Regional Environmental Technical Assistance 5771
Poverty Reduction & Environmental Management in Remote Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) Watersheds Project (Phase I)

Review of Policies and Institutions Related to
Management of Upper Watershed Catchments

Thailand

By

Esa Puustjarvi

CONTENTS

1. Introduction

The review of policies and institutions related to watershed management in Thailand relies on the general analysis framework developed at the sub-regional level, and presented in the regional report of this study. Country reports are presented in a form, which allows for reading them as stand-alone documents. However, a general discussion on the issues and conclusions can be found in the Regional Report. As the structure of country reports and that of the regional report is largely the same, and the discussion relevant to various issues can be referred to by looking up the corresponding sub-heading.

Topics such as health, education, ethnic minorities and gender have been excluded from the scope of this report, as they are covered under other assignments.

2. Socio-economic status

2.1. Country level

The population of Thailand has rapidly expanded from the level of 23 million people in 1961 to the present number of 61 million. However, the annual rate of population growth has been steadily declining. The current estimate for the annual population increase is 1.2 %/a, which is the lowest among the countries in the Mekong sub-region. Despite the rapid expansion of Bangkok metropolitan areas the overall growth of town and cities has advanced at a moderate pace, and it is estimated that currently 19 % of Thai citizens live in the urban areas. Ethnic minorities inhabiting mainly the northern parts of the country represent approximately 1 % of total population. However, locally their share is larger. In the ten northernmost provinces ethnic minorities account for almost 10 % of population.

Life expectancy in Thailand is 68 years for females and 63 years for men, which represents the higher end of scale in the Mekong sub-region. Similarly, adult literacy rates in Thailand reach 92 % for women and 96 % for men, which is one of the highest levels recorded in the region.

Since the 1960’s the Thai economy had an exceptional record of economic development lasting for 30 years. Between 1961 and 1996 the national economy expanded at an average rate of 7.8 per cent per annum (Table 1). Rapid growth was coupled with a major re-structuring of the economy resulting in a marked shift from an agriculture-oriented economy to one dominated by industry and service sectors. In 1995 agriculture represented a mere 11 % of GDP, whereas industry and service sectors had expanded to account for 38 % and 51 % respectively. Between 1981 and 1995 the most rapid growth rates have been recorded in the industrial sector followed by services. Average growth in agriculture has varied around 3-4 %/a, which may be regarded as satisfactory considering the growth rates achieved by agriculture sectors in similar economies.

Table 1: GDP Growth in selected sectors and overall in Thailand between 1981-1995

Source: Bank of Thailand, World Bank staff estimates

Parallel to the expansion of the economy, the number of people living in absolute poverty dropped sharply from 59 % in 1993 to13 % of the population in 1992. However, the economic downturn being experienced in Asia since the late 1990’s has probably reversed this trend. The Thai economy is expected to contract by 7 % in 1998. Its impact on poverty is not yet known, but it is probable that the number of people living in poverty will substantially increase.

It should also be noted that the benefits of rapid growth have been distributed unequally. Disparities in income distribution in Thailand are highest not only in the Mekong sub-region but in comparison with the entire East Asia including countries such as the Philippines and Malaysia.

Measured by the human development index compiled annually by the UNDP* Thailand comes on top among the nations in the Mekong subregion, Further, Thailand surpasses the average index values for the world and qualifies as a country of "high human development".

2.2. Upland Development

For the purposes of this study "upland area" was defined as the northern and northeastern regions of Thailand using the standard statistical division into geographic units. Strictly speaking it may only be the northern area that properly represents the upland area, which in this study refers to mountainous areas in high elevations (see Regional Report). The northeastern region is generally quite flat, even though some areas in higher elevations can be found.

On average Thailand is a densely populated country with an average population of 119 persons/sq. km. In the northern region population level is 71 persons/sq. km and in the northeast it is 125 persons/sq km (Table 2). The density in the north is clearly below the national average, but it can still be considered relatively high for an upland area. However, the population level varies considerably within the northern region. For instance, in Mae Hong Son Province the population density is only 18 persons/sq. km. The northeast has a higher than average density.

Rather unexpectedly, population growth both in the north and northeast is lower than national average. However, owing mainly to in-migration from Myanmar and China very high population growth rates have been reported at the northern border (7 %/a in selected locations).

Table 2: Population data in 1997

Source: Department of Local Administration

Measured by the head-count index ratio poverty declined in all areas of Thailand between 1988 and 1992. The north and northeast are the only regions below the national average. The northeast remained clearly the poorest region, while poverty in the north is quite close to national average (Table 3).

Table 3: Incidence of Poverty in Thailand 1988-1992

Source: Socio-economic Survey 1988-92

Information concerning regional differences in terms of infrastructure and social development was limited. However, data that became available suggest that the upland areas lag behind in these regards. Road density in the north and northeast is 0.12 km/sq.km and 0.14 km/sq.km respectively, which is below the national average of 0.17 km/sq.km. Infant mortality in the north and the northeast is higher than in other regions of the Kingdom (Table 4).

