forest and land management issues,
after a housewarming ceremony

Ban Tat elders say that some community members are angry because they are not allowed to open new swidden fields; in some cases they have set forest fires to protest these regulations. Community leaders say they want to gain greater legal authority over their upland agricultural and forestlands to ensure spring flow and water availability. Ban Tat elders want greater authority to decide which lands should be reserved for watershed conservation and which could be opened for agriculture, rather than leaving it up to government officials. They are especially interested in ensuring the continuing availability of useful timber species.

In a neighboring commune, ten Tai villages protect over 1000 hectares of forest that are a critical source of water for rice lands and fishponds. A 12-member committee was formed to handle forest management. Activities include fire protection, land use planning and classification, division of forest area among the villages for protection, and issuing permits for forest exploitation. Illegal burning or cutting may entail a fine of $3 per square meter, for bamboo $.05 per shoot, and for timber $2-$5 per tree. In 1995, the commune was able to plant 29 hectares of teak, with seedlings being provided by the Nai Yon Forest Enterprise, in the uplands and 14 hectares of longan (fruit trees), whose saplings were supplied by the Forestry Extension Unit.

The Tai of Ban Tat coordinate forest management activities with the Hmong communities to the north. The Hmong villages of Chi Dai and Khau Khoang have their own traditions of forest management, reflecting their unique culture and the natural environment at 1,000 meters elevation.

KHAU KHOANG

Khau Khoang and two other Hmong villages are located among the limestone bluffs above the village of Ban Tat, at elevations of 850 to 1000 meters. The small upland valleys and plateaus the Hmong inhabit are perched behind a ridge, separating them from Ban Tat. The high, limestone bluffs are covered with dense, old growth evergreen forests and below these are maize fields and dryland paddys.

The original Hmong settlers of Khau Khoang came from Lao Ki Tao in southern China 300 years ago. Khau Khoang has 28 families and is located near several small springs found mid-way up the valley walls. According to Mr. Vang Lau Zenh, the village headman of Khau Khoang, until the 1940s, elephants were still present in the area and tigers roamed during the early 1960s. These large mammal populations are now depleted. However, bears searching for honey and other food occasionally move through the forests by the village, while red-faced monkeys are relatively abundant. Several families settled Khau Khoang in 1954 and, in 1960, six more families moved from neighboring Chi Dai and a cooperative was established.

The Hmong farmers of Khau Khoang are currently changing their agricultural system from long rotation swidden cultivation to sedentary agriculture, which involves the clearing of some secondary forest growth. This change is also driven by the expanding community population, the growing shortage of forestlands that can be converted for agriculture, and government policies that discourage shifting cultivation.

The Hmong families of Khau Khoang are poorer than the Tai, their neighbors at lower elevations, since they have few irrigated rice fields or fishponds and are primarily dependent on com cultivation, supplemented by dry rice. Bananas and taro are planted on the upper sides of dryland fields. Squirrels and small birds are hunted in the forests, while chickens and pigs are raised in the settlements house yards. The villagers also collect medicinal plants and fuel wood from the forest. Some families also keep a few cattle and many own one or two horses for transportation and plowing.

A major source of cash income is cinnamon bark collected from wild trees in the old growth forests. Cinnamon sells for $1 (Doug 2500) per kilogram in local markets and men and children are still able to collect 30 to 40 kilograms in a single trip. A few Hmong farmers, including Mr. Zenh, are having some success with the cultivation of coffee, apricots, plums, and peaches in the house yards. In the past year, a fishpond has given satisfactory returns and others are now experimenting with fry bought in the town. Poor water supply and distance from market are critical limitations that have yet to be addressed. Twenty years ago a government-supported school offering classes through the third grade was established in the neighboring Hmong village of Chi Dai, using Vietnamese as the language of instruction. While two students from the village are now in the commune's central school at Chieng Hac, most village children do not study beyond the third grade.

