| Paper |
 |
|
| Title | Review of policies and practices in upland areas of the Lao PDR | | Author | David E Thomas | | Editor | Bounthong Bouahom, Aiden Glendinning, Sophie Nillson and Michael Victor | | Year | 2005 | | Parent Title | Poverty reduction and shifting cultivation stabilisation in the uplands of Lao PDR: technologies, approaches and methods for improving upland livelihoods. Proceedings of a workshop held in Luang Prabang January 27-30, 2004 | | Publisher | National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute | | City of Publication | Vientiane, Lao PDR | | Pages | 9-38 | | Call Number | PP0140-05 |
|
| Abstract: |
| Under the National Poverty Eradication Programme (NPEP) overall visions for
agriculture, integrated watershed management and forestry seek to coordinate
sectors in facilitating a holistic transformation of upland livelihoods to reduce
rural poverty and conserve natural resources. Operational policies, however,
still centre on stabilising shifting cultivation, eliminating opium production,
land use allocation, land use planning, and focal site development with village
relocation and consolidation. Responsibility for planning, implementation and
meeting targets is increasingly delegated to provincial and district offices. As
a result, the overall policy environment tends to segregate lowland agriculture
and upland forests, overwhelm local capacity with mandates under
decentralisation, and place strong constraints on land use while new livelihood
opportunities are still vague. The impacts of this are disrupting diverse
household livelihood systems and bringing turbulence and uncertainty to
many upland communities.
Government efforts to strengthen support for upland agriculture and forestry
focus on the development of responsive, demand-driven research and
extension services. Although the National Agriculture and Forestry Research
Institute (NAFRI) is progressing, initial visions of improved extension services
under the National Agricultural and Forestry Extension Service (NAFES) appear
promising, and pilot projects are helping point the way, much more effort is
needed to build capacity at increasingly important village to provincial levels.
In terms of improving livelihood component technologies, a great deal of
progress has been made in lowland rice production, livestock health, and
some field and tree crops. Nonetheless much important work remains to be
done in horticulture, agroforestry, non-timber forest products, smallholder
timber, irrigated production in small upland valleys, community-based natural
resource and landscape management, as well as local processing, microenterprise
and marketing chains. Organic and/or diverse niche products will
require more effort to develop market opportunities, local identities and
product lines, local entrepreneurial skills, and locally-adapted technologies.
While the challenges are many, the experienced and motivated people
participating in this workshop may be able to help expand the range of
promising alternatives, and further build and accelerate efforts under NPEP
to improve livelihoods in upland communities.
This paper provides a brief overview of upland policies and practices. The
emphasis is on policy themes and directions, implementation issues, livelihood
impacts, as well as emerging institutions, technologies and approaches to
commercial production. |
|