Table 4: Infrastructure in 1996

Source: Public Works Department and the Office of Accelerated Rural Development, 1997
Ministry of Public Health, 1997

2.3. Remote watersheds

It should be noted that data aggregated at regional levels conceals the variation within the regions, which in Thailand seems to be higher than differences between regions. When the poverty analysis is broken into regions and types of residential area, it showed that in general poverty is much more prevalent in villages and sanitary districts* than in the more urbanised "municipal areas"(Table 5). As the remote watersheds are likely to fall into the category of "villages", the study results suggest that they lag behind in socio-economic development. However, it seems that the level of poverty at village level is closely related to overall poverty rate in the region. This suggests that the status of remote watersheds is intrinsically tied to socio-economic development in the surrounding region.

Table 5: Poverty by Region and Type of Residential Area in 1992

Source: Krongkaew, 1995

3. Environmental status

Deforestation has progressed at a rapid rate in Thailand. Between 1961 and 1997 the forest cover has shrunk from 53 % to 25 %. However, a gradual reduction of pace can be discerned (Table 6).

Table 6: Rate of deforestation in Thailand according to Royal Forestry Department

Source: Royal Forestry Department 1998

In terms of regions, the highest forest cover is retained in the north, 43.5 % of land area. The northeast has the lowest cover, 12.6 % of total land area (Table 7). Between 1992 and 1997 the rate of deforestation has been most rapid in the north and the lowest in the northeast. The advance of deforestation seems to correlate with the proportion of remaining forest area. The higher the proportion, the more rapid the pace of deforestation.

Table 7: Regional variation in deforestation between 1992 and 1997

Source: Royal Forest Department

FAO has carried out global forest assessment for periods 1980-89 and 1990-95. The FAO study indicates that between the two study periods the rate of deforestation has decreased from 3.5 %/a to 2.7 %/a (Table 8). The results are not comparable with those provided by the Royal Forestry Department due to differences in study methodology, but they confirm that the rate is slowing down. FAO provides comparable estimates for the countries in the sub-region, which indicate that the rate of deforestation in Thailand is still the highest in the GMS area (see Regional Report).

Table 8: Deforestation in Thailand according to FAO

Source: FAO 1991,1996

Strictly protected watershed areas are classified in two categories. Class 1A represents undisturbed areas, whereas class 1B denotes areas, which have partially been converted to agriculture. Reportedly 1.6 % of the area of class 1B is affected by shifting cultivation. Together the two classes account for more than 70 % of the remaining forest cover (Table 9)..

Table 9: Proportion of strictly protected watershed of actual forest cover in 1989

Source: Royal Forestry Department

Based on available studies the main immediate causes of deforestation in Thailand are logging and agricultural expansion . The immediate cause is most often conversion to agriculture either for subsistence production or cash cropping. Logging and road construction accelerate deforestation, as they enable local populations to move into formerly inaccessible forest areas. Conversion to agriculture can be attributed either to increasing land scarcity for those living in semi-subsistence agriculture or to profit-seeking in commercial agriculture. Land scarcity, in turn, may have been caused by in-migration, population growth, expansion of hydropower reservoirs or real estate development schemes.

Successful family planning programs have relieved the pressure caused by population growth, but in-migration continues to be a major problem in the northern parts of the country. A large number of migrants originate from the Shan State of Myanmar (cf. ch. 2.2). Regarding hydropower development, there are no analyses available indicating its direct impact on deforestation. However, in 1988 the total area under hydropower reservoirs was 5456 sq. km. This is slightly more than the average annual deforestation between 1961 and 1988 (cf. Table 6 ). The actual area of deforestation is probably less, because both forest and non-forest areas were inundated by the reservoirs.

There is no data concerning the impact of real estate development such as establishment of holiday resorts and golf courses, but it is unlikely that they would be a major cause of deforestation. However, even if the physical area affected by such incidents is limited, the fact that they have been often established by circumventing legal regulations has had a high demoralising effect. While condoning forest clearing in benefit of business interests, the authorities have at the same time pursued attempts to evict long-time settlers from similar areas under the pretext of forest protection. The double standard applied by the authorities has effectively undermined the overall credibility of the legal system.

Regarding the impact of subsistence agriculture and commercial agriculture, econometric models constructed for northern and northeastern Thailand suggest that in 1979-89 road construction and ensuing agricultural expansion accounted for approximately 20 % of deforestation, whereas population growth and ensuing expansion of subsistence agriculture would explain 40 % of deforestation. The balance would reflect changes in the price level for agricultural products. However, in the remote watersheds subsistence agriculture and population growth were probably even more significant agents of deforestation, as lack of market access hindered the development of commercial agriculture.

More recently, land allocation to landless farmers has been singled out as factor, which has triggered agricultural conversion and serious deforestation. The northern NGO community maintains that in the past 10 years the release of 10 million rai (1.6 million ha) of forest land for implementing the Land Reform Act has been a much more significant cause of deforestation than swidden agriculture. This is a plausible claim, but lack of detailed analyses makes it difficult to confirm its validity. It is reported that deforestation caused by swidden agriculture would have been 0.3 to 0.5 million rai/a (50 000 – 83 000 ha/a), but it is not known what proportion of the allocated land had forest cover, and to what extent it has degraded.

Regarding the effect of Government measures, it is difficult to establish a clear cause and effect relationship between them and the pace of deforestation. The introduction of a logging ban 1988 appears to have followed by a sudden surge in deforestation (cf. Table 6). In the 1990’s the rate of deforestation has declined, but it is unclear to what extent Government policy has been effective, and what has been the impact of a natural decline of areas suitable for conversion to agriculture.