Since 1991, no opium has been grown in Khao Khoang. No new fields have been opened in the high mossy forests above the village. The opium ban has had a drastic effect on the incomes of local villagers. According to local informants, a 1-hectare harvest used to yield as much as 5 kilograms of opium with itinerant traders paying $80-$100 per kilogram of opium in the early 1990s. In the wake of the government ban, efforts were undertaken to transform Hmong agriculture. Apricot tree seedlings trials were planted on a model farm near the village, one which also included a fishpond and some very small irrigated rice fields. Several families have dug fishponds, while the apricot trees, which seem particularly well adapted to lands formerly planted to poppy, have thrived. Yet, market access remains a constraint, as does capital for commercial expansion.

Forest Production and Management

Mr. Zenh, the village headman of Khau Khong, reported that the Hmong community is intensifying efforts at forest protection and discussing resource management with neighboring villages. In the 1970s, the Hmong began placing fighter controls on field burning by requiring farmers to cut a fire line above the field and positioning someone in the break to Prevent the fire from escaping upslope. Delineation of the territorial boundary of Hmong community land was conducted in 1994, apparently as part of the forestlands allocation program. In 1995, Mr. Zenh, who knew the Tai forest stewards, or Xompa, in neighboring communities, began establishing a forest protection committee for the Hmong community. He also sought formal recognition from the commune.

Khao Khoang is situated directly adjacent to a forest comprised of both old growth forest and younger secondary vegetation. Community leaders are trying to impose stricter forest use regulations on residents and outsiders, though hunting and gathering continues to constitute a major village enterprise. Medicinal plants are gathered in the forest, but the availability of other resources is declining. The village leader has informed the community that the forest is protected, violations will be punished, and that three groups have been formed to monitor the area. Forest Protection efforts have helped in reducing exploitation as well as fire damage. In the protected forest only dead wood can be collected; one farmer was recently fined 15,000 VND ($1.30) for cutting bamboo.

Community leaders have also attempted to control hunting. In one case, the villagers tried to restrain outside hunters from killing a bear who lived on the mountain above the village but, according to Mr. Zenh, the hunters succeeded in killing the bear because the community lacked the authority to stop them. He said that the commune needed to give them greater responsibility for protection. He felt once they had reached an agreement regarding forest use regulations with their neighboring villages that the commune should recognize the new protection system. Mr. Zenh believes protection can be done on a volunteer basis, and that effective access controls can lead to natural regeneration, though without support and incentives from the commune it will be difficult to sustain the group. He has proposed that some commune tax revenues from dryland farming, paddy, and fishponds be used to help finance the Hmong communities' forest protection activities. Mr. Zenh is negotiating with one downstream Tai community to explore possible compensation for Hmong forest protection efforts and the assurance that needed water will be delivered.

Mutually supportive resource management agreements between ethnic groups practicing different land use systems within the same watershed may be necessary to minimize future conflicts. Government policies and programs should be designed to facilitate local dialogue and generate agreements between user communities. By examining the process through which agreements are made between communities in areas like Ban Tat and Khao Khoang, planners can identify critical needs and issues and construct frameworks for practical cooperation.

Land Allocation Programs

Over the past five years, the Son La district government has been implementing a land allocation program under the 1993 Land Law. In Ban Tat, Khau Khoang, and the other nine villages in Chieng Hac Commune, some upper watershed forest plots are being placed under household stewardship. Formerly, the upper watershed forests were divided among the eleven villages, and came under the supervision of the respective communities, although legal control remained with the commune administration.

The Tai settlement of Na Phieng was one of the first villages in Chieng Hac commune to be chosen for allocation of forestland and almost all of the 33 households have received land. The village has a total area of 312 hectares of which 56 percent is old growth forest and bamboo leaving over 44 percent of prospective land for allocation. Many community leaders feel it is better not to allocate all the land to households at this time, but to maintain older secondary and primary forest under community management.

Na Phieng, like other Tai communities in the area, once had a Xompa who coordinated forest protection, but under the new government program three families have received formal contracts to protect the forest. It is unclear how shifting forest management from the traditional Xompa system to the government-sponsored household forest protection scheme will work. In the past the Xompa was responsible for representing communal interests, but the current policy shifts this authority to the households to hopefully better reflect family needs. And, there are also concerns within the community that forestland allocations are inequitable and can favor certain families over others.

