participatory village development and sustainable land use

Lao People’s Democratic Republic Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute Department of Forestry

Participatory Village Development and

Sustainable Land Use System

A General Description

______________________________________________

Sysongkham Mahathirath and Peter Jones

Lao-Swedish Forestry Programme, September 2000 Co-ordination Office, Lao Swedish Forestry Program

Department of Forestry Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

Lao PDR Phone 856 21 215005 · Fax 215004

ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT

1. Intended Audience of this Document

� Policy makers, program planners and the donor community.

Note: This is NOT a technical manual or guide for field use.

2. Explanation of "System"

The Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use System is comprised of four components: extension, land use planning and land allocation, sloping land research and joint forest management The term "system" is used to indicate that the procedures and methods for each of these components are systematised and integrated into a system to facilitate agriculture and forestry development in villages.

3. Purpose of the Document

� To provide an overview of the four components in the Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use system.

� To make information available to assist personnel involved in developing policy, planning development programs and providing donor assistance to the Lao PDR.

of 26

4. Information Provided in this Document

� Explanation of the components, objectives and ownership of the system. � Justification for documentation. � Experiences and lessons learned during the development of the system over a period of four years in

target villages. � Discussion on mainstreaming a gender in development approach and gender responsiveness of the

system. � Monitoring procedures and methods developed. � The relevance of the system to government laws, policies and regulations. � An assessment of sustainability and affordability of the system in the Lao context.

GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DAFO District Agriculture and Forestry Office

DMS DAFO Management System

DOF Department of Forestry

GOL Government of Laos

JFM Joint Forest Management

LSFP Lao-Swedish Forestry Program

LUP Land Use Planning

LUP/LA Land Use Planning and Land Allocation

MAF Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry

NAFRI National Agricultural and Forestry Research Institute

NBCA National Bio-diversity Conservation Area

NSCSP National Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation Program

PAFO Provincial Agriculture and Forestry Office

PFO Provincial Forestry Office

PVD&SLUS Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use System

RTC Regional Training Centre

S&L Saving and Credit/Loan Groups

1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SYSTEM 2

2 COMPONENTS IN THE SYSTEM 2

3 OBJECTIVES OF THE SYSTEM 4

4 JUSTIFICATION FOR DEVELOPING THE SYSTEM 4

5 OWNERSHIP OF THE SYSTEM 6

6 GENDER RESPONSIVENESS 7

6.1 CENTRAL LEVEL 7

of 26

1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE SYSTEM

The Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use (PVD&SLU) System is a model for implementing village development and addressing sustainable land use. The procedures and methods of this model have been developed during the last four years by the Lao Swedish Forestry Program (LSFP). The following description explains how system components (suan prakob) and tools (kruang meur) can be

6.2 PROVINCIAL LEVEL 8

6.3 DISTRICT LEVEL 8

6.4 VILLAGE LEVEL 8

7 EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNED DURING SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT 9

7.1 INSTITUTIONAL EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS 9

7.2 SOCIAL EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS 11

7.3 TECHNICAL EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS 12

8 MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND METHODS 13

8.1 THE PURPOSES OF MONITORING 13

8.1.1 Development of monitoring procedures and methods 14

8.1.2 Application of the monitoring procedures and methods 14

8.2 THE TYPES OF MONITORING 14

8.2.1 Progress or Activity Monitoring 14

8. 2.2 Monitoring of impacts from village development activities 14

8.2.3 Monitoring of staff adoption of component procedures methods and practices 15

8.2.4 Monitoring of the functioning and effectiveness of village committees 15

8.3 MONITORING PROCEDURES AND METHODS 15

9 RELATIONSHIP TO GOL LAWS, GOVERNMENT POLICY AND REGULATIONS 16

9.1 LAWS 16

9.2 POLICIES AND THE STRATEGIC VISION FOR THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR 16

9.3 REGULATION 17

10 SUSTAINABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY 17

10.1 SUSTAINABILITY 18

10.1.1 Land Use Planning and Land Allocation 18

10.1.2 Extension 18

10.1.3 Joint Forest Management 19

10.1.4 Research 19

10.2 AFFORDABILITY 20

10.2.1 Research 20

10.2.2 Extension 20

10.2.3 Land Use Planning and Land Allocation 20

11 ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION 21

of 26

integrated into a process of village development planning, implementation and monitoring.

Four components, land use planning and land allocation (LUP/LA), extension, sloping land research and joint forest management (JFM) have been combined into a system because they each contribute to village development and sustainable land use. Each of the components has tools that are described in more detail later in this document. Integration into a system aims to facilitate the co-ordination of village development activities. However, while the components are described as a system, the reader should be aware that the LSFP does not claim that these components are the only ones that can be used in a system for village development and sustainable land use. They are the tools with which the LSFP has had experience during method development work on village development and sustainable land use.

Some of the procedures and methods of the system are applicable in any situation in Lao PDR, eg., the general land use planning and land allocation procedures. Other procedures and methods are more specific to particular situations or farming systems, e.g., research for the upland or sloping lands. Users of the system therefore need to be aware that the system can not be applied directly or absolutely in any situation. Adaptations will be necessary depending on the particular characteristics encountered in a village or villages.

In addition to the tools for each component of the system there are cross- cutting tools (kruang meur tua bai). These have been named cross cutting tools because they are used in each of the components, e.g., gender mainstreaming occurs in land use planning and land allocation, participatory extension, agricultural and forestry research and joint forest management. The way in which cross-cutting tools are used within the system is explained later in this document.

2. COMPONENTS IN THE SYSTEM

The components in the participatory village development and sustainable land use system are:

� Land Use Planning and Land Allocation � Extension � Sloping Land Research � Joint Forest Management

Figure 1: The Components and Cross-cutting Tools in the Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use System

Figure 2: Components and Linkages for the Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use System

of 26

3. OBJECTIVES OF THE SYSTEM

Goal

Improved productivity, sustainable use and management of forest and agricultural land in village management areas.

Purpose

To provide the agriculture and forestry sectors with approaches, procedures and methods for implementing participatory village development and addressing sustainable land use.

Component Objectives

Land Use Planning and Land Allocation:

To develop, test and provide procedures, methods and tools for conducting participatory land use planning and land allocation at village level

Extension:

To develop and provide participatory extension procedures and methods which promote positive interaction with village communities, and enable self reliance, sustainable livelihoods and the sustainable use of natural resources.

Sloping Land Research:

To develop procedures, methods and tools for adaptive research which are integrated with extension and are

of 26

appropriate for use in the sloping land areas of Laos.

Joint Forest Management

To develop procedures, methods and tools that involve villagers in the sustainable management of State Production Forests and village forests.

Gender

To develop and provide social analysis tools to ensure that attention to gender issues is mainstreamed and integrated throughout the stages of planning, implementation and monitoring of village development activities.

4. JUSTIFICATION FOR DEVELOPING THE SYSTEM

The system was developed to respond to government policies aimed at improving village development planning and implementation and the management of village forests and agricultural land. It is believed the use of the component tools of the system will have a positive impact on:

� Improving the co-ordination of planning, budgeting and implementation of development activities by the concerned government units.

