Patrick Lucas

Back in Canada

2007-05-15T13:36:00.000-07:00

Well, it's finally happened I have found myself back in Canada after more than two years of working and living in Lao. Now I get to have the fun of experiencing home shock. First thoughts, everything is very big here...cars, parking lots, grocery stores, cereal boxes...waist lines. Everything. Currently I have no real idea as to what's going to happen next. My grand plan of having a plan has gone up in smoke due to a startling lack of planning--there never was a plan. Ah well, I think I'm going to take the next few weeks, relax, do some research and then figure out what I want to do next. For sure, my foriegn adventures are hardly over. I know for sure that I would like to continue working overseas and facilitating community based efforts in identifying environmental threats and risks, and working towards developing practical and effective plans and strategies to address them. Honestly, I'm hooked with the south and I certainly see myself in Lao again in the near future.

In the next few months keep an eye out, both in Canada and overseas for new activities including publication of articles of my experiences, a photo exhibit with Paul on our photodocumentary in Lao last year, and more projects. I will be sure to keep everyone updated. Until then, sok dii lae pob gan mai. Good luck and we'll meet again. Patrick

Shifting Perspectives—Conclusion

2007-02-03T19:28:00.000-08:00

Finally, this brings us to the second Development Riddle, which is: When is a problem not a problem? Answer: When it is part of the solution.

Understanding a social system is not unlike looking at a computer drafted 3 dimensional picture. You may remember these were all the rage about ten years back. At first glance they appeared non-sensical, chaotic, a meaningless mess of objects and patterns. But, if you look long enough, and adjust your perception or perspective accordingly, an image will emerge. Understanding shifting cultivation within the contemporary context of Lao is a very similar process. Once you look past the smoke and the fires, the charred and burnt fields and trees left behind, you can begin to see it in a very different light. Rather than being backward and primitive, shifting cultivators have developed highly in-depth agro-ecological knowledge and management systems that have resulted in Lao having some of the highest biodiversity levels in south east Asia, an incredible genetic heritage of rice species perfectly suited to the local growing conditions and environments, not too mention a huge abundance and diversity of non-timber forest products, all of which make a substantial argument that shifting cultivation can be sustainable. The government of Lao, and all actors and stakeholders should appreciate this as highly valuable asset that is quickly being lost, not as a threat. For too long, shifting cultivators have been blamed for environmental degradation and have been resettled and made to alter their livelihood strategies regardless of whether there were adequate or viable alternatives or whether the promised services and infrastructure could be provided. The underlying assumptions have been that shifting cultivators are invariably poor and therefore any move to improve their lives will inevitably result in greater prosperity. Unfortunately, this has not been the case. These assumptions ignore the vast natural wealth that many indigenous communities possess within their traditional environs. Moved into new communities, cut off from traditional land use practices, provided inadequate land with little training or extension workers and credit, many families and whole communities are falling into new poverty cycles that are difficult to reverse or escape. All of which is leading to higher levels of environmental degradation. Obviously, this cycle must end and development and government agencies need to start looking at shifting cultivation in a new light.

Back in the day, while fighting their “Secret War” in Lao, the CIA had a saying, “If you think you understand the situation, you simply don’t have all the facts!” The fact is that Lao, like any country or culture anywhere in the world I suppose, is far more complicated and dynamic than even a 3D picture. Anytime you think you are starting to figure things out, some little fact jumps out and shatters everything you built. I won’t presume to truly understanding the entire situation as there is no way that I could ever have all the facts. But I have identified a few important facts that can guide future action.

1. Shifting cultivation, if done properly with traditional or effective contemporary soil erosion methods, and sufficiently long fallow periods, can be not only environmentally benign, but beneficial by encouraging new growth and higher biodiversity.

2. Shifting Cultivators do not deserve the stigma or stereotype of being either backwards or poor if they are successfully practicing their traditional methods. (Successful in my opinion, for this circumstance, being that they are meeting the requirements of the first point, while supplying all the nutritional and material needs they require for sustainable economic and social security.) Shifting Cultivators possess in-depth agro-ecological knowledge that, while it should not replace solid scientific knowledge and research, it should be respected and viewed as an asset.

3. Shifting Cultivation does not equal environmental degradation—so long as it meets the requirements of the first two points. There are other sources of degradation that must be addressed together, including: pioneering cultivation, deforestation, large rubber plantations, intensifying agriculture in the low lands, all of which result in soil erosion and sedimentation, and drastic changes in the hydrological regimes of watersheds (ie. Flooding, droughts, etc.)

So where does all this leave us?

It’s one thing to say that the government, NGOs, and development agencies should stop demonizing shifting cultivation and view it as an asset: a major barrier that must be crossed, but what are they supposed to do then? Seems to me to there are plenty of people around doing this first part, but I have yet to see any concrete actions plans, strategies or criteria for planners to work with to actually start integrating in a sound manner into the contemporary planning process and agricultural landscape. All of this assuming of course that shifting cultivators want to keep practicing shifting cultivation. As always, it’s easy to criticize and point out mistakes, it’s a completely different situation altogether to come up with feasible and practical solutions. This is the next step and the entry point for planners, such as myself, have to step up to the plate.

Fortunately, there are some people and agencies who are working on this issue, and within my limited time and experience in Lao I have begun to gather some ideas to approach this issue. Firstly, there are a few preconditions that must be met. Some of these include:

There must be a recognition and understanding by all stakeholders and agencies that:
a. Shifting cultivation with the appropriate fallow periods and practices is not inherently environmentally destructive or unsustainable
b. That without viable and feasible alternatives and means shifting cultivators cannot be expected to change their practices and that shifting cultivation can remain a reasonable and sustainable means of sustenance
c. Adequate land and low population densities conditions must exist to allow for environmentally acceptable practices. (Some have suggested areas with less than 20 persons per 1 km2, may be an acceptable population density to allow for sufficient fallow periods…assuming there are no other practices or land uses in the area…not likely for most locations.)

As I said before, there is a growing awareness and consensus among planners (both Lao and foreigners) that the eradication of shifting cultivation is not only undesirable under current economic and social condition, but highly unlikely for the foreseeable future. In fact, the government of Lao has begun to change its language from a program of “eradication” to “stabilization” wherein shifting cultivators are encouraged to change, but are allowed to practice in limited areas as long as it does not encroach on current forest covered areas. Regardless, I have compiled a short list of strategies and objectives I have been encouraging people to consider throughout my tenure as project coordinator for the Nam Ko Watershed Project, these include:

1. Improve Land Tenure, Land use planning & allocation.
Existing land entitlements in Lao are weak and routinely ignored by government officials. It is far more likely that farmers will engage in sustainable agricultural practices if they have a more secure knowledge that they will have access to the land over a set period of time. Also, by improving upon the land use planning and allocation process, the government will be able to alleviate conflicts and deal with environmental problems more effectively.

2. Improve Fallow Periods & Recognize Fallow as a legitimate form of land use.
Currently, the government of Lao has a regulation in place that if a farmer does not use his land for a period of three years (ie. Allows it to go fallow), than he or she will use their land use certificate. By recognizing fallow as a form of land use, they will provide more opportunities for the regeneration of soils and harvesting of non-timber forest products.