4. Government Policies

4.1. Regional Priorities

The Government’s economic policy is expressed in the 8th National Economic and Social Development Plan (NESDP). It has no reference as such to upland areas, even if regional and rural development is frequently referred to. However, in terms of economic policy the regional emphasis appears to be on strengthening links between the Bangkok Metropolitan Region and its immediate vicinity. Another priority is those border areas that have potential to develop commercial ties with neighbouring countries. This may have significance for the northern upland area, as trade with China and Myanmar is expanding. Another direct reference to upland development is found in connection with industrial development, where the development of an existing industrial park in Lamphun, near Chiang Mai, is foreseen.

Even though the statements made in the 8th NESDB are rather general, it appears that the regional thrust of the Government’s economic development policy and investment activity is in areas able to develop direct links with the Bangkok Metropolitan region such as the Eastern and Southern Seaboard. While this is to some extent understandable owing to their large development potential, the efforts to promote economic development in the more remote rural areas seem modest given the disparity in socio-economic well-being. Even if shifting emphasis towards rural development – especially upland development - may not be warranted in strict economic terms, the disadvantage of the upland regions would make it justified on equity grounds.

4.2. Upland Policy

There is no upland policy as such in Thailand, but it has to be derived from the various policies implemented by sector agencies. This is a notoriously difficult task as the number of involved agencies has always been large, and clarifying the magnitude of effort expended by them individually and as a whole seems to have defied most analyses. While the amount of public resources devoted to highland development cannot be assessed, the large number of agencies involved in this work suggests that the effort has been substantial. The relatively high level of physical and social infrastructure, particularly if it is compared to remote areas found in other GMS countries, provides support to this claim.

Even though the various sector policies sometimes have conflicting approaches one cross-cutting strategy can be discerned: encouraging upland people to adopt permanent settlement by promoting cash cropping and market-oriented development. This strategy was seen to contribute to both social and environmental ends. Initially, it was motivated by the objective to find alternatives to opium cultivation. At a later stage when poppy production had been substantially reduced, promotion of permanent settlement and cash cropping became a means to reduce shifting cultivation, which was considered environmentally harmful (cf ch. 5).

The establishment and maintenance of a large network of strictly protected conservation areas was another Government strategy that has had a significant impact on the uplands. The area of protected areas was expanded from 0.9 % of land area in 1961 to 15.2 % in 1997. In the interest of protecting forest environment and water resources only very limited use of forest resources is allowed in these areas. As the upland people’s livelihoods have been forest-based to a significant extent, this policy imposes severe restrictions on their socio-economic development. Whether the expansion was justified and necessary in environmental terms is a matter of judgement, but it appears that the socio-economic implications of the Government’s policy were paid inadequate attention to. The conflict between the people settling the conservation areas and the Government remains unresolved (cf. ch. 6).

Upland development strategies in Thailand tend to limit their focus on rural areas and activities that can be carried out on-site. This may be considered a major weakness of the present approach given that land scarcity is the main underlying constraint to the implementing the Government’s present strategy. The development potential held in a fruitful interaction between rural and semi-urban settings within the upland areas is not fully tapped. It is true that the positive effects of developing semi-urban areas such as job creation and increased demand for local goods may have not extended to remote areas. However, with carefully targeted measures these linkages may be substantially strengthened. It seems that unawareness of this potential has made the Thai development planners largely ignore the development of semi-urban areas as a means to support remote watersheds.

5. Agriculture

The Government’s policy regarding upland agriculture has focused on a search for alternatives to shifting cultivation. The pursuit has been largely motivated by the adverse environmental effects it is thought to have. Based on the available analyses it seems that it the 1970’s and 80’s shifting cultivation coupled with logging was indeed a major contributor to deforestation (cf. ch. 3). However, at that time land scarcity was not as severe a constraint as it is today and in some areas swidden practices may have been sustainable in the sense that they did not deplete their resource base. Still, it had the effect of reducing forest cover, which impacted negatively on biodiversity.

However, bowing to outside pressure the swidden practices have undergone a major change and become more adapted to the prevailing conditions. Itinerant slash and burn has been largely abandoned, and even the rotational form of swidden has been coupled with sedentarized agriculture. The pressure on environment has also been eased by the fact that trends increasing land scarcity have been contained to some extent. Natural population growth has been substantially reduced and hydropower development schemes, which in the past increased land scarcity, have been scaled down.

On the other hand, despite positive developments land scarcity remains a major constraint to land use, and there seems to be no relief in sight for the upland areas. In-migration from neighbouring countries and the lowlands have pushed the total population growth to very high levels in the border areas. Given this trend and the fact that relieving land pressure is very difficult once it sets in, the continued policy to adjust shifting cultivation towards more land-intensive practices seems justified. This does not mean that coping with land scarcity should be the sole responsibility of the agriculture sector. Trends, which aggravate the situation such as in-migration and illegal logging should not be seriously tackled, but the policy on agriculture has to be based on the current and foreseeable situation, and land scarcity is undoubtedly one key issue that need to be addressed.