� Improving field staff ability in participatory village needs identification. � Providing field staff with procedures and skills in participatory planning and decision making. � Ensuring that extension programs encourage villager self-reliance. � Ensuring that gender and equity issues are adequately addressed � Improving monitoring and evaluation of development activities. � Improving the continuity of village development activities. � Attaining more efficient and effective village development.

The participatory village development and sustainable land use system has the following attributes which are necessary to attain the impacts referred to above:

Attribute Explanation

Inter-disciplinary Numbers of disciplines, components or units are involved, including those responsible for forest and agricultural land use planning and management, agricultural research, extension, gender and production forest use and management.

Participatory It involves villagers in every step of the process and encourages them to make their own decisions in regard to village development and sustainable land use management.

Empowering It strengthens community organisation and capability and provides villagers with the skills and tools to solve their own problems and make improved decisions in regard to the sustainable management of forests and agricultural land.

Gender Responsive It promotes the active participation and equal opportunity for men and women in all decisions regarding resource allocation and management and addresses the unique problems of men and women by the use of social analysis and gender mainstreaming.

Networking/Exchange It promotes inter-village co-operation to solve resource use conflicts and improves community development and sustainable land use activities.

Holistic It focuses at the level of the whole village natural resource management system including community livelihood systems, forest and land use management and production forests.

Integrated It promotes integrated village development, sustainable land use, agroforestry research and production forest activities by linking village planning and extension, on-station and on-farm agro-forestry research, village forest land use and management activities, and forest production

of 26

5. OWNERSHIP OF THE SYSTEM

In the context of model/method development ownership refers to:

The government units responsible for developing the components and tools in the system: Development

Those responsible or concerned with co-ordinating the application of the system: Coordination

The end users of the system: Users

The target beneficiaries of the system: Beneficiaries

The table below summarises ownership in the village development and sustainable land use system

Table 1: Ownership in the Participatory Village Development and Sustainable Land Use System

activities.

Decentralised The system and it’s components devolves responsibilities, authorities and rights to staff at provincial and district levels and at the village level to village organisations, village groups and individuals.

Stepwise Procedures have a logical sequence of steps providing ample time for due consideration of village needs and opportunities, the outcomes of activities undertaken, and their implications, by both villagers and District staff.

Strengthens staff competence

In the process of using the components and tools in the system staff acquire new knowledge and skills which are improved with each planning and implementation cycle.

Iterative As villagers implement development activities and adopt new resource management practices, conditions change, new problems and opportunities emerge and additional lessons are learned requiring that certain steps are repeated in the light of the changed circumstances.

Components Component Development

Agency/Unit Co-ordination

Component End Users

Beneficiaries

LUP and LA LUP Sub-program of LSFP in cooperation with DOF, MAF and the National Shifting Cultivation Stabiolisation Program

MAF DOF PAFO PFO RTCs The LUP/LA Committees at: Central Province District

LUP/LA Committees: Central, Province, District NSCSP staff Provincial LUP Staff District LUP staff Village Committees Village LUP/LA Committees RTC staff

The Nation Provinces Districts Village communities Village dev. Droups Village social groups Village families Men and women

Extension Extension Subprogram of LSFP in co-operation with DOF and MAF, RTCs

MAF DOF PAFO PFO RTCs DAFO

Provincial extension staff District extension staff Village Committees TC staff

As above

Sloping Land Research

Shifting Cultivation Subprogram of LSFP in co-operation with NAFRI and the NPSCS, RTCs

MAF NAFRI: FRC & NARC DOF PAFO PFO RTCs

Provincial extension staff District extension staff Village Committees Reg. Training Centre staff Researchers

As above

of 26

The various stakeholders which have been involved in method development activity are depicted in Figure 2 above. This is both necessary and desirable to ensure that:

� End users at each level in the government system are capable of using the procedures and methods developed during the stages of formulation, testing and improvement.

� The procedures and methods are integrated and institutionalised in government policy and working procedures.

� Adequate testing has been undertaken at village level to ensure that the procedures and methods are appropriate and benefit communities, groups, families and men and women.

6. GENDER RESPONSIVENESS

The participatory village development and sustainable land use system incorporates attention to gender issues by using social analysis tools throughout the stages of planning, implementation and monitoring of system activities. This ensures that staff who are involved in village development activity give attention to gender issues in a systematic and structured way.

The tools used in social analysis focus on identifying and addressing social and gender concerns. They include examining gender roles and division of labour, gender relations and the relative access and control women and men have of village resources.

At the whole village level social and gender analysis also identifies the perceived development potential of village resources and empowerment and gender equity issues which could be addressed and supported.

This approach to gender mainstreaming provides equal opportunities for men and women to participate in and benefit from village development, through engaging both women and men in planning and decision making about village development priorities and activities.

Use of the system raises gender awareness levels of district and provincial staff and improves their capacity to consider gender issues in village development in all the components of the system. Actions are taken at central, provincial, district and village levels. These actions include:

6.1 Central Level

� The appointment of staff members to promote gender work. � In-service capacity building activities involving both men and women. � Providing opportunities for staff of both sexes to attend study tours and training courses.

6.2 Provincial Level

The appointment of gender focal persons in the provincial LSFP Co-ordination Offices to assist provincial and district staff with gender work related to village development and sustainable land use.

� Training courses for both male and female staff members on relevant gender issues. � Participation of provincial gender focal persons in LUP/LA, extension and JFM field activities in target

districts and villages.

6.3 District Level

� The appointment of gender focal persons in the DAFO to facilitate gender work related to village development and sustainable land use with communities, groups, and individuals.

� Participation of district gender focal persons in method development and testing at village level.

Joint Forest Management

Research Subprogram of LSFP in co-operation with: MAF, DOF, NAFRI, PFO and District staff RTC

MAF NAFRI DOF PAFO PFO DAFO RTCs

PFO extension staff DAFO field staff Village Committees JFM Committee Reg. Training Centre staff

As above

of 26

� Attendance of both male and female staff members of DAFO in meetings concerning development planning and activity implementation.

� Providing training courses on gender for both male and female staff members

6.4 Village Level

Organisational Actions

� The appointment of women to village LUP/LA, JFM and Savings and Loan Group (S&L) committees � The appointment of women to school parent committees to encourage equal opportunity for boys and

girls to attend school.

Planning Actions

� Gathering information from both village men and women when undertaking planning activities. � Ensuring women, youth and village elders attend village decision making meetings � Using approaches such as arranging convenient venues and times to facilitate women’s participation in

planning and decision-making meetings. � Conducting social analysis activities to assist village development planning � Interviewing respondents of both sexes when monitoring component activities.

Training Activities

� Participation of men and women in study trips, field days and training sessions conducted by each of the components.