3. Implement development programs that are people centered.
Many development projects have been implemented in a top-down manner focusing on broad development goals that have little to do with the needs and realities of local communities. Local residents should define and establish needs and criteria for development as well as evaluating successes.

4. Ensure provision of viable alternatives to shifting agriculture
Should upland communities choose to relocate and shift from traditional agricultural practices, this should only be done when there are viable and feasible alternatives. Obviously, this is a classic “Chicken and the egg situation”. The government, and development agencies need to recognize that this process will not happen overnight and that traditional methods should not be cut off or disallowed until alternatives are firmly in place and providing for all the needs and requirements of the people that were available from traditional practices and more.

As I have said, this is an extremely complicated situation, and I’m sure that within a few years time, or even in a few months, my own understanding and perspective of the situation will change and continue to evolve…or at least I hope so. I can say with some confidence that I have been learning thus far, as when I look back on what I thought to be true in the past…it was, indeed, pretty much completely wrong.

Community Mapping, Participatory Landscape Analysis & GIS Training Workshop

2007-01-27T00:10:00.000-08:00

Tired. Very tired. I have just spent the last two weeks conducting a Geographical Information Systems (GIS) training workshop with my office, PSTEO, and some people from the District Agriculture and Forestry Office (DAFO). I have never seen my Lao counterparts get so excited and put so much effort into any activity we have conducted before. Usually, when you hold training, people tend to show up around 9am (if you scheduled to start at 8am), take a half an hour coffee break around 10am, and leave for lunch around 11:30. The afternoon usually gets going around 2 or 2:30 and everyone disappears around 4. This time around, people were showing up at 8am, no coffee break, and not leaving for lunch until 12:30! They were back like clockwork by 1:30 and many days we didn’t leave the office until 6 or even 7pm. Pretty incredible to say the least. It’s been a lot of fun as a result but very tiring as we have been keeping this schedule for the last 12 days straight.

The objectives of the training were as follows:

To provide participants with a basic understanding of the theory and practice of Geo-informatics and remote sensing
To provide participants with basic understanding and knowledge in the use of Arcview 3.2a (a GIS software package used for making maps and displaying spatial data)
To enable participants to conduct participatory community mapping (PCM) in villages with respect to land use and watershed management
To enable participants to correlate and confirm data taken from the PCM activities using baseline spatial data taken from external sources, and by using a Global positioning system.
To provide participants and PSTEO and DAFO the means and capacity to integrate basic GIS skills and knowledge into the planning and implementation processes regarding land use planning and watershed management

Activities

The first week we spent in a meeting room at the PSTEO offices with a GIS expert we flew up from Vientiane from the National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute provided an introduction to GIS and using Arcview to make simple maps. Participants learned how to:

Create maps in arcview using base line data from NAFRI showing watershed boundaries and catchments, watershed classification, infrastructure, hydrology, land use planning, geo-referencing data, and displaying all this data in map layouts.

The second week, we headed out to a village (Ban phonhom) to conduct the PCM and participatory landscape analysis aspects of the training. Participatory mapping is conducted by using large (A0) base topography maps developed showing a digital elevation model with hill shading and contours. Over this way lay a transparent piece of paper and then work with the villagers to draw the village boundaries and all current land use activities. Also, the training workshop participants went into the field with the villagers and, using a clinometer, compass, and gps unit they learned to calculate slope and identify areas of the village that were susceptible to high erosion and sedimentation and thus potential risk areas to watershed functions and services. This took three days and ended, of course, with a big lao hai drinking party. (who would a thought!)

Once the field work was completed it was back to the office to digitize the maps we had made in the field. This is done by geo-referencing the transparent maps in Arcview overlaid with the gps data. What you end up with is a digital map of the transparent maps made by the villagers, which we can then overlay with the data given to us by NAFRI. This is what we just finished doing. The next step after the training will be to take all this data and use it to develop future strategies and land use and watershed management plans.

Overall, I have to say this has been my favorite workshop so far and can also say my own knowledge of GIS and arcview has increased tenfold.

Shifting Perspectives Continued...

2007-01-16T20:51:00.000-08:00

One night, while dining over “sin-daat” (a form of Lao BBQ) with a colleague, we were discussing this very situation when my friend asked me a simple, yet poignant question, “How is it that a form of agriculture such as the shifting cultivation, which has practiced by the Khmu people in this area for the last 400 to 600 years, was suddenly deemed un-sustainable?” Of course, as usual, I had no answer. I knew one thing for certain: I needed to find out. For me this was the starting point when my perspectives and understanding of upland agriculture began to shift.

Shifting Cultivation in Laos-traditional and current circumstances
Shifting cultivation, as it has been traditionally practiced by the Khmu, and other ethnic groups in the north of Lao, is far more complicated than the simple images portrayed by slash and burn.

Firstly, it is important to understand why upland agriculture is necessary to begin with. Oudomxay, like the rest of the country, is a highly mountainous area, comprising around 80% of the total land area. The geography is characterized by steep sloops, rugged terrain, and very little lowlands and flood plains. The fact of the matter is that Oudomxay has very few options or viable alternatives to cultivating upland areas. Even if they cultivated every square inch of lowland areas for rice paddies (they would have to get rid of all the towns, roads, etc to do so) and managed to raise production levels by 20% or more, they would still be faced with rice shortages to meet the demands of a growing population. This means that upland cultivation, in one form or another, will remain apart of the agricultural landscape, and a crucial aspect of the people’s livelihood strategies for some time to come.

The fact that shifting cultivation has been stigmatized and associated with poverty and “backwardness” is a classic example of what has come to be called environmental racism: the placement of blame for environmental degradation on often marginalized ethnic minorities. There is a danger of course of oversimplifying or romanticizing the lives of shifting cultivators. Upland agriculture, though an effective livelihood strategy, is a difficult one. I once asked the Phorban (village chief) in Ban Tangnuey if he felt the village was better off living in the valley bottom doing sedentary agriculture as opposed to their traditional lifestyle in the nearby hills. He answered that yes, he did feel the village was better off. Why? Because living on a hill is difficult he replied. The fact is that many of the villages I have visited and worked in usually expressed a willingness to move away from shifting cultivation if provided the opportunity. They would like to practice different forms of agriculture; they would like access to schools, hospitals and infrastructure. The question is how the programs are carried out and what their true intentions are. I have come to suspect that the efforts to eradicate shifting cultivation have less to do with “improving” the people’s lives than getting them out of areas that are rich in other resource values such as timber, mining, and cash crop plantations. This leads us to another key point, that even if shifting cultivation was recognized as a viable form of agriculture, the fact is the Khmu people live in a very different socio-economic environment than they did in the past. There is a much higher degree of competition over land uses. Shifting cultivation, as practiced in the past, meant that people had to move around every 20 years or so…this may not be possible with a growing population and demand for cash crops and resources.

Seeking out the Environmental Culprits
So, if shifting cultivation isn’t the cause of all the environmental degradation, what is?

Well, let’s first clarify that there isn’t one single cause of environmental degradation. Secondly, it’s important also to clarify specifically what environmental degradation are we speaking of. My research with the Oudomxay Provincial Science Technology & Environment Office in the Ko River watershed, along with a growing body of secondary research being conducted by numerous domestic and international research institutes, has provided a fairly comprehensive picture of the state of the environment with respect to watershed functions and services. (Please see the inserted graph.)