In order to deal with land scarcity two main strategies have been proposed. The Government has promoted cash cropping. Upland farmers’ persistence to continue practising shifting cultivation suggests that from their standpoint the advantages of cash cropping are not very large. However, as the practice is gradually taking root, it seems to provide at least a reasonable alternative to shifting cultivation.

In terms of its environmental impact cash cropping has often been accused of adverse effects. Short-term profit-seeking has driven producers to expand their cultivation instead of intensifying it. Intensification of agriculture has aggravated upstream-downstream conflicts through increased water and pesticide use by upstream farmers. Road construction, which is an integral element of the strategy, has been a conduit for increased deforestation.

However, increase in intensive cash cropping may have been instrumental in deflecting a more harmful trend. While the area of commercial agriculture may have expanded and caused deforestation, the pace may have been slower than if agricultural production had been based on shifting cultivation, which is by nature an extensive land use. Even if the relationship is not straightforward and easy to establish, expert opinion suggests that the shift towards cash cropping has had a positive net effect in that it has reduced land scarcity and pressure on environment . Nonetheless, the negative implications of cash cropping must be checked more vigorously.

The second strategic option, which particularly by the NGO community and some academics have voiced support to, is the promotion of agricultural practices, where reduced dependence on markets and self-sufficiency as well as environmental sustainability are key concerns. While the objectives are probably largely acceptable, especially considering the environmentally fragile watersheds, the approach has been slow to win wider acceptance. The objective of self-sufficiency often entails lower material standard of living than could be achieved by cash cropping, and there is scepticism regarding its acceptability among the farmers. Reportedly, only 0,4 % of Thai farmers practice agriculture based on a similar approach .

On the other hand, the percentage of interested farmers may seem low and it may never become very large, but there is probably scope for increasing it. Even if the expansion of models based on strict self-sufficiency may be constrained because of land scarcity, there may be other alternatives to intensive cash cropping. As the environmental impact of such approaches would most likely be positive, an intensified research effort would be warranted in order to increase their attractiveness from a farmer’s standpoint. This would be in line with the strategy proposed by the 8^th NESDB, which pledged support to promotion of "sustainable agriculture.

Regarding the long-term perspective for agricultural development in the upland areas, it appears that there is still some untapped potential. On the other hand, it is clear that in the most fragile and densely populated areas the limits of agricultural expansion are rather close. If an increase in the material standard of living is set as an objective, it may be difficult to achieve unless diversification of economy is sought. Modest standard of living can probably be achieved, but the question is whether this is sufficient to ensure the stability of communities. It appears that a significant number of younger people have left for larger cities attracted by economic incentives, and it is unclear whether the upland villages can be sustainable, if the age structure becomes skewed towards older generations.

6. Forestry

6.1. Regulations concerning forest use

In 1988 Thailand introduced a logging ban, which effectively closed off all existing forests for any commercial use. Non-timber forest production is allowed for household use. Regulations also prohibit any settlements in forest areas. The dilemma the Government continues to face is that despite regulations a large number of people live on forest land including the catchment areas. In 1997 there were 284 000 people living inside the watershed areas and another 35 000 in the fringes. Efforts to resettle these people have largely failed, and in practice Government control over forest areas is rather weak. In search for alternative approaches the Government has launched several pilot projects based on community-based approaches.

The discussion on alternative strategies revolves around the question whether the people living in forest land, and especially in the areas still covered with forest can manage them in a sustainable manner. From a technical point of view the proponents refer to the long occupancy and tradition in resource management that many of the settlers have. Owing to their dependency on natural resources they have accumulated unique knowledge of the forest resource and developed intricate systems of resource management. Opponents point to the recent and dramatic change of circumstances that substantially weakens the sustainability of traditional land use, which were not devised with the new situation in mind. Apart from environmental constraints, survey results indicate that a change in cultural values may have eroded the sustainability of traditional practices. The younger generation of rural Thai people seems less concerned with the issue of forest conservation than generations before them.

While there are examples of communities managing their forest resources sustainably even under changed conditions, it is not difficult to find cases, where local people have initiated a process of environmental degradation. It is obvious that the situation is very location-specific, and not least dependent on local culture. Therefore the debate on alternatives has gone beyond the issue, whether forests located in watershed areas can be utilised in a sustainable manner. It seems that most parties agree that this is technically feasible, but the issue causing contention is whether the communities would actually do so, if forests were opened up for more extensive utilisation. Arguments put forward in the discussion are based on subjective views on how the communities would react, if resource management were handed over to them.

The discussion has been quite intensive, but lacking convincing evidence in support of either school of thought, the debate seems to have ended up in an impasse. However, it seems that some type of a compromise solution must be sought, where the settlers’ customary rights are respected, but where sufficient provisions are made to safeguard the national interests in terms of environmental protection. Solutions satisfying everyone’s demands are unlikely to emerge, and concessions would needed from both sides. One technical alternative is presented in Box 1. However, it needs to be stressed that a lack of technical options has not been a significant hindrance to resolving the conflict. At this point, it depends largely on the capacity of the political decision-making system to reach an acceptable compromise.