7. EXPERIENCES AND LESSONS LEARNED DURING SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

7.1 Institutional Experiences and Lessons

Integrating Sub-program work facilitated co-ordination and the concept of the Participatory Village Development System

In the early stages each sub-program worked on developing procedures more or less on a sub-program or component basis in response to their purposes, inputs and outputs. The first attempt at physically integrating sub-program work occurred in January 1997 at Xieng Le Kok village in Savannakhet Province. Central, provincial and district level staff from LUP, Extension, JFM and the Xepon Regional Training Centre completed an integrated exercise of land use planning and village development planning. Similar exercises were later undertaken in which research and conservation sub-program staff participated.

These joint exercises were in fact a stepping stone to defining a village development system, based on the inter-actions between LUP, Extension, JFM, Research, and the RTCs during the inter-disciplinary field exercises.

Village Development is enhanced by integrating component work

In Luang Prabang procedures and methods were developed to link sloping land research, extension with training at the Northern Regional Training Centre. Similarly, associations have been created in southern Provinces between the LSFP and established research institutions and service departments to facilitate the provision of technical advice to both district extension workers and villagers.

In the JFM activity, PAFO, DAFO, village communities and private logging companies are partners in the development of viable systems to involve villagers in commercial forestry activities.

Linkages were made with the Regional Training Centres during development of the procedures and methods so that RTC staff gained the understanding and knowledge to assist with dissemination and training.

Institutionalisation requires involvement from stakeholders at all levels

of 26

As explained in Table 1 the development and adoption of models for PVD&SLU has better prospects for success if ownership of the system is shared by stakeholders at all levels in the organisation. During the formulation and improvement stages of component development care was taken to ensure that all stakeholders were involved in an appropriate capacity. This created the ownership of the procedures and methods at the operational level and facilitated their acceptance at the policy level. The potential for expansion of the procedures and methods to non-project areas is enhanced. This was the case with the LUP/LA procedures, which were developed in co-operation with the MAF and the NSCSP and subsequently adopted nation wide.

The benefits of de-centralisation in method development were demonstrated

The GOL has a policy to decentralise authority and rights to provincial, district and village levels. The PVD&SLU system through the distribution of ownership at the various levels supports this policy. This is possible because the system possesses the important attributes summarised on page 3. The system is integrated, participatory, empowering, gender responsive, networked, stepwise and iterative. These attributes provide mechanisms for devolving authority and rights, particularly at the district, village, group, family and individual levels and therefore are attractive tools for the GOL’s de-centralisation program.

The Regional Training Centres were linked to village development and sustainable land use activities

Staff of the RTCs have been involved in all method development activities with each component of the PVD&SLU system. Examples of this activity include participation in LUP/LA, extension, sloping land research research and JFM method development activities in model development villages, and formal and informal training for extension staff and villagers. Curriculum development at the RTCs has been based on field experiences during method development work in target areas. RTC staff have developed training material with assistance from land use planning, extension and research staff who have field experience with the procedures and methods. This cooperation helped to ensure that training provided is relevant and appropriate for village development work.

The LSFP whole village approach to village development offers more opportunity to effect change in village communities

A "model farmer" is usually a person who has a farm which exhibits numbers of exemplary farming activities which serve as a complete demonstration for others in the village to follow. Assistance is provided by the extension service to ensure that the farmer is successful in producing a very attractive "show-piece". Typically extension effort and funds are concentrated on just a few farmers.

The LSFP uses a "participatory whole village" approach which is characterised by participatory methods, equal opportunity for village social groups, logical sequences or steps and repeated activity as circumstances change.

The LSFP experiences indicate that concentrating extension and development resources on a few selected framers does not offer the opportunity to reach all sectors of the village community, invariably does not incorporate gender concerns or perspectives, and may not address the issue of poverty alleviation satisfactorily.

It is concluded that the phased whole village approach, through the steps of demonstrating selected farming practices, farmer testing and evaluation to adoption is a more satisfactory approach than the model farmer method because the majority of families in the community have opportunities to access, test evaluate and adopt technologies.

There was duplication in the LUP and LA and extension procedures which was corrected in the latter stages of the program

"Extension" was included as a latter stage in the LUP/LA procedure. This was done in an attempt to create a linkage between LUP/LA and extension at a time when there were no systematic extension procedures and methods developed for use at district level. This is no longer the case as satisfactory and adequate extension procedures and methods are now available. Furthermore, as both Extension and LUP/LA are integral parts of a village development system it is inappropriate that Extension be considered as part of a LUP/LA procedure because LUP and LA are tools in the village development process. It is therefore not necessary for land use planning and land allocation personnel to attempt to define an extension plan at the time land allocation is being done. This anomaly could be rectified by simply removing extension as a stage in the LUP/LA procedure and using the extension procedures and methods which have been developed and documented.

of 26

Extension activities should be undertaken whether LUP/LA has been done or not. It would be more satisfactory if those responsible for LUP/LA completed specific LUP/LA tasks after which extension would continue with the task of participatory village development planning and implementation.

7.2 Social Experiences and Lessons

Gender has been progressively understood and partially adopted in the system

Gender concerns and activities have gradually been mainstreamed in the attitudes of staff involved in village development and sustainable land use activities. The initial perception that gender meant "women" and that gender activities were the exclusive concern of the Lao Women’s Union, have been progressively dispelled and there exists a better understanding of how gender mainstreaming can benefit village development.

Participation was demonstrated and partially mainstreamed in system procedures and methods

The GOL has well defined policies for participation in rural development with the aim of increasing villager involvement in decision making. The PVD&SLU system is a participatory one in which staff inter-act with village communities, groups, families and men and women in undertaking each of it’s components, LUP/LA, Extension, Research and JFM . The term "participation" is widely assimilated in the vocabulary of field staff. Methods and techniques for applying participation are still being learned. Participatory approaches are now embedded in the curricular of the Regional Training Centres responsible for training extension staff.

Staff competence in village development activities was improved

The participatory and practical training methods used improved the competence of district staff in planning and implementing village development activities. In each of the components of the system the procedures and methods all advocate and necessitate consistent dialogue by staff with communities, groups or individuals through-out the process of preparation, planning, implementation, follow-up and monitoring of village development activities. Village development activities defined therefore reflect community needs and opportunities and government visions, policies and development objectives.

7.3 Technical Experiences and Lessons

Research has been linked to village development and extension

The difficulty of linking research and development is addressed by this system. Approaches linking extension and research have been positively demonstrated in contrasting situations. In the shifting cultivation areas of the north the research component uses on-station and on-farm research methods to address and demonstrate conservation farming technologies. This is done in collaboration with other research organisations, district extension and land use planning staff and villagers. In the lowland rain-fed areas of the south, the extension program involves the government rice research station in rice trials, training of district staff and villagers and demonstrations to address the problem of rain-fed paddy rice insufficiency. Similar initiatives have been demonstrated in the economic area of Laongam District where technical agencies have assisted village extension staff with advice and training on specific economic development activities identified by villagers.