As I stated before the only thing that matters in ecology is the rate at which something occurs and the timeframe in which it occurs. Shifting cultivation, as practiced in the past, with long fallow periods, has been shown to be either environmentally benign, or even beneficial. Currently however, the state of shifting cultivation is rapidly changing due to changes in land use policy, as discussed earlier there are much shorter fallow periods and increasing intensity in the use of land in increasingly fragile environments. One could accurately describe this form of agriculture as “pioneering” cultivation and it is a major source and cause of soil erosion, sedimentation, deforestation, and storm water runoff; a major source of environmental degradation in the province.

It is not the only culprit however. A growing consensus among agronomist, planners, and development workers and agencies, is that the most significant cause of environmental degradation in Oudomxay and Lao generally is the issue of land use change, the growing rate of conversion of forest and agricultural land to large monoculture cash crop plantations, particularly rubber. Throughout Oudomxay province we are seeing larger and larger areas of land being cleared and planted with massive plantations of rubber. The large majority of the investors come from China and they have very little interest in conserving the land for the long term. Quite often, the land is given away in concessions to investors, land that typically belonged to villagers—the land taken away and given to the investors without consultation or even the knowledge of the farmers. These plantations have incredibly high erosion and run off rates, and typically can leave the soil denuded and useless for many years afterwards. Other land uses that can prove damaging to watershed services include stripping the vegetation along rivers and streams to grow corn and other crops, and the destruction of and loss of wetlands and floodplains. Once you put all these issues together you are looking at a very severe degree of environmental degradation. Quite obviously the issue is very complicated and defies any simple explanation or solution.

Integrated Spatial Planning Workshop

2007-01-11T03:08:00.000-08:00

Hello, well my new year got off to a bit of a rough start concerning all things computer. on the 2th my computer was obliterated by a virus which erased all my systems files. Luckily I was able to recover most of my files and had everything else back up...except for some of my writings including the finished essays on shifting cultivation...so you'll all have to be patient while I rewrite those. right now I'm actually in Khon Kaen Thailand just over the border from Vientiane taking part in a workshop on Integrated Spatial Planning with a number of guys from my office and other governent officials from Oudomxay Province. It's being held by some international consultants being funded by the Swedish International Development Agency. So far it's been a really interesting workshop and I'm learning a lot of new planning skills and it looks like I'll be playing a key role in implementing the pilot project for oudomxay to develop and implement a integrated spatial plan for the the province. I'll get more into what spatial planning is etc another day...for now I must go and....wait for it....wait for it....drink beer! bet you never saw that coming! Ok, cheers, patrick

Shifting Perspectives Part 1

2006-12-30T22:39:00.000-08:00

Earlier in this blog I made two remarks that I would like to remention for the subsequent essays: Shifting Perspectives on Shifting Cultivation

1. I have come to believe the only time you really know you’re learning something is when you realize everything you thought you knew on a given topic turns out to be almost completely wrong. This point has become a major thread and theme to my entire experience here in Lao, and is even more poignant when put up against my evolving knowledge and understanding with regard to Shifting Cultivation.

2. A few months back, when writing about resettlement of upland villages, I quoted the first of two “development riddles”. The first was: When is a solution not a solution? The second “development riddle” that I did not mention or examine the last time is: Riddle No. 2: When is a problem not a problem?

The issues of shifting cultivation in Lao has made me realize how little I knew or understood about this complex issue, and has caused my views and opinions to change drastically. Also it has provided me with a new level of understanding of the answers to these two riddles. With this series of essays I would like to take anyone willing to read it, on a short journey explaining my experiences and shifting perspectives on shifting cultivation in Lao.

Shifting Perspectives on Shifting Cultivation
When I first arrived in Lao I had never actually heard the term “shifting cultivation”. In fact, as I was learn during my tenure in Oudomxay, there are a number of different terms and references to this highly controversial form of agriculture, including: swidden agriculture, shifting cultivation, rotating cultivation, pioneering cultivation, and the most famous of all, SLASH AND BURN! Or “hai na” in Lao. I suspect, as was the case for me, this last term is the most common and well known reference, and is one that conjures the most drastic images of environmental destruction and un-sustainability. The phrase “slash and burn” is a highly politically charged term that is often intended to convey precisely this kind of image, portraying the people who are practicing it as environmental criminals, backward, unsustainable, and requiring development assistance and programs designed to halt the practice and move people into the development light of economic and environmental security. This has certainly been the case in Lao as the government and numerous aide agencies have embarked on a number of development and planning initiatives to eradicate the practice and introduce alternatives and to create seemingly more sustainable methods for upland communities. I remember when I first arrived traveling with my colleagues around Oudomxay province and seeing areas that matched the image in my head of slash and burn cultivation: steep slopes, denuded of all trees and vegetation that were then burned in giant fires that fill the air with dense clouds of smoke and ash that fall in huge black flakes like some form of Buponic snow, a third world nuclear holocaust. My colleagues would point out areas on the hillsides along roads and highways that were cleared of bush and burnt and would say things like, “Hai na, maen bo di ti singwaetlom—slash and burn, is very bad for the environment!” In my state of ignorance, I would simply nod my head in agreement, “yes, very bad.” As with so many things however, I would soon learn that the issue is far more subtle and complex than such a simple understanding could ever possibly capture. Unfortunately, more often than not, it is this simple image and understanding of a very complex and very old relationship the people have with the land that dominates government policy, international development initiatives, and the international mass media. I can remember reading in the most respectable of media outlets descriptions that profile upland ethnic minorities in a negative stereotype of environmental marauders, slashing and burning the forest, farming the land for a few years until it is denuded of nutrients and productivity, and then moving on, leaving a path of irreversible destruction in their wake. As I have learned over the past 22 months in Oudomxay, this image, and the activities undertaken by the government and the international aid community, are largely mislead, and fit perfectly within the two “development riddles” I have mentioned earlier.

So what exactly is “Slash and burn agriculture” and all these other terms anyways?
Simply stated, slash and burn refers to the practice of clearing an area of forest, typically in an upland area of steep slopes, and then burning the brush and vegetation for cultivation. Most often, in Lao, the people will plant a strain of rice suitable for dry conditions, but have also been known to plant various types of fruit trees and vegetables. Usually after one or two growing seasons, the field is then “abandoned”. Most upland ethnic groups, such as the Khmu people in Oudomxay Province, will farm an area for up to twenty years, shifting their fields from cultivation to fallow, until the soil fertility and productivity drops, and then move the entire village to a new area to begin the cycle over again. It is usually at this point that the understanding of these practices end and the claims of environmental destruction and un-sustainability begin.

The argument against this form of agriculture revolves around the issues of soil erosion, sedimentation (the deposit of soil in local streams and rivers due to erosion), reductions in soil fertility due to over cultivation, and productivity losses. The fear is that once an area has been cleared on a steep slope, the likelihood of soil erosion and sedimentation in local streams is much greater, and in a time of quickly growing populations (Lao has the highest population growth rates in South East Asia), this form of agriculture is destructive and un-sustainable in the long term. And, on many levels, these claims are quite legitimate. That is if we were simply discussing a situation in which the images of slash and burn were accurate, however, as I have come to believe, this is a gross oversimplification and betrays a long term relationship and an in-depth and complex level of ecological knowledge the people have of the land.