Box 1: Strategy option for resolving the conflict regarding forest use in watershed areas

6.2. Reforestation

Thailand has embarked on extensive reforestation programs. Plantations are established mainly by the Royal Forestry Department (three fourths of total area), but former timber concessionaires and other representatives of the private sector have also reforested sizeable areas. The available data on the survival rates of plantations is scant, but reportedly the Government has limited capacity to maintain them and protect them against encroachment. Compared to deforestation the rate of plantation establishment lags behind (Table 10).

Table 10: Comparison of reforestation and deforestation rates
in Thailand between 1993-1997

Source: Royal Forestry Department 1998

When assessing the viability of launching reforestation schemes, it would be necessary to examine more carefully whether the reasons behind deforestation continue to exert pressure on land and forest cover. Unless the fundamental factors causing deforestation have been eliminated, the newly reforested areas run the risk of being exposed to the same pressures, and undergoing the same process of degradation.

Two alternative strategies experimented with in Southeast Asia would reduce the risk of financial loss. Increased reliance on natural regeneration has been recommended as an option in the northern uplands of Vietnam. It is argued that besides being less costly, natural regeneration develops a stand, which displays higher biodiversity and is better adapted to the natural conditions of the site than artificially reforested sites. Another option for high-risk areas is a low-cost approach adopted in Sri Lanka, where the objective of restoring full forest cover has been relinquished because of the high probability of renewed encroachment. Instead, the principal objective is to restore some form of vegetative cover such as shrub able to reduce erosion. The disadvantage compared to natural forest cover is considered minor compared to the level of cost savings achieved.

7. Rural Industrialization

Shift from agricultural occupations to non-agricultural ones has been seen an important step towards raising material standard of living in the rural areas. Owing to higher productivity in the non-agricultural sector, workers in this sector tend to have higher income levels. In Thailand, the disparity between agricultural and non-agricultural sectors has been marked and in recent times the gap has even widened. While in 1961 the income level in non-agriculture sector was on average six times higher than in the agriculture sector, by 1990 the difference was twelve times (Table 11).

Table 11: Per Capita Income in Agriculture and Non-agriculture sector

Source: NESDB and Office of Agricultural Economics, MOAC

In Thailand industrial development has concentrated in Bangkok, where it has gradually pushed aside agricultural production. In rural areas agriculture has remained the principal production sector, whereas the proportion of industrial output has remained modest (Table 12). Regarding employment the agriculture sector has even a more central role to play. For instance, in 1991 in the northern region agriculture absorbed almost 70 % of workforce, whereas it represented only 24 % of regional GDP. It appears that in order to reduce the regional differences in the material standard of living, a rapid expansion of the industrial sector would be necessary.

Table 12: Share of Agriculture and Manufacturing in
Gross Regional Domestic Product by regions

Source: National Account Division, NESDB

The possible strategies to promote rural industrialisation are discussed in the Regional Report. Regarding the impact on the remote watersheds there are three principal ways in which the remote watersheds could benefit from rural industrialisation (e.g. agro-industries, tourism); augmented demand for agricultural products originating from remote watershed, increased involvement of upland people in trade and engagement in wage labour.

The past pattern of rural industrialisation in Thailand has probably benefited the remote watersheds in the sense that the increased demand for agricultural products has enabled them to fetch higher prices and increase production volume. However, it is unlikely that they would have been able to participate in and derive benefits from the increased trade of agricultural products. It is probable that the principal beneficiaries are the middlemen of trade originating from the lowlands.

Regarding employment it is equally unlikely that the people from the remote watershed would have access to employment in the industrial sector. The hindrances include both a lack of industrial skills as well as the physical distance to employment opportunities. The Government’s strategy for rural industrialisation has emphasised the establishment of large industrial estates. In the northern region there is only one such estate located in Lamphun near Chiang Mai. While it has undoubtedly provided employment to those living in the vicinity, the opportunities available to people living in the remote watersheds are almost certainly negligible.

There is a number of measures which would be needed in order to secure the establishment of positive links with remote watersheds. In order ensure a wider distribution of benefits a more decentralised structure of industrial growth poles in the rural areas is needed. While the basic approach of concentrating efforts in limited areas has merit, the industrial parks are too few to develop links to remote areas. Even if the benefits of economies of scale are well known, a less concentrated structure would be warranted on equity grounds.

In order to benefit from the employment opportunities opening up in the industrial sector the people living in remote areas need training in skills needed in trade and industrial production. Many of the upland people migrating to urban centres drift to low-paid casual employment for a lack of suitable skills. In addition, the cultural and social barriers to business development, which are particularly severe in GMS watershed inhabited by ethnic minorities, must be lowered. In order to reduce the polarisation of remote watersheds and semi-urban centres areas in terms of business development, it is necessary to take a proactive stance to increasing collaboration and integration of the enterprise sectors.

It is important to realise that the diversification of the economic base in the remote watersheds does not happen in isolation, but it is intrinsically tied to development that takes place in the rural towns and the surrounding countryside. It should be noted that it is not only the infrastructure but also the industrial structure in the surrounding areas, which lay the foundation for developing economic activities in the remote areas. On-site development in the catchment areas and rural industrialisation in upland townships should be seen as two complementary components of upland development strategies.

