Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
-
Upload
ulysses-n-mordekai-arheimo -
Category
Documents
-
view
223 -
download
0
Transcript of Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
-
8/13/2019 Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
1/5
Stakeholder 1: wwf
-- they basically wanted a critical report about the highway, because of the
negative environmental impactof the highway. They wanted me to find
social problems that could enable them to justify them pressing for "less
roads".
--to save:the saola (indochinese flagship species), also tiger, and a number
of less known species (gibbons, langurs etc.) they seemed to be primarilly
concerned with mammals.. animals... less with trees (( they did not mark out
any tree species as flagship species ))
-- their allies:the vietnames forest protection department who were given
various resources by the wwf (better cars, better euipment, per diems,education for rangers, "overhead money" flowing to the top of the
department etc. !tc.)
-- (ote# in this area the forestry department were not allowed to e$ploit
timber, the area was protected because the ministry of infrastructure and
industry (( %% )) used it for hydroelectric development)
-- the problems:
&unting.
local and non-indigenous hunters, commercial hunting increases as the
infrastructure improves... roads fragmenting animal and plant habitats
'hifting cultivation
-- local groups are shifting cultivators, longstanding debate ... national
governments have for over fifty years blamed shifting cultivators this is
core theme (( refer back to scott, laos, deforestation, climate,
indonesia, greenhouse gases ))
() wwf and shifting cultivation conservationists and shifting cultivation
Explain the local situation:
-
8/13/2019 Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
2/5
*educe shifting cultivation provide alternatives while reducing alternatives
dont work, reduced shifting cultivation area leads to permanent
"grassification" of forest the fallow system collapses when vegetation is not
allowed to regenerate forest (critical threshold of sustainability) villagers
without sufficient agricultural production cut timber illegally and hunt more
intensively to compensate for lack of rice
he povert! "uestion
-- +rundtland "predicts" -- poor people e$ploit environment
hat we see, however#
-- attempt to modernise agriculture -- cash crops etc, new land regulations,
"rational land use" decreased food sufficiency increased dependency oncash environmental destruction
#mportant "uestion: how should we define povert! $
--overty is typically measured in terms of money (both, /, world bank,
vietnamese govt). 0 monetary sum represents the amount necessary to buy
certain products in the market.
-- if no money absolute poverty
-- if less money than certain sum "food poverty" (not enough money to +/1 a
certain uantity of rice etc.
-- povert! is then used as justification for changing agriculture cash crop
and production forestry (( pulpwood ))
2utta krahn better food in remote villages
Statistics, however, typically show a very small incremental "improvement"
in every respect.. year by year (( even though people 0T to be 33*
because they receive more benefits the village headman is pressurised to
take away one poor household per year....
-
8/13/2019 Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
3/5
%igger "uestions political ecolog! &&&
-- forest access whose forest whose definitions what the
definitions entail
(( ' %*+ E S##.' */0##. #00'E 2#*/3E ))
-- when land is defined as "forest" it then automatically becomes the property
of the state (( the state can then sell it etc. ))
-- theory becomes science becomes politics and power scientific definitions
of forest % or political definitions %
-- what is the baseline landscape %% if the baseline is "pristine forest" then
locals have no right to disturb it. Typically biogeographical maps will define
areas according to the imagined "baseline" rather than the actual historical
reality
-- can the locals inhabit the landscape without destroying it% 4an they be
"just as good and smart" as the modern conservationists%
-- the eternal forest conflict (( goes back all the way to robin hood sherwoodalso medieval germany peasants rights to forest access vs the lords right
to "game" and or biodiversity
4wf paradoxes
5et funding primarilly from large organisations such as world bank and adb...
5oal of world bank and 06+ is typically to develop infrastructure as much as
possible ...
-
8/13/2019 Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
4/5
-
8/13/2019 Consultancy Lecture1 Edited
5/5
Entering 0aos: government timber, spirit forests
-- consultancy months as "T!7 advisor"
-- same problems ... as above
-- working for an organisation that purported to want to make 8aotian
forestry "sustainable" sponsored by world bank and finnish government
((sweden has financed similar stuff))
-- a foreigninternational organisation, paying villagers a lumpsum of money,
to agree to have their forests cut by the laotian government ... ((no profit to
the organisation almost nothing to villagers))
-- this is probably a very typical third world forestry scenario the govt can cut
timber in any forest it wants, or give forests to private entitiees, does not
need to compensate local people.
-- project wanted to make system more "transparent" and more
"systematical" etc. 9t wanted to be able to make villagers agree completely
and voluntarily ...
-- as such i was actuall! instructed to find out 5the truth5 about local
forest usage &&& - pro6ect did not want to take land considered b!
locals as agricultural or important .2 land, or spirit forest etc&
-- problem: the local staff of the pro6ect were the laotian forestr!
department ((foreigners not down on the ground))& he! were not
interested in asking local people about customar! usage, for
decades the! have simpl! told the villagers what to do &&& laos is not
democrac! &&& etc etc& 7ou dont have the right to oppose government
policies and plans&&&