In neighboring Chiang Mai commune, experiences with land allocation have been mixed. Mr. Quang, the commune chairman, attempted to work through the village managers to explain the new law and gain the cooperation of member villages. He feels that land allocation has had two main benefits: by redistributing agricultural land more equitably and by initiating a more systematic resource planning process. Reallocation has also helped to clarify village boundaries and define protected forest areas. Mr. Quang opposed the allocation of forestland to individual households, however, believing instead that the communities should manage them. The village managers have also issued a ban on the sale or transfer of land without the commune's permission. Community leaders are concerned over the growing commercialization and privatization of village land and resources. Mr. Quang says it is important to prevent villagers from selling their land in order to buy consumer goods because these same families will later ask to be given more land for fanning. He is also concerned that village land will become a commodity and that outside speculators will begin taking control of the area, leading to commercial disputes.

LESSONS LEARNED

Vietnam's national planners are keenly aware of the need for strict watershed management through forest protection to meet the various goals of the lowland communities. Until now, the government has invested heavily in programs to promote hydropower development, reforestation, resettlement, and sedentarization. While these policies have brought benefits, they have also upset the resource management systems of the ethnic minorities of the Da River watershed, especially those of the Hmong, Dzao, and other upper watershed communities, leaving them with inadequate food sources and reduced alternatives. The ban on opium is a further, though secondary, issue affecting the Hmong in particular and the upland economy in general. Successful policies that can stabilize the Da River watershed must inevitably respond to the needs of the Tai, the Hmong, and other ethnic minority groups. The case studies of Ban Tat and Khao Khoang demonstrate several important lessons:

• Due to social, cultural, and technological differences in the way each ethnic community approaches forest management, the government needs policy and programmatic flexibility to respond to diverse and distinctive forestlands use and production strategies.
• The government should consider developing policies and programs that support traditional organizations that can strengthen forest protection and management activities by recognizing ancestral lands and providing financial support to indigenous institutions where appropriate.
• For government policies and programs to interface successfully with indigenous land management systems they need to identify and be compatible with local land classification and use systems, distinguishing those held under community and household control.
• New forestland allocation policies to transfer rights to households can be used effectively in the case of forest gardens and long rotation farm plots. However, communally managed upper watershed forests need community-based tenure mechanisms.
• In upland regions, especially those inhabited by ethnic minority groups, policies and programs need to respond to requests for greater communal authority over forestlands, as well as information and capital that will allow farming families to intensify food and tree crop production.
• Government policies and programs that support inter-community negotiations to work out formal agreements on resource control and clarify lines of management authority have been well received by community leaders in Chieng Hac Commune. Holding participatory mapping exercises that include neighboring communities within a sub-watershed can assist in clarifying territorial boundaries and management responsibilities.

SUMMARY

Over one hundred million people living on the mainland of Southeast Asia or along the region's archipelagos interact with the forest on a daily basis. The cases presented here illuminate a few of the many hidden faces of forest management in Southeast Asia. For the most part, the forest-dependent communities of the area are only beginning to find recognition under national government laws and policies. For generations, their ancestors have worked in the forest habitat to create a life for themselves, their children, and their descendents. Their cultures have evolved with nature, incorporating the physical environment into their spiritual beliefs and group identities. It is not surprising, then, that villagers often reflect that without the forest they are no longer a people and that their unique cultural identity will disappear if the forest is destroyed or if they are separated through resettlement.

In Ya Poey Commune, Cambodia, indigenous forest communities practice a dynamic yet sustainable form of long rotation farming within the forest. The communities and their forest management systems are currently threatened by timber and estate crop concessions held by foreign firms and urban-based elite. With local government and NGO support, a new community alliance was formed to strengthen the villager's capacity to protect their rainforest homelands.

But, a central authority that seeks to raise foreign capital through the sale of logging rights now threatens this initiative. The absence of a national community forest management law recognizing customary rights, combined with a competing national policy aiming to attract foreign investment for natural resource exploitation, places many rural communities in conflict with government and the private sector over resource ownership.

In Krui, Indonesia damar forest gardens provide an impressive income flow for local families, in addition to creating a habitat that supports many endemic species. Indigenous cultural institutions are adapting their management structures and regulations to allow household control over production and assets, while insuring that traditional adat codes of forest protection and management continue to be followed. Pressure from expanding palm oil estates that are displacing millions of hectares of natural forests threatens even the productive forest gardens of Krui. An alliance of scientists and NGO staff has assisted communities in Krui to strengthen their position through documenting these remarkable agro- forestry systems, mapping household forest gardens and communal lands, and ultimately winning formal recognition from the government of Indonesia.