It is clear that the effects of rural industrialisation are not only positive. For instance, protection of workers’ rights has often proven difficult. In Lamphun in northern Thailand, problems with occupational safety have been reported. Also, the urban-like lifestyle, which seems to be an inevitable corollary of industrial occupations, does clearly not suit everyone. Engagement in wage labour entails a disruption of traditional cultures, which are intimately linked to use of natural resources. It is also evident that for many people the quality of their traditional life more than offsets the higher material standard of living of industrial and urban environments.

Therefore, rural industrialisation should be seen more as a complement to natural-resource based development of upper catchments rather than as an alternative to it. While continued support should be provided to those people who wish to maintain their traditional livelihoods, it is also necessary to recognise that many people have opted and will opt for wage labour and urban lifestyles. In Thailand, this has led to seasonal and permanent migration of upland people to large cities with many negative consequences in social terms. Development of upland industries would probably be able to reduce this flow, give a boost to the upland economies and be less harmful in terms of its social impact (cf. ch. 8). Therefore, the strategy of rural industrialisation should not be pitted against development approaches based on natural resource management in the uplands, but it should rather be considered an alternative to continued concentration of migrants in Bangkok and other large cities.

8. Population movements

In the past the Thai Government pursued the policy of resettling people living in the remote upland both on environmental grounds as well as for reasons of national security. The policy stirred remarkable controversy, and it even caused a rift within the NGO community. Environmentally-oriented NGOs are still in favour of the policy, while rural-based organisations are strongly opposed to it. However, the efforts have been largely unsuccessful, and resettlement has in practice been discontinued. Reportedly only two percent of the populations living in the forest reserves have been resettled.

Large-scale resettlement seems inappropriate not only for the widely discussed social reasons, but on practical grounds as well. There is only limited land available for settlements, and the high cost of resettlement makes it inefficient as a policy. However, voluntary migration from the remote watersheds is continuing, but it has drawn remarkable little attention as a development issue despite the large number of migrants. The focus of upland development strategies has been almost exclusively on in-situ development. The implicit assumption seems to be that by improving the living conditions in the uplands and remote watersheds, migration will become a minor issue.

However, this approach fails to recognise three elements of social and economic development. First, upland communities are not a homogenous group of people. While a large number of them may prefer the traditional living sphere to any other alternative, there will always be a number of individuals wishing to seek other options by migrating to new areas. Second, in the most populous upland areas the carrying capacity of the environment has been pushed to the edge, and it is doubtful whether the natural resource base will ever be able to provide an adequate standard of living to all people presently living there. Third, the disparity between upland and lowland areas continues to increase, unless part of the upland population is absorbed in the industrial sector. Therefore, it seems inevitable that part of the population in scattered villages will be pulled to urban or semi-urban environments, unless people in remote areas are willing to settle with a substantially lower standard of living than the remaining population. The past development in Thailand indicates that especially the younger generation seeks to migrate to urban environments.

Paying more attention to outmigrants does not imply that the efforts to develop remote areas should not be vigorously continued. However, instead of indifference, which seems to be the prevailing attitude towards voluntary migration, it would seem more appropriate to make the most of the situation. Since most of the negative effects of outmigration are associated with social problems for those drifting to large cities, a more favourable option would be one where the migrants would have an opportunity to settle in urban or semi-urban areas in the proximity of their upland settlement.

One of the advantages of such an approach is that settlers would be able to maintain much of their social networks owing to the physical proximity to their former settlement area. From the perspective of ethnic minorities it would provide the migrants with an improved opportunity to protect their cultural identity, as the limited size of rural towns would probably ensure that they represent a fairly large portion of the population. Preservation of cultural integrity for ethnic minorities would be further supported by policy measures such as introduction of bilingualism. The migrants could play a crucial role in forming a "social bridge" between the upland communities and majority populations and in breaking their social and economic isolation.

However, in order to successfully divert part of the migration flows to small towns, it is necessary to generate employment and, to this effect, rural industries. This is a very demanding task and clearly not relevant in all rural areas (cf. ch. 7). In addition, it is necessary to recognise that the negative consequences of migration cannot be entirely avoided. For instance, emergence of social problems and erosion of cultural identity are probably unavoidable. However, if migration cannot be stopped, the "small town" scenario provides an effective means to mitigate the negative effects.

9. Land tenure

The tenure policy on agricultural land has been largely settled. Agricultural land will be transferred to private ownership. Even though the pace of the land titling programme has been rather slow (Table 13), there seems to be no dispute regarding the basic approach.

Table 13: Distribution of ownership to agricultural land by region in 1992

Source: Office of Agricultural Economics, MOAC

All forest land is owned by the state. However, the debate concerning non-state tenure has continued for several decades. A first step in this direction was taken in 1970’s, when the Government started in the 1970’s to grant tenure rights to degraded forest lands under the so called SKT program and other similar arrangements. While the intention was to stabilise forest use, they often had a perverse effects, as local farmers attempted to degrade forest areas they occupied in order gain tenure rights. The implementation of these programmes has been stopped, but before the issuance of certificates was halted about 16 000 sq. km of forest land was transferred to non-state tenure (Table 14). This area represents approximately 7 % of forest land.