Practical, field focused and relevant training methods were successful in improving staff competence

The training planned and provided by the four components of the PVD&SLU system had very similar characteristics. Provincial and district staff first received orientation or awareness raising training either at RTCs, Districts or in the target villages followed by on-the-job training on procedures, methods and practices with villagers. The on-the-job training was associated with village development activities outlined in the method development work plan. This approach ensured that theoretical training was focused and relevant and that staff practised the procedures, methods and tasks in the field.

Monitoring and evaluation was introduced and practised as an integral part of the planning and development cycle in target villages

In the past monitoring and evaluation generally received less attention than other stages in village

of 26

development. The village development and sustainable land use components have made variable progress with developing and testing monitoring and evaluation procedures and methods. Never-the-less, considerable progress has been made on four aspects of monitoring:

� Progress or activity monitoring � Monitoring impacts of village development activities � Monitoring staff adoption of component procedures and methods � Monitoring the functioning and effectiveness of village committees in managing village land use

agreements.

The monitoring methods include simultaneous extension follow-up and advice on activities being implemented in villages.

8. MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES AND METHODS

Monitoring methods have been developed or are being developed for land use planning, land allocation, extension research and JFM. In addition the program developed methods for a DAFO Management System (DMS) which aims to improve management at district level by establishing staff duty statements and routines, procedures for office management, procedures for planning and reporting on field activities and information management. Monitoring procedures and practices are embodied in the DMS, and if used properly DMS is a valuable tool for monitoring village development and extension activities.

The methods involve villagers (both men and women), village organisations and district staff in monitoring activity. Monitoring is based on the principle that those undertaking the monitoring will also be the end users of the results including villagers.

Monitoring is a tool used to provide information to review village development and sustainable land use activity being undertaken by the various village development units and personnel.

The monitoring procedures and methods being developed for each of the components in the PVD&SLU system are in different stages of development and refinement depending on the availability of resources available to devote to monitoring methods development within each of the components. The LUP/LA component has made the most progress with the development of monitoring methods because the sub-program has had technical assistance with this activity.

Monitoring is also conducted to assess the extent extension personnel are adopting the methods and practices of each of the components of the village development and sustainable land use system.

8.1 The Purposes of Monitoring

Monitoring activity has the following purposes:

8.1.1 Development of monitoring procedures and methods

� To help improve monitoring approaches, procedures and methods at village level � To help improve the use or application of monitoring itself.

8.1.2 Application of the monitoring procedures and methods

� To help evaluate and analyse the field work done by DAFO staff. � To help improve the field work done by DAFO staff. � To help improve village development activities and forest and agricultural land use at village level.

The application of the procedures and methods provides information to improve decision making at the various levels concerned with village development and sustainable land use.

of 26

8.2 The Types of Monitoring

8.2.1 Progress or Activity Monitoring

This aspect of monitoring is undertaken at regular intervals to assess the level of progress of activities being conducted in the annual work plan. It has two parts;

� monitoring progress and results of staff activity against their work plans

Examples: The number of days of training completed by staff at the RTC The number of days conducting demonstrations with villagers

� monitoring of progress and results with activities at village level

Examples: The number of on-the-job training sessions done with villagers The number and membership of savings and loan groups formed

8.2.2 Monitoring of impacts from village development activities

This aspect of monitoring is done with villages and communities to asses both the short and long-term social, economic and environmental impacts, using interviews and discussions with village committees and separate groups of men and women.

Examples: The amount of land available to families after LUP/LA The increase of rice yield after adoption of new rice varieties

8.2.3 Monitoring of staff adoption of component procedures methods and practices

This aspect of monitoring addresses the level of adoption by field staff of "better practises" in undertaking LUP/LA, extension, research and JFM. Indicators for the processes, procedures and methods of each of the components are used to assess the extent to which they are applied by field staff when undertaking activities at village level. This is divided into adoption of field practices and adoption of office management routines.

Examples: Are staff using the 9 stage process for LUP/LA properly Are staff using the participatory methods for extension planning properly

8.2.4 Monitoring of the functioning and effectiveness of village committees

This aspect of monitoring assesses the level of commitment and effectiveness of the village administrative organisations and committees in the management of village development activities and forest and agricultural land. It is important in preventing inappropriate practices and to protect the promulgated village forest and agricultural land use agreement. This type of monitoring is conducted using discussions in the village and at the district office and through general observations by field staff when visiting villages.

Examples: Is the Village LUP/LA Committee implementing the Village Forest and Land Use Agreement as intended Is the Village Committee assisting with managing the JFM Development Fund as intended

8.3 Monitoring Procedures and Methods

Procedures are specified for conducting monitoring activities for each aspect of monitoring conducted. For example if the aspect concerns the adoption by field staff of LUP/LA procedures and methods, procedures are defined to gather information, using relevant indicators, which enables an assessment of the level, effectiveness and quality of the activities used by the field staff.

A common feature of monitoring methods is that they are participatory, meaning that information is sought using dialogue between staff and/or staff and villagers.

In some cases formal questionnaires are used in interviews and in others cases key points are used to elicit

of 26

information during discussions with individuals or groups.

Methods are quite diverse and flexible including:

� individual interviews with staff and farmers � subjective monitoring using group interviews with different social groups including men and women � whole village meetings to understand village perspectives � comparisons between control villages and project villages � discussions and observations

9. RELATIONSHIP TO GOL LAWS, GOVERNMENT POLICY AND REGULATIONS

9.1 Laws

The Laws most relevant to the village development and sustainable land use system are the Forestry Law and the Land Law. These have particular relevance to the LUP/LA component as they state the requirements for village level forest and land allocation. These laws reaffirm the commitment of the government to providing forest use rights to communities and land use rights to individuals through a process of forest and land allocation.

The Family and Property Laws confirm the government’s intention to allocate land rights fairly to both men and women. These Laws recognise the traditional land inheritance systems and protect the land ownership rights of women in marriage.

9.2 Policies and the Strategic Vision for the Agricultural Sector

The LSFP has concentrated on developing procedures and methods for use at provincial and district levels which if adopted would be effective tools in implementing four of the eight National Priority Programs in the Socio-economic Development Plan and four of the six programs in the Agriculture and Forestry Sector Development Plan.

A summary of the components of the PVD&SLU system which are relevant to the National and Ministerial programs is provided below.

National Priority Programs Most Relevant Components of the PVD&SLU System

1. Planning Approach LUP/LA; Extension

2. GOL/MAF Planning and Decentralisation LUP/LA; Extension; JFM

6. Sustainable Upland Development LUP/LA; Sloping Land Research; Extension

8. Shifting Cultivation LUP/LA; Sloping Land Research; Extension

Agriculture and Forestry Sector Programs Most Relevant Components of the PVD&SLU System

1. Food production Extension

3. Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation LUP/LA; Sloping Land Research; Extension

5. Agric. and Forestry Research Sloping Land Research; Extension; JFM

6. Human Resources Development LUP/LA; Extension; Sloping Land Research; JFM

of 26

The procedures of each of the PVD&SLU components addresses the policies and strategies of the National Priority Programs indicated above. They would also be effective in implementing the programs and priorities to achieve the outputs as documented in the Government’s Strategy Vision for the Agricultural Sector.