Like Krui and Ya Poey, the inhabitants of Ban Khamteuy, Laos are heavily reliant on their forests for subsistence needs and cash. The creation of a National Biodiversity Conservation Area covering much of their traditional lands has confronted them with new use restrictions. Lack of a clear agreement regarding use rights has also created potential conflicts with neighboring communities. The Lao PDR government program for land allocation and planning has helped to reduce tensions by engaging local communities in a participatory mapping process. The involvement of the IUCN-sponsored NTFP Project has further ensured that community issues are voiced and heard by managers of protected areas and by local government. A National Village Forest Law that recognizes customary community institutions and forest management rights supports the dialogue process in Khamteuy. While this case demonstrates how community forestry policies can be implemented within protected areas, it also indicates that they will require consistent support from policies and programs to succeed.

The Philippines possesses one of the most comprehensive community-based forest management (CBFM) policy and program frameworks in Southeast Asia. Designed to respond to the needs of migrant farmers, forest-dependent communities, and indigenous peoples, CBFM has been accepted as the primary strategy for upland management. The case study from the Pantaron Mountains on the southern island of Mindanao exemplifies how indigenous cultural communities are being authorized to manage extensive tracts of state forestland under the authority of CADCS. With help from ESSC, Bukid-non leaders in Bendum are re-establishing their cultural identity and strengthening ties with neighboring villages to respond to the growing immigration of Dumagat lowlanders. In nearby Agusan del Sur, 14 small Manobo communities have just received a 51,000-hectare CADC, yet they presently lack the leadership and solidarity to jointly decide how to manage this vast resource, while government agencies and foreign investors are eager to dictate priorities. In the Pantaron Mountains, as in many places in Southeast Asia, the process of devolving authority to local forest-dependent communities will require time and investment in strengthening traditional institutions and creating new capacities to manage forest resources in an effort to withstand outside encroachment.

As in many of the other case study sites, Chom Thong, Thailand features an ethnic minority who has inhabited the region's upland watersheds for years. Their lowland neighbors, as well as the composition of the national government, are largely comprised of ethnic Thai, often unfamiliar with the ways of the hill tribes and their land use systems. Growing demands from lowlanders for more water for agriculture, urban centers, and industry are resulting in increasingly restrictive management requirements in upland watersheds, the home of the hill tribes. At the same time, a new generation of urban-based conservationists is eager to see Thailand's remaining forest preserved, even at the cost of resettling resident peoples. The Karen, the Hmong, and other upland communities recognize that they will need to adapt to survive. They are changing their agricultural systems in the upland villages above Chom Thong, not only in response to market demands, but also to minimize the impact on the forest and on water resources and to meet the expectations of lowland government officials and farming communities. Kor Gor Nor, or the Northern Farmer's Network, reflects the parallel desire of some hill tribe communities to create an identity, promote solidarity, and to participate in the upland management dialogue as a significant stakeholder. Given the situation a decade or two ago, although the absence of a community forestry law in Thailand continues to inhibit a clear approach to upland management in the north, the strategy has been remarkably successful.

In northwestern Vietnam, the Tai and Hmong communities of Chieng Hac commune retain many features of their distinctive cultural traditions and land use systems. A four-fold increase in population over the past 50 years has required an intensification of agricultural production, as it has throughout much of the region. At the same time, expansion of farming into the forests has already incorporated most of the available land. The Hoa Binh dam inundated much of the region's best farmland, flooding villages along the valley bottom and pushing the inhabitants up the watershed. Although the socialist government has devised new administrative structures that have displaced traditional communal institutions to a considerable degree, the cultural identities of upland groups remain strong. The communities of both Ban Tat and Khao Khoang have expressed the need to resurrect communal authority over upland watersheds and forests, opposing government policies that currently target households and cooperatives. Mr. Quang, the commune chairman, favors communal forest management and is working with long-standing community leaders to better define village boundaries. All communities within the commune have agreed to ban private sector land speculation while they continue to seek greater autonomy to manage local forests and form volunteer committees to Protect themselves against forest fires, illegal hunting, and logging. Mr. Zenh, the Hmong headman from Khao Khoang, notes that if uplanders are not compensated for protecting the upland watersheds to ensure the continuity of water for downstream communities, they should at least be allowed to keep their tax revenues from agriculture. The issue of compensation for upstream resource managers by downstream users remains relevant throughout the region.