Table 14: Area of forest land in non-state tenure

Source: Royal Forestry Department 1998

The option of introducing community-based user rights in forest land appeared on the discussion agenda as soon as the network of protected areas started to expand. The first drafts for a community forestry bill were prepared almost 10 years ago, but all attempts to pass the law have failed. The latest version of the bill was debated in early 1999, but the outcome was reportedly disappointing, as the opponents and proponents failed to find common ground. However, in many areas, the Royal Forestry Department has tacitly approved the development of community-based arrangements for forest management, and there is an expanding collaboration in developing the community-based arrangements further. However, granting non-state tenure remains an unresolved issue.

The main objection to granting non-state tenure is that the perceived risk of communities taking to unsustainable practices is deemed excessively high. As conclusive evidence crediting/discrediting this argument is not available, the issue remains a matter of subjective judgement. However, a strong argument in favour of non-state tenure is that based on the past performance record there is little doubt of the incapacity of the state to protect the forest resource it has been entrusted with.

On the other hand, non-state tenure is unlikely be without adverse effects. The traditional management systems are not necessarily able to cope with emerging pressures on land, as they were not developed in such an environment. The erosion of cultural values, which underlie the sustainable practices found in many communities, is also a discernible trend. However, granting tenure rights to communities or households, which depend on it for their livelihood, provides at least for the possibility of obtaining their long-term commitment to resource management. Lack of tenure effectively eliminates this opportunity.

From a legal point of view the key issue is whether the society’s interest should supersede customary tenure rights. The principal argument for strict protection and state tenure over local tenure is the need to protect environmental values, which are of concern to the society as a whole. Such values include biodiversity and capacity for carbon storage as well as catchment protection preventing harmful effects in the downstream area.

Whether the society at large has a legitimate claim to land areas of high environmental value is, of course, a matter of subjective judgement, and there is no "right" answer. However, given the rapidly dwindling forest base in Thailand some degree of public intervention in key areas appears justified. In Thailand there are probably areas, where the environmental values are so high and the environment is so fragile that even the risk of degradation cannot be tolerated. It is likely that a few key watershed areas, as well as priority conservation sites would qualify among them (cf. Box 2).

In order to minimise the risk of environmental degradation in these key areas strict protection is justified. However, the present approach to ban the utilisation of all forest areas seems an excessive measure. Considering the practical difficulty of providing protection to all forest areas and in recognition of customary tenure rights the size of strictly protected areas could be reduced in Thailand. In areas taken out of strict protection local population should be granted tenure and limited user rights (cf. ch. 9). In strictly protected areas state ownership would probably be the preferred option as the lack of tangible benefits is likely to diminish the interest of local population in resource conservation

The outcome of the proposed change is difficult to forecast with certainty. Degradation of forest environment would most likely continue, even if at a reduced rate. There would be cases where communities would not act responsibly, but would degrade the forest environment they have been entrusted with. However, this may at least partially be offset with improved management and protection of the forest environment in other areas, where granting tenure rights encourage communities to take the long term view on resource use.

Box 2: Strict protection of conservation areas

10. Institutions

10.1. Government capacity

The number of Government agencies involved in watershed management is large. At the peak period of development during the 1980’s, there was a total of 168 agencies from 31 government departments and 49 international donors and NGOs. Even today there are reportedly 26 agencies, which have a role to play in upland development. The principal players are presented in Table 15.

Table 15: Principal Government Agencies involved in watershed management

Source: Chunkao 1999

At the central level the key players are the Ministry of Interior, the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment as well as the Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives including Royal Forestry Department. All of them have qualified staff, and capacity to implement the policy and planning function. However, the effectiveness of the administration is seriously reduced by overlapping mandates and rivalry between the agencies.

The implementing arm of the Government in the upland areas includes three principal agencies: Watershed Management Division of Royal Forestry Department, Hilltribe Welfare Division of Department of Public Welfare and the Highland Agriculture Extension Sector under the Department of Agricultural Extension. The largest operational budget is held by the Watershed Division, whereas the Hilltribe Welfare Division has the most staff (Table 16).

Table 16: Principal Government agencies involved in watershed management
with representation at field level

Source: Chunkao 1998

The available data does not permit a detailed evaluation of the Government’s priorities as reflected by resource allocation between sectors. However, regarding the activities carried out by the Royal Forestry Department, the extent of annual reforestation areas suggests that it is one of the major activities. Community-based approaches to watershed management are implemented mainly by the field staff of the Watershed Management Division of RFD. The number of its extension staff is 53, who account for about 20 % of total personnel in the Division. This seems like a low number considering the number of people living in and around the watershed areas (approximately 320 000, see ch. 6.1).

The option of shifting the emphasis further towards extension services may be considered. As the skills of existing extension staff are quite advanced, the key issue is a decision regarding resource allocation. Reforestation has an immediate effect, but as one of the root causes for forest degradation is people’s struggle for livelihood, a more people-centred approach might yield a better net result in the long term.

10.2. Intersectoral Co-ordination

One of the principal obstacles to efficient utilisation of Government resources is a lack of intersectoral co-operation. Watershed management is typically a multi-sectoral activity, and difficulties in co-ordinating the inputs of all actors in the public sector are common to all GMS countries. In Thailand the predominant model relies on co-ordination mechanisms, which are non-binding and focus on policy issues. On one hand, there are several, partly overlapping inter-sectoral committees with representation from line ministries and other relevant Government bodies such as National Economic and Social Development Board (NESDB) and National Environment Board (NEB). On the other hand, the key Government Agencies have been established around a model, where the responsibility for co-ordinating environmental policies to the Ministry of Environment, Science and Technology (MOSTE). The line ministries retain the responsibility for policy implementation in their respective fields.