Shifting Cultivation obviously goes beyond this. Simply put, shifting cultivation, or swidden agriculture, refers to the practice of clearing and burning forests of land, using the land for a season or two, and then allowing to go fallow, letting the forest re-grow for up 7 to 12 years before being burnt and cultivated again. The field is hardly abandoned however. Fallow areas are continuously used by the ethnic upland people, such as the Khmu, as a source of resources, including wildlife for consumption, and a plethora of non-timber forest products such as traditional medicines, various plants for building products and food, as well as spiritual beliefs. (It should be noted that Lao is known for having the highest biodiversity values in south east asia along with the highest diversity and abundance of non-timber forest products, which are quickly growing in demand and market value—all due to 400 600 years of shifting cultivation!.) From my understanding, the Khmu people, like the Inuit of the north with regard to having over 26 words for snow, have numerous words for describing the forests in different stages of re-growth commensurate with the products and wildlife that can be found within them. In fact, I suspect that if the value taken from fallow areas and secondary forest were taken into consideration, the perceptions around shifting cultivation would change drastically. As such, many agronomists and environmental planners throughout the developing world are beginning to understand that shifting cultivation is not only one of the most efficient forms of agriculture (the amount of energy spent compared to calories derived ratio is quite high—translation, lots of work but lots of food), it can also be very environmentally beneficial. Many cultivators have highly sophisticated forms of soil conservation, and shifting cultivation provides fallow areas that are high in biodiversity and abundance that are crucial not only to farmers and communities, but with respect to wildlife habitat as well. With respect to ecology and environmental degradation, the only thing that really matters is the rate at which something occurs. The ecology of Lao, over the last 400 to 600 years has adapted well to this form of land use, and the changes that are being implemented are causes rapid changes the balance and environmental dynamics that rule this fragile environment. As I have learned, it is these changes that are proving to be the real cause of environmental degradation and social disruption in the country.

Pioneering Cultivation is an entirely different story. This refers to what happens when people have restricted access to land, and are forced to move into areas that were previously untouched primary forest, usually in very fragile environments (head water areas for major rivers and tributaries with steep slopes and soils with already low nutrient levels and highly susceptible to erosion and sedimentation) and begin practicing slash and burn practices. Since these areas are typically protected against cultivation, the people engaging in the practice are understandably concerned about getting caught and unlikely to invest in soil conservation practices. Also, since they rarely own this land, and will be forced to move on, the fallow periods typically shorten between cropping years—from 7 to 12 years—to continuous intense cultivation for 3 to 5 subsequent years in a row. In short, the forest is not allowed to grow back and the farmers keep growing crops until the soil nutrients are almost completely denuded and then leave the land. The result is severe degradation and soil loss. This is the type of slash and burn that fits the actual environmental stereotypes and should be rightly addressed. Ironically, the very policies and programs aimed at all shifting cultivation is resulting in the very restrictions in access to land and is resulting in an alarming rate of growth of pioneering cultivation throughout Laos and the developing world generally.

This brings us back to the first development riddle: Riddle No. 1—when is a solution not a solution? Answer No. 1: When it causes more problems than it solves. By attempting to eradicate shifting cultivation without understanding it, Lao has found itself in the uncomfortable position where the very practices and environmental problems they had hoped to address are in reality becoming in more exacerbated.

Answer No. 2: when it is not adopted by the intended beneficiaries. Like so many development initiatives, based on misleading or misguided ideals and initiatives, without consideration for the needs and local realities of the people for whom they are intended to “develop”, the programs to eradicate shifting cultivation have not provided upland communities with viable alternatives, meaning that they have no choice but to continue cultivating upland areas, and with restricted access to land, they have begun to engage in land use patterns that are truly destructive and un-sustainable.

Monks & BioSand Filters

2006-10-21T02:20:00.000-07:00

During the last couple of weeks my project activities in Ban Bo, a small Thai Leu and Phonoy community approximately 7km from Xay Town, have been moving ahead…finally! I haven’t yet had a chance to fully survey the work the villagers have completed on the gravity fed water system, but from what I’ve seen they are nearing completion. The storage tanks are completed and I have seen a few taps around the village spitting out water with a fair amount of strength and the villages seem very happy about the situation. I’m hoping to get out and do a final review sometime in early November.

This last week, two colleagues of mine, Vixay and Khonsevan, and myself headed out to the village to conduct a workshop with the village residents for building, using, maintaining the BioSand Water Filter, to develop plans for establishing a cooperative for building and distributing the BSF throughout the community, and in the future, to additional communities in the surrounding area.

For those of you unfamiliar with the BioSand Water Filter it is a simple house hold technology used for filtering water for the purposes of personal consumption. Made from concrete, sand, gravel, and a little bit of rubber piping, this technology is simple to build, use and maintain, not to mention relatively inexpensive (Approximately $6 USD per/filter after all the tools and the steel mold for making the concrete case have been purchased.) I have been working with the BSF for a while now and have been planning these workshops for several months, so it was quite a relief to finally find myself out in the village.

Initially, our plan was to hold the workshops for three days and in that time the training was to include:

 Instruction and hands on experience for the participants in building and installing the filter
 Basic knowledge concerning bacteria, viruses, parasites and general sanitation and hygiene concerning house hold water use and the BSF
 Basic knowledge about proper water storage and protecting clean water from recontamination
 Comprehensive understanding for participants on how the BSF filters water
 Training in how to maintain and ensure the proper use of the BSF
 Develop simple plans and strategies for promoting the use of the BSF within Ban Bo and for financing the building and installation of BSF units to all three hundred households in the community
 Simple plans and strategies for promoting, selling and distributing the BSF to additional communities and families in the surrounding area.

Of course, this plan got shot down within the first thirty minutes, but we have made a fair amount of progress and are continuing to work with the workshop participants to achieve each of these goals.
Things got off to a start on Monday morning when Vixay, Khonsevan, and I headed out to Ban Bo. We arrived in the village about an hour late as it took awhile to round everyone up, get all the materials in the truck and drive out to the village. When we arrived we were informed by the village representative for the Lao Women’s Union, Mrs. Haak, that none of the villagers had shown up for the training, but that she would do her best to go and round some up for us…such enthusiasm! The three of us unloaded the truck at the village temple where we were to conduct the training and then sat around waiting for people to show up for another 60 minutes or so. (This kind of thing is perfectly normal…so I wasn’t too worried.)

Finally, 10 people…7 women and 3 men, showed up and we got started. First thing we did was mix the sand, gravel and concrete to pour our first mould. This went quickly enough though I was starting to fret when the villagers and my Lao trainers put far to much water into the cement mix (the mix for the BSF is supposed to be fairly dry or the water runs out the bottom of the mould taking the cement with it leaving nothing but sand and gravel, which typically falls apart almost immediately.) Again, I wasn’t too worried as I feel it’s best for these kinds of mistakes to be made during the training when I can deal with them rather than after. After we poured the mould I spent the rest of the day giving instruction on how the filter works, water storage, and basic sanitation with lots of games and activities to help the villagers understand….generally a good time.