As a group, these cases present a strong argument for the protection of the rights of forest-dependent peoples. While the forest use practices of upland peoples impact the environment in both positive and negative ways, the experience with mining, logging, and plantation management alternatives strongly suggests that community-based practices are more sustainable and far more equitable. These two policy directions are present, and almost always in conflict, in many Southeast Asian nations. Greater clarity is required on the part of national planners and development agencies regarding how to structure a policy framework that promotes sustainable management responsive to the needs of local communities and the larger society. In response to the Asian economic recession, many nations are giving even greater emphasis to foreign investment. Failure to proceed with systematic programs to devolve formal authority for forest management to local user groups perpetuates a power vacuum that increases the vulnerability of natural resources to unsustainable exploitation. The elimination of regulations and programs designed to protect the rights of indigenous and forest-dependent communities jeopardizes many local systems of resource use and control that have helped to ensure the stability of Southeast Asia's resources for generations.

Notes

40 For further information on the CFM policy debate in Thailand see an excellent series of articles in the Bangkok Post and The Nation, from January 4 1997 to February 18, 1998. Writers for the Bangkok Post: Subin Khuenkaew, and Cheewin Sattha. Writers for The Nation: Preecha Saardsorn, Kamol Sukin, Pennapa Hongthong, Nittayaporn Muangmit and Sorrayuth Suthassanachinda. See also a report by Peter Hoare, Mr Yangyon Sricharoen, Banharn Silapech entitled "Future Directions in Conununity Forestry Development in the Upper Nan River Basin in North Thailand, "in Community Forestry at a Crossroads: Reflections and Future Directions in the Development of Community Forestry (Bangkok, Thailand: RECOFTC, July 1997).

41 The term "upland" is used to refer to communities and villagers located on the mid and upper slopes from about 400-800 meters, and on the ridges in the highlands above 700 meters.

42 Contributed by Kingkom Narintarakut na Ayutthaya, Karan Aquino and Wirote Dulyasophon. For further information see Pinkaew Laungaramsri "Reconstructing Nature: Community Forest Movement and its Challenges to Forest Management in Thailand," in Community Forestry at a Crossroads: Reflections and Future Directions in the Development of Community Forestry (Bangkok, Thailand: RECOFTC, July 1997).

43 Chusak Wittayapak, "Political Ecology of the Expansion of Protected Areas in Northern Thailand" presented at the 6th International Conference on Thai Studies, Chiang Mai, Thailand, October 1996.

44 Andrew Nette, "Hill Tribes Still Target of Bank's Conservation Plan," in The Nation, June 6, 1998.

45 "Conflict or Resolution? People and forests in northern Thailand," in Watershed: People's Forum on Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 1, July-October 1998, p. 23.

46 Ibid. p. 12.

47 Pinkaew Laungaramsri, "Reconstructing Nature: Community Forest Movement and its Challenges to Forest Management in Thailand," in Community Forestry at a Crossroads: Reflections and Future Directions in the Development of Community Forestry (Bangkok, Thailand: RECOFTC, July 1997).

48 Ibid. p. 13.

49 Ibid. p. 14.

50 From a personal interview with Jorni Odechao, first Northern Farmer's Network Chairman

51 Nette, p. 14.

52 Ibid. p. 16.

53 From a personal interview in May 1997 with Yee Laowang, Pa Phai Village

54 Interview with Anan Kanchanapan of the Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Chiang Mai University, in Watershed: People's Forum on Ecology, Vol. 4, No. 1, July-October 1998, pp. 26-28

55 Nguyen Duy Khiem and Paul Van Der Poel, "Land Use in the Song Da Watershed" Social Forestry Development Project (Hanoi: SFDP, 1993) p. 18

56 Ibid.

57 Ibid