9.3 Regulations

Regulations on Forest-Land Classification, Land Use Planning and Land Allocation have been drafted with the assistance of the LUP Sub-program. The regulations will be a valuable tool in facilitating the implementation of forest and land zoning at the national and provincial levels and LUP/LA at the district and village level. The adoption of the regulations will also facilitate the promulgation of practical guidelines and instructions for the implementation of these activities which are critical for sustainable forest and agricultural land use. Facilitation of their review and adoption is therefore a priority issue in facilitating sustainable forest-land use at village level

10. SUSTAINABILITY AND AFFORDABILITY

It is difficult to quantify sustainability and affordability without an economic assessment. However in the absence of such an assessment the following observations are made which indicate that the adoption of the procedures and methods of the components of the system may improve the potential for sustainability and enhance affordability.

10.1 Sustainability

10.1.1 Land Use Planning and Land Allocation

The LUP/LA procedures are sustainable as they have been adopted and institutionalised by the GOL for use through-out the country and will be applied in all areas. The LSFP program has been making adaptions to the eight stage procedure to include other important activities, including the secure storage of LUP/LA information and the establishment of Land Allocation Record Books at the DAFO level. These two activities are very important in maintaining permanent and lasting records of maps, reports, data and the land use certificates issued to families. Should they not be adopted in the procedures the future of the LUP/LA program will be in jeopardy because follow-up and monitoring work has indicated that these records are being damaged and/or lost in most cases. Sustainability of the program will therefore be enhanced if the GOL adopts these procedures.

10.1.2 Extension

The procedures and methods tested and described for participatory extension are very compatible with the GOL vision and the policy for the agriculture sector at provincial, district and village levels. The village administrative organisations, with assistance from district staff, will be responsible for preparing "whole village plans" which will be incorporated in District Plans. The village plans will be responsive to both GOL policy and community needs and opportunities. These plans will also be consistent with country agro-ecological zonings and village forest-land use zoning and agricultural land allocation. The extension procedures and methods support very well these GOL criteria because they are participatory, responsive to policy and provide for district extension support and follow-up for the village plans. They therefore have a high potential for sustainability if incorporated in regular GOL planning and village development procedures.

Another aim of the GOL vision and policy is to move towards integrated district level extension services comprised of the various rural development sectors, within which DAFO staff would play an important role. This policy includes developing a responsive, integrated and interdisciplinary extension service at district level. The participatory extension model fits this objective because it includes:

� A core process for preparing village plans based on participatory planning, and � An integrated extension support system which has four functions:

Village community strengthening Technology testing and development Technology dissemination Village finance provision and management.

of 26

The procedures and methods in the extension model for providing finance for village development activities uses S&L group ownership with limited and selective financial support from government or other sources. This has the effect of placing the responsibility for finance and credit management in the hands of villagers and provides the potential for reducing the amount of funding required from government or outside sources. This is perceived as a very cost effective and sustainable approach to financing village development activities. Village savings groups provide steppingstones and pathways to sustainable land use in areas where institutional forms of credit are not readily available.

10.1.3 Joint Forest Management

JFM is a sustainable approach because it involves villagers, DAFO and PAFO in forest management, has sustainable harvesting plans, provides tangible benefits for communities in return for efforts made in sustainable forest management and protection, while providing GOL with benefits from taxes and royalties. Staff also receive incentives for participating in the work. It provides sustainable forest protection simultaneously.

Conjecture exists concerning the compatibility of the JFM model in relation to the intent of the Forestry Law, one argument being that the approach does not distribute benefits from harvested timber widely enough outside the communities involved. Should this argument prevail the sustainability of the approach would be severely compromised.

However the JFM has other attributes which make it an attractive approach for involving villagers in sustainable production forest management while complying with government policy and legislation;

� Ownership of the forest resource is vested in the State � Management and use of the forest resource is decentralised to provincial, district and village level

stakeholders � JFM fosters livelihood development activity which has the potential to lessen pressure on forest

resources � Benefits from harvesting in any village are distributed between all villages involved in the JFM

production plan � Taxes and royalties collected by the Government can be distributed to villages outside the JFM

production forest area � Revenues from JFM have the potential to reduce the government rural development burden � Investments are made in village development and community infrastructure

10.1.4 Research

The Thong Khang Research Station which plays a primary role in sloping land research in shifting cultivation areas, has now been integrated into the Forestry Research Centre with the National Agricultural and Forestry Research Institute (NAFRI). This assures that it’s operation is not totally dependent on "Project" assistance as it will receive financial support from NAFRI for which a research strategy and long term plan is being developed. Thus this station will be able to make a continuing contribution to sloping land research in shifting cultivation areas.

10.2 Affordability

10.2.1 Research

The LSFP adaptive research-extension approaches make technology development and options more affordable because they are focused on real problems and needs identified with communities. The testing is done by research and extension staff with farmers simultaneously which reduces costs because land use options are being assessed by farmers while trials are proceeding.

10.2.2 Extension

The LSFP extension model encourages farming communities to express their perceived problems and opportunities, encourages farmers to participate in finding solutions to problems and to capitalise on opportunities by gaining access to resources. This encourages self-reliance and ownership which has the potential to reduce government inputs for extension. Extension inputs would therefore be relatively simple, affordable, focused and productive, and thus cost benefit effective.

of 26

The advocated "whole village" extension approach involves not only selected "model farmers" but a cross-section of farmers who show an interest in testing and evaluating promising technologies. Such an approach is compatible and consistent with the cost benefit effective approach successfully demonstrated in lowland irrigated farming systems by the Pilot Extension Project.

10.2.3 Land Use Planning and Land Allocation

The LUP/LA procedures themselves appear to be sustainable however the question of affordability is a concern. The comprehensive procedure for LUP/LA is relatively expensive if all stages are undertaken each time LUP/LA is conducted.

The identification of priorities for LUP/LA would permit flexibility in choosing an appropriate level of intervention. It would result in more effective use of available LUP/LA funds at district level. In areas of very low priority LUP/LA may not be necessary because little or no benefit will result from the effort and expense. In areas of very high priority resources could be concentrated and a higher level of intervention applied as the benefits will be substantial.

The table below provides an indication of how priorities could be established and appropriate levels of LUP/LA intervention.

Priority Description Appropriate Procedure Remarks

1. Reasonable staff resources available Critical area or focal area Very high land demands Very high population Land value high (economic cropping well established) Type 1 NBCA villages Obvious land degradation

Delineate village boundaries Complete land use zoning Prepare village agreements in groups of villages Undertake land allocation Intensive extension activity

Very high priority All steps in the LUP/LA procedure conducted. Extension is focused on management of zones, population management and agricultural land productivity.