The next morning (Tuesday) we arrived at the temple (Wat in Lao) and proceeded to extract the concrete case we poured the day before. As expected, the case cracked and literally fell apart in front of us into about a thousand pieces. I wasn’t worried, but I did not expect the villager’s reaction…when they saw how bad it turned out it seemed like most them lost interest in continuing. It took some fast talking on my part to assure them this was normal. We discussed what went wrong, what we could do better, and I managed to convince them to pour a second mould. We did so, but I could see that any additional lecturing or activities was out of the question until they saw how this mould turned out. So, we agreed to leave the cement dry for an extra day and return on Thursday afternoon for the extraction. I was praying it would turn out this time or else I wasn’t sure what we would do.

Thankfully, when we returned on Thursday and extracted the case it came out beautiful…no cracks, only a few leaks, and the energy of the villagers turned up immediately. In fact, with no prompting from me or my colleagues, the villagers jumped right in and poured a new mould within 30 minutes. I was hoping to do some more training, review what we had discussed the day before, etc, but this was not to be…the women felt it was time for us to…well, drink. So, next thing I knew I was sitting at someone’s house trying out the local Lau Lao (local rice whisky equivalent to moonshine—in fact Ban Bo is exceptionally well known in the area for making high quality Lau Lao, although it really all tastes the same to me.) During the ongoing discussion I learned some interesting facts concerning the villagers understanding and perceptions of our project. Just to review quickly: this project, funded by the German Agro Action to the tune of $2400 US, was to build a gravity fed water system and to train the villagers to build, maintain and use the BioSand Water Filters to produce cleaning drinking water. It’s important to note that both these activities were at the request of the villagers. We have met numerous times with the villagers, and thought we had made it very clear what each part was for: water system was for delivery and the BSF for making clean water. Problem is, as I found out, over one glass of lau lao after the other, that the villagers assumed that any water that comes out of a pipe, is already clean, and they were confused about what exactly the BSF was for and why they needed it. Eeep! Hadn’t they asked us for it? So, I knew right then that we had a communication problem and are looking at months of follow up to clear up the misconceptions. Nevertheless, the people in the workshop assured us they were very excited about the BSF and wanted to learn more. At least we had that going for us.

Sunday, now a week gone by when I had hoped to finish by Wednesday, we returned in the afternoon to see how the third case turned out and to hopefully train the participants to prepare and install the filter medium (gravel and sand). The second case turned out even better than the second one and I could see the workshop participants were starting to get excited about the possibilities. After pouring yet another mould, we got started on installing the filter mould. Now, anybody who has seen my office and I working on the BSF before, will know we’ve experienced some difficulties in this area. If the filter media, layers of sand and gravel, are installed correctly, the water should flow out of the filter at 1 liter/minute. If it comes out to fast, this means the medium was installed incorrectly, the water is not getting filtered and the water is not safe to drink. It all comes down to a matter of what kind of sand you use and how you prepare it. If the sand comes from the local river (as is the case it Ban Bo), it is usually mixed heavily with clay and other materials, and is likely contaminated with bacteria requiring it to be sterilized (boiled) and washed (too remove the clay). Problem is, during this process, if the sand is cleaned too well, the water will practically shoot out of the filter like a fire hose. If it is not cleaned enough, it clogs up the filter like a cork and no water comes out at all. So it is a matter of finding the perfect balance…a process that usually takes a fair amount of practice and can be a source of frustration and discouragement for the villagers, and requires a huge amount of follow up and additional training from the trainers. Understandably then, it was with some trepidation and anxiety on my part when we finished installing the medium, that we prepared to test the water flow. This involves taking a 1 liter bottle and a stop watch, filling the filter with water, and then counting the seconds until a minute passes.

Important sidebar: as any one who has traveled in Asia generally, and Lao in particular, you will understand the important role that Buddhism plays in blessing all community events and situations (i.e. weddings, new babies, even new motorcycles, etc.). The training we were conducting was in fact taking place on the grounds of the village temple. The filter we were about to test was set up just off to the side of the front doors. Neither myself, my colleagues, nor the villagers had considered asking the monks to bless the BSF, but we were about to experience the positive benefits of even having them around. As we prepared to test the filter, dusk was starting to fall around us. At every temple throughout Lao, just before dark, the monks begin their evening prayers by gathering and playing a large drum by the temple along with sets of chimes and gongs. Basically, a little pre-dinner jam session. I gave the bottle to Khonsevan, and got my cell phone turned on to the stopwatch. Just as did this, the monks started into their first song: at first slow with a steady drum and steady chimes, the gong setting the backbeat. I counted to three and Khonsevan let the water start flowing into the bottle. The monks kicked up the beat. Everyone gathered around holding a collective breath. At 24 seconds the bottle was at the quarter mark. Good sign. The music picked up in tempo, the drummer was really starting to bang it out, the gong going strong, the chimes clanging away. 30 seconds, the bottle was a little over half full. Damn, it was coming out a bit fast. I could feel sweat running down my face. I was counting along with the clock. Suddenly, the monks slowed down the tempo…and you may not want to believe this…but I swear to Buddha, the water flow seemed to slow with it. 45 seconds and sure enough, the bottle was at ¾ full. The rhythm was steady and filling. At this point I was praying to Buddha himself. Come on fat boy, show me some of that sweet enlightenment baby! 50 seconds and the water was just about at the top of the bottle. I was worried…If this didn’t work out and we had to redo the filter medium I could see the villagers throwing up their hands and walking off…no filters for this village. The monks really kicked up the beat for the crescendo! Boom boom boom. Everyone was silent and then the bottle was full. The monks stopped with one final bang. I stopped the clock afraid to look. I stepped back with everyone staring at me. I looked at the clock and the final mark was 1 minute 7 seconds! Good enough. I yelled out the time and the crowd erupted and the monks cheered and really kicked into a jam….people started dancing and “nopping” (clasping their hands in front of their faces and bowing) to the filter. Personally, I give full credit to the villagers for preparing the sand and the monks for the musical talents and connection to another world behind this world for sure. The lau lao flowed and I managed to make it home before dark with my broken headlight…but at least the training ended on a good note. I will never underestimate the power of Buddhist blessings again. Hopefully we won’t have to have celestial jam session going every time they build a new filter or simply want to use it!

We still have to do a lot of work to finish up the training: checking how they are making new filters, do some work around promotion and selling, clearing up the misconception between the water system and the BSF and clean water, but I am very confident the villagers will be making many units well into the future. Not too bad overall.

Out of town on study tour

2006-10-21T00:42:00.000-07:00

Hey all, so tomorrow I will be headed out with my office colleagues and some village residents from the Nam Ko area on a study tour to Luang Phabang and Houaphanh Province. We will be visiting some projects involved in community forest management and watershed management. I will be gone until next Saturday, October 28 and will most likely not have any access to the internet during that time. cheers all.

Project Update

2006-10-14T21:55:00.000-07:00

Well things have been extremely busy for me here in OUdomxay. Last week starting on Monday I went out with two of my colleagues to do a training workshop for building using the Biosand water filter. Things started out pretty good with 10 villagers attending the training. the first concrete case we built however, fell apart as we took it out of the mould...too much water and it didn't sit long enough. so we tried again and the next day it turned out really good. did some additional training on sanitation, bacteria and water storage....and that was it for the week as the villagers had other work to do. Going back today (Sunday) to see how the second concrete case turns out and hopefully do some training on installing the filter medium. Hopefully it will work out.