Both levels of co-ordination suffer from vaguely defined mandates and overlapping responsibilities between the entities. The non-binding character of the arrangements has led to a situation, where priorities based on sector policies overpower attempts at multi-sectoral co-ordination. The key ministries have somewhat different perceptions as to the overall strategy and priority to be attached to watershed management. Apart from the lead agency of watershed management, the Royal Forestry Department, the line ministries seem to consider watershed management peripheral to their core activities. Further, even though there are signs of a gradually broadening focus, individual ministries still show a tendency to look at problems and causes within their administrative mandate. At the field level the emphasis on sector issues is reflected in the low priority attached to tasks transcending administrative boundaries.

The key problem of the non-binding models is that the co-ordinating bodies lack any authoritative power in terms of activity co-ordination and resource allocation. In Thailand the exclusive focus on policy co-ordination has made the coordination arrangements at field level ineffective. The pilot projects in Mae Tang, Nam Chern and Klong-Yan watersheds in northern Thailand are attempting to address the problem by developing a model, where the management authority and, most importantly, budget planning and allocations for line ministries would be made through one authoritative body. However, the proposed model does not address the second weakness of the present systems, the low capacity to deal with the upstream-downstream conflicts. The issue will probably be addressed in the upcoming review of water sector management, but no policy directions are yet available.

It has been suggested that ministries spanning larger administrative sectors would help to resolve the problem. It has been proposed that the MOSTE and Ministry of Agriculture would be merged in order to form a new Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources in Thailand. The main weakness of such arrangements lies in the sheer size of the proposed entities. Large structures tend to have even less administrative flexibility, and the problems of co-ordination would re-surface within the ministries. For instance, there are numerous examples of poor co-ordination even within the existing Ministry of Agriculture of Thailand, which is much smaller than the proposed new ministry. Another pitfall may be the fact that it may undermine democratic governance in countries such as Thailand. The concentration of power in larger units carries the risk that political control over key issues diminishes, as decisions could be increasingly be made within the ministries in an administrative fashion.

The Thai Governments is presently studying a management approach, which entails the establishment of a basin-wide authority to manage all natural resources in the area. The advantages of a basin-wide management system would be the ability to address all issues related to water resource management in a comprehensive manner. Components such as regulation of water quality and quantity, management of the aquatic environment and land use may be included in its scope. Management of upper catchments would be but one component in a larger system.

Many of the systems established elsewhere in Asia (e.g. in Sabah, Malaysia) are self-supportive in the sense that they generate revenue by levying charges on water use, part of which are then ploughed back to basin development. It is this feature, which has been considered particularly advantageous for the management of upper catchments. It would provide a mechanism for transfer of funding from lowlands to upland areas in return for the benefits upland protection provides downstream. Also, all other aspects of upstream-downstream conflict such as water allocation, pollution etc. could be effectively addressed by the management system.

A basin-wide management authority is a rather complicated system, which requires high institutional capacity in order to be effective. It would be a significant departure from current institutional structures, which implies that the development of the basin-wide system as well as an interface with the rest of the administrative structure would be a major effort. On the other hand, the advantages of the system are significant, and the concept has been found workable elsewhere. The advanced capacity of public administration in Thailand makes it a potentially feasible option, and further exploration of the model should be pursued. Alternatively, the proposals to confer more authority to the co-ordinating bodies should be rapidly implemented.

10.3. Patterns of Participation

Formal endorsement for the adoption of public participation as a key underlying principle for all economic and social development activities was provided in the 8^th NESDB. The updated Watershed Management Master Plan has, similarly, adopted community participation as a key tenet for future watershed management activities in Thailand. While top-down planning may still characterise some planning efforts, participatory planning methods are steadily gaining ground in the public administration in Thailand. A number of participatory initiatives, which were launched even prior to formal policy endorsement. For instance, the pilot watershed management projects implemented by the Royal Forestry Department since 1980’s have introduced a participatory approach to planning and implementing watershed management.

A consequence of the shift in approach to watershed management by the Royal Forestry Department has been the (re)-creation and (re)-emergence of local institutions, committees and institutions which are increasingly involved in defining the modalities of (detailed) land use planning and regulation in sub-catchments in the upper watershed areas. For instance, the Doi Sam Muen Watershed Network Organisation in the Mae Tang watershed has been instrumental in harnessing local knowledge and value systems in watershed planning.

An important step in institutionalising local participation was the establishment of Tambon (sub-district) Administrative Organisation/Tambon Councils. With officials elected by the communities, they represent an important mode of community participation in local planning. The Tambon Council act with powers to enact sub-district by-laws may undertake activities related to the protection and conservation of natural resources. Despite problems typical of newly established organisations, the reported experiences of working with Tambon Council give indications of high development potential , and providing support to their future development should be vigorously pursued. The strength of Tambon Councils vis-à-vis more informal arrangements for participation is the fact that their mandate is unambiguously derived from a popular vote.

Thailand has a strong civil society movement with more than 10 000 registered non-governmental organisations. The relationship with the Government has sometimes been strained, and well-published "media-clashes" have been frequent.