2. Moderate staff resources available Semi-critical or focal area High land demands High population pressure Type 1 NBCA villages Some land degradation Economic cropping on the increase

Delineate village boundaries, Complete land use zoning in groups of villages Complete village agreements in groups of villages High extension activity

High priority Village management agreements are the framework for management planning Focus extension on management of land use zones and productivity in the agricultural land use zone LA is done after land use zone management systems are established

3. Scarce district resources Types 2 and 3 NBCA villages Semi-critical area Moderate land demands Moderate population pressure

Delineate village boundaries in groups of villages Complete land use zoning in groups of villages Moderate extension activity

Moderate priority

Establish land use management zones in villages and resolve land disputes

Land allocation can be planned for a later date

4 Very scarce district resources Very isolated subsistence level villages Non-critical area Low land demands Low population pressure Types 3 and 4 NBCA villages

Delineate village boundaries in groups of villagers Limited extension activity

Low Priority

Establish village management areas and resolve boundary disputes

Land allocation not necessary

The adoption of priority setting for LUP/LA would make the procedures and methods that have been developed more cost effective and affordable.

of 26

11. ADDITIONAL SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Land Use Planning and Land Allocation

Jones, P.R. (July 1995) Participatory Land Use Management Planning: Consultant’s Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry, Lao PDR.

Anon., (September, 1996) Participatory Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Training. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry, Lao PDR.

Hansen, P.K and Houmchitsavath Sodarak. (November 1996) Land Use and Demographic Conditions in the Target Areas of the Lao Swedish Forestry Program: Paper presented at the planning meeting on measurement of institutional development, Department of Forestry, Vientiane.

Hansen, P.K. and Houmchitsavath Sodarak, (November 1996) Land Use and Demographic Indicators for the Target Areas of Lao-Swedish Forestry Programme: Technical Report No. 4". Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Hansen, P.K. and Houmchitsavath Sodarak, (December 1996) Environment, Socio-Economic Conditions and Land-Use in Ban Thong Khang Sub-district Northern Laos: Technical Report No. 2. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (1997) Vang Khanan Village Agreement for the Management of Forest and Agricultural Land. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Fåhraeus, Liss-Björn, (May 1997) Bane Vang Khanan Agriculture or Forest Production or Both", First Draft. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones. P.R. (February 1997) Summary Report on A Model Building Exercise on Village Planning, Sieng Le Kok Village, Phalansay District, Savannakhet Province: Land Use Planning, Forest Management and Extension Components Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Palmkvist, Gösta (February 1997) Report on Land Survey Methods and Training in Participatory Land use Planning and Land Allocation", Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (April 1997) Proposed Workshop on Land Use Planning and Land Allocation. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Senthavy, S, Amphaychith, H and Jones, P.R. (July 1997) A Review of Problems in Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Processes, Procedures and Methods: Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (September 3-4 1997) Conference on Land-Use Development in Luang Prabang Province, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

P.R. Jones, Sysomvang, S, Senthavy, S (October 1997) Manual on Participatory Land Use Planning and Land Allocation, 1st Edition. Ministry of Agriculture, Department of Forestry, National Office for Forest Inventory and Planning.

Anon., (October 1997) Technical Booklet 1: The Processes and Procedures for Participatory Land Use Planning and Land Allocation. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (November 1997) Application and Use of Data and Maps in Strategic and other Planning of Forestry and Land Use in Lao PDR, SLU Umea, Sweden. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

(Olsson, B, Sandewall, M, and Sandewall, K (February 1998) People’s Options on Forest Land Use: Working Paper No 2- Lao PDR. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (April 1998) Learning Lessons from Land Allocation in the NTFP Project: Comments provided by the Land Use Planning Sub-Programme, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Jones, P.R. (May 1998) Report on Land Use Planning Exercise in Ban Na Vene Rural Development Project Zone. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (July 1998) Options for Forest Land Use Planning and Land Allocation: Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sysomvang, S, Senthavy, S and Jones, P.R. (August 1998) A Review of Problems in Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Processes, Procedures and Methods. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Rantanen, M and Skage, P (August 1998) Test of an Agricultural Land Use Parcel Register: Consultant’s Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Bloch, P. (September 1998). Assessment of the Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Subprogram Activities: Consultant’s Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry. (in association with Sida and the Land Tenure Centre, University of Winconsin, Madison, USA)

Noven, J. (September1998) Field report 1, Monitoring and Evaluation in Savannakhet and Salavane Provinces August/September 1998. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (October 1998) Technical Booklet No. 2: The Preparation of Participatory Village Forest and Agricultural Land Management Agreements. Land Use Planning Subprogram, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (November 1998) Monitoring Guidelines: Procedures for Undertaking Field Monitoring Activities. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (November 1998) Progress in Developing a Model for Monitoring and Evaluation of the Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Activities: A Status Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (November 1998) Strategies for Improving Land Use Planning and Land Allocation in the Lao PDR for Decentralising and Devolving Forest Land Management: Paper presented by MAF at the International Seminar on Decentralisation and Devolution of Forest Management in Asia and the Pacific, Davao City, Philippines, 30th November to 4th December 1998.

Noven, J. (November 1998) Progress in Monitoring and Evaluation of the Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Activities: Status Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (November 1998) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Procedures: A 5 minute policy level video. LUP Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program in association with Champa Documentation.

Anon., (November 1998) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Procedures: A 14 minute video for district and village levels. LUP Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program in association with Champa Documentation.

Noven, J. (December 1998) Field Report 2, Monitoring and Evaluation in Savannakhet Province December 1998. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (December 1998) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation; Government Policy, LSFP Approach and Progress in Savannaketh Province: Paper Presented at Provincial Workshop, Savannakhet. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (February 1999) Na Vene Rural Development Project; Discussion on the Land Use Situation. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (February 1999) Field Report 3: Monitoring and Evaluation in Nan district, Luang Phabang Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (February 1999) Report on Land Use Planning Exercise in the Villages of Ban Katep, Ban Som Sanuk and Ban Norn Samlarn, Vilabouly District, Phou Xang He NBCA, Savannaketh Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Anon., (March 1999) Technical Booklet 4. Procedures for Storage and Protection of Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Information: Land Use Planning Sub Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (April 1999) Brief Overview of Available Digital Map Data Produced in Lao PDR. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (April 1999) Report on Phase 2 of a Land Use Planning Exercise in the Villages of Ban Na Vene, Ban Na Ngeun and Ban Na Samphan. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J (July 1999) Monitoring and Evaluation in Xieng Ngeun and Hongsa Districts, May and June 1999, Field Report Number 4. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (July 1999) Report on Stage 3 of a Land Use Planning Exercise in the Villages of Ban Na Vene, Ban Na Ngeun and Ban Na Samphan, Pieng District, Sayabury Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (August 1999) Monitoring and Evaluation in Lao Ngam and Phin Districts. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Rosback, J. (August 1999) Summary Report on Development of a Temporary Land Use Certificate Register. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry. (in association with Swedesurvey AB, Sweden.