Thursday morning I attended a meeting with my staff and community leaders from 8 different villages located around the xay Township. We are working with these villages to help them develop and implement strategies and plans for dealing with waste water and solid waste. this coming week we will be spending 4 days in the villages helping them to do surveys on waste around the village and then working to actually develop village based plans for dealing with it.

On Friday, the project staff for the watershed management project went out to two villages, Ban Konoy and Ban Homxai, to conduct focus groups on deforestation and chages in land use planning...etc. unfortunately as I'm supposed to be training my colleagues to do the research I don't really get to sit in on their discussion and have trouble following along (don't have a translator for this stuff) but the little I was able to pick up seemed really intersting. Hopefully, we will all have the chance to sit down soon and go over what they learned from the villagers.

anywho, keeping busy and always having fun. Starting today I will be in the villages for the next 7 days straight and then headed off for a study tour to the Houaphanh province. don't worry if you don't hear from me for a while. patrick

Project Udate

2006-09-19T21:45:00.000-07:00

Hello all, well the project in Ban Bo is finally moving ahead. Last week, the German Agro Action finally transferred the money after requesting endless changes and upadates to our plans. I went out to Ban Bo on Monday and the villagers are already pressing ahead with the contruction of the gravity fed water system. It's going to be a big one: nearly 2000m of pipe, 3 large tanks serving upwardsof 250 families. In the next week or so we should be doing our workshop training a small number of men and women in the village to build, maintain, distribute and ensure proper use of the BioSand Water filters.

The Nam Ko watershed project is set to enter its next phase of research with more community mapping exercises, transect walks (a research method inolving hikes into remote catchments with farmers where we analyze and conduct interviews with land users), and interviews and surveys of village men and women on the impacts of land use plans and the environment. Currently, PSTEO and myself are organizing a study tour to the Huaphan Province in late October to visit a similar project where we hope to exchange ideas and lessons learned on land use planning and watershed management for upland communities.

Project Activities Update

2006-08-21T19:18:00.000-07:00

Well, it’s been a little over two months since I saw Paul off in Vientiane and it feels like more has happened than in the entire 16 months I have been in Oudomxay before we worked on our documentary together. It’s been far too long between entries on this blog than I would have liked, but I have been far too busy in the last few weeks and internet has been notoriously uncooperative.

The projects I have been working on with the PSTEO staff has been going remarkably well. After 16 months of living and working in Oudomxay I finally feel like we’re really clicking together…my team seems enthusiastic and excited about the projects, and things have been moving forward.

The Nam Ko Watershed Management Project

At this time, we are conducting the community-based participatory research phase of our watershed project. The whole idea behind research being participatory is that the community, groups and individuals involved have some hand in developing the research objectives and methodologies, and the ultimate goal is for a mutual exchange of knowledge and learning experiences, with the objective of developing and implementing actionable, feasible, practical and culturally appropriate strategies to address issues raised from the experience. (At least that is the theory).

Our first step has been to visit seven of the 23 or 25 villages that are located within the study area and to develop relationships with the community residents and try and get a sense of what their knowledge and perceptions of environmental problems and watershed management might be. Thus far we have visited 4 villages: Homxai: a small mostly Lao Leum (Lowland Lao) about 8km from Oudomxay town; Konoy, a larger mixed ethnic village of 1000 people a little over 10km from Oudomxay town on the road to Luang Nam Tha; Houay Lieng, a Khmu village about 8km off the highway in the uplands of the upper Ko river watershed; and Najan, and even more remote village farther up the watershed past Houay Lieng and composed entirely of Khmu. In each village we conducted several activities to achieve our research objectives. Aside from doing some ice breaking games we conducted three main activities:

1. Drawing Watersheds
The first thing we did was ask the village residents to draw what they think is a watershed. The point of the activity was to break the ice, get people to relax with us, and get an idea of what the villagers believed or understood a watershed to be. The idea is this would get everyone on the same page and give my team a clear understanding of where we needed to go to develop a consensual understanding of the issues at hand. Working in teams of 3 to 6 people, the village residents would draw their perceptions and understanding of what a watershed is on large pieces of paper supplied by PSTEO. The exercise was a great way of lightening the mood and the end result was very illuminating. Throughout the seven villages, the villagers consistently drew very similar images: Often, the image depicted a rough sketch of the community in relation to the closest river, roads, and agricultural activities. This wasn’t entirely surprising as these represent the major features of the average farmer’s reality. Interestingly, the maps usually centered on water, but did not depict sources, tributaries or boundaries. Again, not surprising, as these ideals would have very little to do with their day to day decision making.

After the drawings were finished, we had one person from each group present their drawing and we would all discuss together what it meant. After each group went, my staff went about conducting some simple activities to fill in some of the gaps in our consensual understanding of watersheds and to better explain the objectives of our projects. We organized the workshop participants to stand in a large semi-circle, and then my staff explained that they (the participants) represented the mountains surrounding a watershed. Then my staff took turns pretending to be different forms of water during different times of the water cycle (i.e. clouds, rainfall, run off, a river etc) to explain what a watershed was and how all the villages in the area were interconnected by their need for water. The villagers usually found the activity uproariously funny and at the end of it all kind of looked at us with expressions on their faces that said, “Duh! We knew that already!” The one thing I’m learning with this project is that it’s not so much that the people don’t already possess the knowledge we are seeking, but that my staff and I haven’t figured out how to ask the right questions.

2. A Problem/analysis flow chart.
After the “understanding watershed” activities, we would move onto what we have come to describe as a “problem/analysis flow chart” activity. This is a pretty simple activity but a great way to get everyone thinking and you can learn a great deal about what the research participants-in this case the village residents-think and understand of environmental problems and watershed management.

Before continuing on I feel I should give a brief description of watershed management.

I found the following quote in a report from the German Technical Corporation and felt it provided a fairly accurate description of watershed management.

“Watershed Management is the process of people guiding and organizing water, land and forest resource use on a watershed in order to provide desired goods and services without adversely affecting water, soil and vegetation resources. Embedded in this concept is the recognition of the ecological interrelationships among land use, soil and water, and the ecological, social and economical linkage between upstream and downstream areas.”

Basically it comes down to this: managing and using land in a way that will maintain the water cycle within a watershed. Humans, through agriculture and other land use practices, like logging or building parking lots, change the land cover and impact the water cycle. Often this can lead to flooding or droughts if not managed properly over the long term. So, when I say we were trying to learn what the villagers perceptions were, we were trying to find out what they understood or believed about the vitality and health of the forests and land within their environment and the associated impacts on the ability of the watershed to provide important environmental services (for example, good tree coverage will hold water during the rainy season and release it slowly overtime avoiding floods, etc. Cut down the trees and voila! You’ve got water coming in your front door! That’s a little oversimplified, but in a nutshell that’s what watershed management is all about.