Noven, J. (August 1999) Description of Model for Monitoring. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (August 1999) Technical Booklet 5: Establishing Temporary Land Use Certificate Registers. Land Use Planning Sub Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (August 1999) Technical Booklet 6: Establishing Computerised Temporary Land Use Records at Provincial Forestry Offices. Land Use Planning Sub Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (August 1999) Field report 5, Monitoring and Evaluation in Lao Ngam and Phin Districts, June 1999. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (September 1999) Reviewing Land Allocation Documents to Facilitate the Land Registration Process: Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (October 1999) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Approaches: Discussion Notes Prepared for the Luang Namtha Provincial Land Use Planning and Allocation Workshop, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (October 1999) Description of the Participatory Land Use Planning Model. Model Consolidation Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sawathvong, S, Leuangkhamma, T and Jones, P.R. (November 1999) The Development of Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Approaches and Methods for Protected Areas: Paper presented at the Second Regional Forum for South East Asia on the IUNC World Commission for Protected Areas, Pakse, December 6th to 11th

1999.

Jones, P.R. (November 1999) Development of an Agriculture Land Use Plan Demonstration Area: Report on Visit to Number 10 Village, Xieng Ngeun District, Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (January 2000) Monitoring and Evaluation in Xieng Ngeun, Nan, Hongsa and Phin Districts, November-December 1999: Field Report Number 6. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (January 2000) Summary of Achievements in Northern Target Areas; LUP Core Team. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Jones, P.R. (January 2000) Description of Participatory Land Use Planning Model in NBCAs. Model Consolidation Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (January 2000) Establishing Temporary Land Use Certificate Records at DAFO Level. Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (February 2000) Field report 7: Monitoring and Evaluation in Phalanxay and Atsaphone Districts, Savannakhet, Jan 2000. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (March 2000) Documentation on Forest/Land Classification, Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Regulations, Draft. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, in association with the Regulation Drafting Committee, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (March 2000) Monitoring and Evaluation of Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Activities: Technical Booklet No.8. Land Use Planning Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (April 2000) Land Allocation or Land Use Zoning: What is the priority? Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (April 2000) Storage and Record Keeping of Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Data. Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (April 2000) Impact Monitoring in the Land Use Planning Sub Programme. Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (May 2000) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Experiences, Lessons and Issues from the Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Phase 4. Discussion Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (May 2000) Field Report 8: Monitoring of Farmer Level Impacts from LA, Land Use Changes and Conservation Practices. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Keoketsy, B., Bounthabandith, S and Noven, J. (September 2000) Monitoring and Evaluation of Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Impacts: Final Report Results for 19998-2000. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (October 2000) Technical Booklet 9: Procedures and Methods for Land Use Planning and Land Allocation in National Biodiversity Conservation Areas (NBCAs). Land Use Planning Sub Program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Technical Booklet No. 7: Demonstrating Agricultural Land Use Practices in the Uplands. Land Use Planning Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Technical Booklet No.3: Procedures and Methods for Village Forest and Agricultural Land Use Zoning. Land Use Planning Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (June 1999) Monitoring Method Development Activity; A Summary of Observations and Results from No 7 and No 10 Villages in Xieng Ngeun District of Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program.

Extension

Bott, T (July 1996) Inception Report on Rural Credit: Short-term Review, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Bott, T (November 1996) Final Report on Rural Credit: Short-term Review, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Lundberg, J.O. (1997) Participation in Rural Credit Schemes for Household and Local Development. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

McGowan, M (May 1997) Assessment of Small Scale Irrigation Projects of the Lao Swedish Forestry

of 26

Programme in Lao PDR, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J. (June 1997) Assessment of Promotion Bank Activity in Lao-Swedish Forestry Programme Target Areas. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Flint, C (December 1995 to July 1997) Field Visit Reports. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J (August 1997) Final Report on Community Credit. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sodarak, H and Hansen, P.K. (September 3-4 1997) Improving Land-Use Extension in Luang Prabang Province: Paper presented at the conference on Land-Use Development in Luang Prabang Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., ( ) Village Profile Data Collection Form; Lao and English versions. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J. (October 1998), Methodologies Development for Village Financial Services: Background Paper, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J. (October 1998) Proposed Pilot Co-operative Activity with APB - Methodologies in Village Financial Services: Consultants Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J. (December 1998) LSFP Extension Approach-Village Financial Services-Savannaketh Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noven, J. (May 1999) Exchange Visit to Vietnam Sweden Mountain Rural Development Programme: Travel Report, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (May 1999) Towards Integration in Agricultural/Forestry Development in Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (February 2000) Report on Extension and Institutional Strengthening in LSFP, Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (March 2000) Report on Extension and Institutional Strengthening in LSFP, Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (May 2000) Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Experiences, Lessons and Issues from the Lao Swedish Forestry Program Phase 4: Paper prepared for NAFRI Research Strategy Development Workshop. LUP Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M (June 2000) Report on Extension and Institutional Strengthening in LSFP, Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (July 2000) Report on Extension and Institutional Strengthening in LSFP, Luang Prabang. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (4th August, 2000) Sloping Land Extension-Finance Methodology: An Extension Guide, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Trethewie, R.J. (January, 2001) Procedures and Guidelines for Participatory (Full Cycle) Extension: An Extension Manual, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January, 2001) Experiences and Progress in Village Development and Land Use, 1996-2000: A whole village narrative case study report, Number 10 village, Xieng Ngeun District, Luang Prabang Province: Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January, 2001) Experiences and Progress in Village Development and Land Use, 1996-2000: A whole village narrative case study report, Xieng Le Kok village, Phalansay District, Savannakhet Province. Lao

of 26

Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January, 2001) Experiences and Progress in Village Development and Land Use, 1996-2000: A whole village narrative case study report, Nam Thap village, Hongsa District, Sayabouly Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Organisation and Implementation of Village Savings and Credit Groups: A poster presentation on village extension work. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Extension in Sloping Land Situations-Ban Silalek, Xieng Ngeun Diostrict, Luang Prabang Province: A poster presentation on village extension work. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Extension in Lowland Paddy Situations-Ban Nathong, Palansay District, Savannakhet Province: A poster presentation on village extension work. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Extension in Upland Plateau Farming Situations-Ban Inpaeng, Laongam District, Salavane Province: A poster presentation on village extension work. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Extension Response Functions to Support the Participatory Village Development Process: A poster presentation on conducting participatory extension support activities. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Gender in National Bio-diversity Conservation Areas (NBCAs): A poster presentation on village gender mainstreaming work. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Training Course Curriculum Module 1- ( ): A course curriculum document prepared by the Northern and Southern Regional Training Centres. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Training Course Curriculum Module 2- ( ): A course curriculum document prepared by the Northern and Southern Regional Training Centres. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 2001) Training Course Curriculum Module 3-Participatory Extension: A five segment course curriculum document prepared by the Northern and Southern Regional Training Centres. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sloping Land Research

Sodarak, H. (April 1996) Introduction to the Shifting Cultivation Sub-Programme - Technical Report No.1. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Hansen, P.K. and Sodarak, H. (December 1996) Agroforestry Research for Development in Shifting Cultivation Areas of Laos - Technical Report No. 5. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Hansen, P.K. (December 1996) Agriculture Research of the Shifting cultivation Sub-Program: Follow-up on a Consultancy in 1992-Technical Report No. 6. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Hansen, P.K. and Sodarak, H. (February 6-7 1997) Potential and Constraints on Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation in Lao P.D.R: Paper presented at the "Stakeholder Workshop on Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (February 1997) Proceedings of the Shifting Cultivation Workshop-February 6-7 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sodarak, H. and Hansen, P.K. (April 1997) Research Agenda of the Shifting Cultivation Research Sub-Programme, Lao P.D.R.: Paper prepared for the workshop on "Research Agenda on Rural Development for the Mountain Areas of Northern Vietnam", April 22-23 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Hansen, P.K., Sodarak, H. and Savathong, S. (July 1997) Teak Production by Shifting Cultivators in Northern Lao P.D.R.: Technical Report No.9. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Hansen, P.K. (August 1997) Animal Husbandry in Shifting Cultivation Societies of Northern Laos: Technical Report No.10. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sodarak, H., Va Ya, Souliyavongsy, S, Ditsaphone, C and Hansen, P.K. (August 1997) Livestock Development by the Shifting Cultivation Research Project in Luang Prabang Province, Lao P.D.R.: Technical Report No.11. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sodarak, H. and Hansen, P.K. (September 3-4 1997) Shifting Cultivation Development in Luang Prabang Province: Paper presented at the conference on Land-Use Development in Luang Prabang Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Sodarak, H. and Overgoor, P. (February 1998) Shifting Cultivation Research Subprogramme: Its institutional arrangements, constraints and future vision. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tan-Kim-Yong, U. (July 1998) A Guidebook for Socio-economic Research in Development and Natural Resource Management. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tan-Kim-Yong, U. (August 1998) Socio Economic Research Development and Linkages. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Overgoor, P. and Somprachan, (December 1998) Past Upland Research in Savannaketh Province and Proposals for It’s Integration with Extension. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tan KimYong, U. (September 1999) Socio Economic Research: Mission Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Jones, P.R. (August 1998) Farming Systems and Cropping Systems in Lao PDR. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (December 1998) List of reports produced by the Component, including reports in English and Lao languages-period 1996 - 1998 (LSFP Phase IV). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tan Kim Yong, U. (May 1999) Shifting Cultivation Research Sub Programme: Socioeconomic Consultant’s Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Tuckson, M. (October 1999) Manual of Sloping Land Extension-Finance Model. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noochdumrong, T. (July 1999) Manual of Agro Foresty Research, Development and Extension. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noochdumrong, T. (September 1999) Agro Forestry Research in Lao PDR: Final short term Consultancy Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noochdumrong, T. (September 1999) Manual on Agroforestry Research, Development and Extension. (English version). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Noochdumrong, T. (September 1999) Manual on Agro-forestry Research, Development and Extension. (Thai version). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Nochdumrong, T. (February 2000) Training on Agroforestry Research and Extension: Consultant’s Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (February 1999) Draft paper 4: A Summary and Analysis of Experiences with Onfarm Research in Target Areas of LSFP: Paper prepared for Annual On-farm Research Workshop, 1st - 4th February 1999, Thong Khang Station, Luang Prabang. Shifting Cultivation Research Subprogram, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Anon ., (February 2000) Draft paper 6: Present and Future Research Agenda and Strategy for the Thong Khang Station: Paper prepared for the Consultative Workshop on Forestry Research Agenda and Strategy for the Next 5 - 10 years, Vientiane, February 22nd - 25th 2000. Shifting Cultivation Research Sub-program, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Key Shifting Cultivation Research Sub-Program Reports

TR 1 Agro-forestry Research for Development in Shifting Cultivation Areas of Laos, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1996. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 2 Environment, Socio-economic Conditions and Land-use in Ban Thong Khang Subdistrict, Northern Laos, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1996. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 3 Land allocation - The Experiences of the Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation Sub-Programme, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1998. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 4 Land-use and Demographic Indicators for the Target Areas of the Lao Swedish Forestry Programme, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1996. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 5 Selected Socio-economic Data of Luang Prabang Province, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 6 Potentials and Constraints on Shifting Cultivation Stabilisation in Northern Laos. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 7 Shifting Cultivation Development in Luang Prabang Province. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 8 Livestock Development by the Shifting Cultivation Research Project in Luang Prabang Province, Lao PDR.. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 9 Teak Production by Shifting Cultivators in Northern Lao PDR. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 10 Animal Husbandry in Shifting Cultivation Societies in Northern Lao, PDR, SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

TR 11 Shifting Cultivation and the Use of Firewood as Energy Source. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1997. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (April 1999) Draft Paper 5: Results and Conclusions of On-farm Trials Carried Out in the Target Areas of LSFP from 1996-98. SCR - Sub-Programme, 1999. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Joint Forest Management 1 and 2

Muraille, B. (November 1996) Joint Forest Management in Lao P.D.R. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Bailey, S. (December 1996) Village Forest Management Planning and Joint Forest Management: Consultant’s Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (December 1996) A study of the Lao Institutional Framework for Resource Use and Management Affecting Villages Around Dong Kapho State Production Forest, Savannakhet Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Muraille, B. (January 1997) Ban Sienglekhok Survey Report. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Bailey, S. (June 1997) Village Forest Management Planning as a Focus for the Development of District and Provincial Capacity for Forest Management?: Discussion Paper. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26

Manivong, K. and Muraille, B. (July 1997) Partnership for Forest Management: Joint Forest Management in Savannakhet, Lao P.D.R. Paper presented at international seminar on Community Forestry at the Cross-roads: Reflections and Future Directions in the Development of Community Forestry, July 1997, Bangkok. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (September 1997) Assessment of the Joint Forest Management Project, Dongkapho, Savannakhet Province: Report by the Dong Kapho Joint Forest Management Committee. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (November 1997) Dong Kapho State production Forest; 5-10 Years Harvesting Plan, (translated from Lao). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (January 1998) Summary Report of JFM Evaluation Mission - JFM Strategy Meeting. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Kastberg, B. (March 1998) Introduction and Evaluation of the Minature Sawmill "Solosagen" for Small Scale Production in Lao PDR.

Anon., (August 1998) Forest Protection Contract Model 1 (JFM). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Anon., (August 1998) Forest Protection Contract Model 2 (JFM). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Manivong, K and Muraille, B. (September 1998) Managing the Forest with Villages. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Carle, J and Southavilay, T. (November 1998) Forest Products Marketing Study Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam (for JFM/LSFP and FOMACOP). Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

RECOFTC, (November 1998) Comparison of Village Forestry Planning Models Used in Laos. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Muraille, B. (December 1998) Dong Kapho Joint Forest Management Test. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Makarabhirom, Tavorn, Kittveskul, Raintree, J. (February 1999) Village Forest Management Plan, Xienglekok Village, Phalanxai District, Savannaket Province. RECOFTC, Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

RECOFTC, (January 1999) Field Manual of Participatory Village Forest Assessment and Planning. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

RECOFTC, (February 1999) Village Forest Management Plan, Xieng Le Khok Village, Phalansai District, Savannaketh Povince, JFM. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

Muraille, B (May 1999) Mission Report on JFM, Savannakhet Province. Lao Swedish Forestry Program, Department of Forestry.

of 26