After my team had explained the concepts and principles of watershed management through a series of games, we would start the flow chart analysis activity. This would begin with the villagers being separated into at least three groups which would be given markers and pencils and a stack of small blank pieces of paper. One groups would be asked to think about what happens to the village when the water levels in the local village are really high, and then either write or draw as many impacts that they can think about (one of the PSTEO staff would assist and encourage and facilitate discussion with each group). The second group would be asked to consider the same for when the water levels are very low. The third group would be asked to consider and either draw pictures or write down the many uses the village has for water. They were then told that the group that came up with the most examples would win a prize (usually a bag of snacks or something of that nature.) I always enjoyed this part of the research as the villagers usually got right into the game and before long the entire room would be an overwhelming din of shouting and running around as each group raced to beat the others. The results were stunning, with literally hundreds of pieces of paper with drawings and writing on them were handed into the project team members. The papers would be hung up on the wall in a flow chart and my team would facilitate a group discussion of how one issue lead to or was interconnected to the others. What we ended up with is a fairly complex picture of the environmental and socio-economic impacts of invariable water flows in the local river system, and the related causes and impacts. The results were remarkably similar in each village. Sorry I tried to put in a chart but it just doesn't want to work. This simple activity has provided my office with a fairly good understanding of the environmental problems as perceived by the village residents.

3. Community Mapping

After the flow chart analysis activity, my team moved onto what is quite possibly one of my favorite activities thus far: Community Mapping. Basically, this involves getting the research participants to sit down in groups and draw a map of their village and the local watershed with all the agricultural activities, the local streams and rivers in the watershed, the location of the community infrastructure, irrigation schemes, and fish ponds, etc. The objective is to get an idea of where everything is located, understand the village resident’s perceptions of their space and environment and the relationships between the problems and issues articulated in the flow chart analysis. This activity is also very useful in getting my staff to listen to the research participants and to develop a shared language for discussing the issues of watershed management, land use, and the associated environmental impacts and problems. It’s also important in that it provides the villagers with a sense of ownership over how the discussion of their community and the associated issues is conducted.

The groups were facilitated by team members and they would start by developing a consensus on how to draw and represent different features that would go into the maps: rivers, road, homes, farms, etc, and then would start drawing them using pencils. Eventually what we would end up with were fairly well drawn maps of the entire village and the surrounding streams and geography. I never participated directly in this activity, but moved from group to group observing.

A few things we have learned from this activity:

The villagers understanding, knowledge and perceptions of their environment are highly detailed but also highly localized. Meaning that they had a great deal of detailed knowledge on the environment directly around their village, but limited knowledge and understanding of anything outside of that boundary, at least in anyway that they were able to articulate during this activity. Also, they did seem to have a solid understanding of how different land use and economic activities could impact the watershed and environmental services, but had a great deal of difficulty and/or reluctance to show us how or where these issues existed within their community. We were able to develop very detailed maps showing the number and location of streams and tributaries, agricultural practices (although we had a great deal of trouble including upland agriculture as I suspect the villagers were hesitant to admit they were engaging in these activities—upland agriculture is illegal—even though they were visible from the village centre.) Nevertheless, this activity has provided a solid base line of data for us to work from.

So, that is a brief summary of our project activities to date. There are a number of gaps in our knowledge and research that we will be working to address in the near future. These will hopefully include:

Local Ecological Knowledge: What is the level of understanding of watershed management with regard to how the villagers decide what agricultural practices to engage in?

What has been the impact on women in the decision making processes with regard to agriculture as compared to traditional and contemporary practices?

What is the degree of land ownership in the study area?

At this time, my team and are drafting a plan to address these gaps. More to come in the future.

Poverty: Epistemology & Politics

2006-07-31T23:18:00.000-07:00

During the two months I spent in Savanakhet studying Lao Leum-the national language of Lao PDR-I had the opportunity to visit and spend some time in a village in order to practise my fledgling language skills. While there, and walking around the village with my fellow volunteers and the village chief, I witnessed a rather disturbing sight: we noticed an elderly man, dishevelled in appearance, who was chained up and sitting on a covered platform near the edge of the village. We asked the village chief what the story was, and thankfully we had our Lao Leum instructor along to translate the more difficult aspects for us. As it turned out the old man was mentally unstable, and as there are relatively few resources in Lao for communities to deal with mental illnesses, the villagers had decided to secure the man to keep him from hurting himself or others after he had become physically violent. It was a depressing site: the old guy sitting on the platform, arms and legs chained together and to a large beam at the centre of the platform. He looked as if he had been there for some time, a dish of food and a jug of water sitting next to him in the otherwise empty shelter.

For myself, the issues of mental illness has always been someone else’s problem, something that thankfully, fortunately, has never touched the lives of anyone I knew directly, and as such has always remained an academic question. I’ve always wondered how it was that people became to be defined as sane or insane. Who was the first person to make this decision? Who was it, and what motives did they have in deciding that someone was mentally incapacitated and in need of protection against themselves. I realized that day in the village, that for the residents and the gentleman in question, it was a direct issue with which they had to deal with on their own. They didn’t have the option of proselytizing, but had to take the only measures they could, which now sat on the edge of their village day in and day out as a constant reminder of what can happen to the fragile human mind and their inability to fully deal with it; chained, out of sight for the moment, but impossible to forget or just brush away.

I didn’t realize it then, but that old man has become for me a metaphor for the issues of poverty in Lao. Like mental illness, for myself poverty has always been largely been an academic exercise. Coming from a fairly affluent family in one of the wealthiest and most prosperous countries in the history of the world, poverty was always something that happened to other people, with little real connection to my own life. Travelling throughout the developing world, and having come to Lao with the intention of “alleviating” poverty has forced me to question precisely what it means to be “impoverished”. With what I have learned from spending time with the Khmu people, I have begun to believe that, like the man in the shelter, poverty is something that has been forced onto them, but with the chains being clasped onto the legs and arms of each and every person in the community in slightly different ways, and the people feeling helpless to do much about it. Most significantly, once someone’s is defined as being poor, it is exceptionally difficult to convince anyone you're not and “assistance” is showered down on you whether you want it or not, and quite often the treatment can be worse than the disease.

Who was it that first decided what poverty was and who was impoverished? I have learned that very often, the people who are designated as poor are rarely the ones who decide what the criterion is or what steps will be taken to address it. Also, the definitions of poverty and the application of poverty indicators are driven by epistemological and political factors rather than real human conditions or needs. One criterion that is often applied for deciding a community in Lao is poor is the question of rice self-sufficiency. Development professionals will visit a community for what is called a Rapid Rural Assessment, a practise whereby residents are visited on one or several occasions and asked a series of questions, which will usually include “Are you rice-self sufficient?” Meaning: is the village, or individuals within the community, capable of producing enough rice to meet their daily intake and nutritional needs over a 12-month period, or do they have to supplement any shortages through other means. If the person or community is unable to meet these criteria they are thereby deemed to be impoverished. You can imagine the dialogue going something like this:

Development professional to Khmu villager: "Are you rice self-sufficient?" (With accompanying explanation of definition)

Khmu Villager: "No."

Development professional: "Well then, you are poor."

Khmu Villager: "Oh my Buddha! I never realized."

Development professional: "Of course not. Poverty is relative after all. No one really knows they’re poor until someone, an expert, shows them that they are. But don’t worry, we have a comprehensive plan that will lift you out of poverty and show you the light of development and progress."

Khmu Villager: "I don’t feel so good."

Development professional: "Of course not. You’re poor."

Hence a flurry of activity and development programs and policies ensue, including the arrival of crazy Canadian kids with a penchant for BioSand Water Filters and drinking Lao Hai.

One minor problem: the Khmu people have rarely ever been rice self-sufficient. Their sustenance and livelihood strategies have always included options for making up for shortages of rice through the harvesting of wildlife, aquatic resources, and non-timber forest products. The irony is that the very programs that have been instituted to deal with the perceived status of impoverishment have resulted in reductions in the ability of the Khmu to make up for rice shortages or grow sufficient rice due to restrictions in access to land (Please see Resettlement essays for more details). In fact, when speaking with Khmu villagers I have found that many of them refer to their poverty as being a new phenomenon, which is understandable considering that before many of the development initiatives, when the Khmu were living more or less as they had been for the last 600 years, their access to a wide variety of food options and sustenance strategies were much greater than they are now. This is the perfect example of a self-fulfilling prophecy: the Khmu were defined as poor and the policies intended to address this ended up causing the very poverty they were meant to address. How’s that for a development kick in the head?

In my opinion, the central issue here is that when people are treated as victims of poverty and are targeted for development. The development processes and definitions are driven by external factors: the perceptions and beliefs of poverty from the international community, and political agendas both domestic and international. The results will inevitably produce the opposite effect of those intended. The defining of Khmu people as poor as a result of being rice insufficient, which has always been a part of life in upland areas, makes it that much easier to justify moving them or forcing them to adapt to new livelihood strategies.

Sitting in Ban Tangnguey, speaking with the villagers, and thinking of these issues, always causes me to think back to that poor man in the village in Savanakhet: a problem caused by factors outside the control of the village residents, sitting, chained up, always staring out at them, and the villagers with out the means or resources to do anything about it.

Romantizing Tribal Life

2006-07-21T05:42:00.000-07:00

A key criticism of any person who speaks of the economic, social or environmental benefits of traditional lifestyles often centres around the accusation that you are romanticizing tribal life. The suggestion that the people living traditional rural lifestyles might be better off than their more “developed” contemporaries, is often viewed as heresy among the developed world and many development professionals. For example, among the Khmu people this could mean practising shifting cultivation, living in homes made from natural materials, harvesting non-timber forest products and wildlife, and basically living a subsistence lifestyle outside the modern economy.

Often charges of racism and a sadistic desire to trap people into an anachronistic and inherently inferior way of life are levelled at proponents for traditional knowledge and practises. What right does anyone have to say that the Khmu people, or any other group of people, should have to live under such conditions just to satisfy the perceptions of outsiders? Do they not have the right to develop their communities, and enjoy the benefits of modern life and scientific and technological progress?

In my opinion, the answer to these questions is that no one has the right to force their perception or their belief in the most appropriate way for a community to exist or develop, including development professionals such as myself. With respect to the Khmu, the threats to their development, the causes of their poverty is not coming from people trying to force them to live traditional lifestyles, but from top down development initiatives that view them as being victims, and seeks to “target” them for development.

More often than not, communities are not consulted about development programs and initiatives and are having them forced on them by outside forces including the development industry and the government. Efforts to conserve culture and traditional knowledge and practises, as an alternative, should not be viewed, or approached with intent of holding tribal and ethnic communities into static stereotypes or caricatures.

The one thing that should be understood about local traditional knowledge is that it is not static. It is an ever-changing dynamic series of processes and relationships that exists in communities between groups and individuals and the larger environment in which they exist. Preserving or revitalizing traditional knowledge and practises is ultimately about assisting ethnic groups to utilize and strengthen their own communal methods for developing knowledge; adapting them to the ever-changing reality and environment around them; making choices concerning economic and social development that are appropriate for their own needs; and, enhancing their ability to continuing passing that knowledge onto younger generations.

What it all comes down to is the need for people outside of ethnic communities to learn to respect and understand the value of the vast wealth of knowledge that ethnic communities such as the Khmu possess and seeing them as empowered agents who have the right to pursue their own destiny.

Romanticizing tribal life? That’s best left to Walt Disney.

Community Mapping

2006-07-19T22:50:00.000-07:00

The Water for Life watershed management project is well underway. My team and I are very busy now visiting villages in the study area. Last week we started our vists to seven villages and will continue for the next two months to conduct a variety of participatory research methods including community mapping.

The idea behind community mapping is to work with the villagers and have them draw out the concept of their village and the local environment. This will hopefully give us some insight into how they view their local environment and their understanding of watershed management. It's a good tool for getting the government staff to sit down and listen to the village residents and see things a bit more from their perspective. It will also, hopefully, give us an idea of some of the environmental impact on local watershed services from the villagers perspective.

Last week we started out by visiting Homxai village, about 10km north of Oudomxay town. On a Friday evening and Saturday morning, we did the community mapping exercise. If nothing else, it was a lot of fun and it's great to watch the village residents and my staff get into the exercise and draw up some great looking maps.

Tomorrow we are headed out to another village, Konoy, for another round. Should be fun.

A Learning Experience Part 5 continued...

2006-07-11T23:28:00.000-07:00

Resettlement & Riddles of Development

In a book of research papers published by the National Agriculture and Forestry Institute (NAFRI), a Lao government research organization, one author articulated two riddles with regard to resettlement and that of development generally. They were:

Riddle #1: When is a solution not a solution?

Answer: When it causes more problems than it solves; and

Riddle #2: When is a problem not a problem?

Answer: When it is part of a solution.

Resettlement, as I have learned over the last 16 months is a perfect example of when a ÂsolutionÂ ends up causing more problems than it solves. Over the last few years there has been an extensive amount of research conducted on resettled communities and on communities that have remained in the highlands, living more or less ÂtraditionalÂ livelihoods as shifting cultivators. The research has begun to develop, among development and international institutions as well as within the government of Lao, a consensus on what some of the impacts stemming from resettlement are. The impacts for local ethnic groups like the Khmu people of Oudomxay province are many, but a few of these include:

 Restrictions or limitations on access to land, resulting in food insecurity
 Higher mortality rates
 Devaluation/loss of traditional knowledge and practices
 Greater environmental impacts and degradation
 Loss of social cohesion

Access to Land

A key part of the resettlement program is to provide resettled communities and individual families with sufficient lowland paddy field to grow rice, cash crops for export and non-timber forest products from protected forests for new income. The government program to deal with this issue is the Land Use Allocation and Forestry Program. The intent was to have district level staff conduct land use planning alongside village residents and then ensure the proper allocation of land and forest resources for each village.

The problem here is firstly one of institutional capacity. As it turned out, according to research conducted by NAFRI and a number of international non-governmental organizations, the district level departments charged with carrying out the plans and allocation simply did not have the training, qualifications, finances or resources necessary to perform the required tasks. As a result the planning process was conducted in a haphazard, perfunctory, top down manner.

In many areas, village residents received insufficient and poor quality land or were utterly confused about the process altogether. This has lead to some families or individuals finding themselves in the compromising position of having insufficient to land to grow rice for personal consumption or for sale on the open market. As a result many families are forced to rely on wage labour, borrowing money to purchase rice, or engaging in pioneering cultivationÂpracticectise of slashing and burning relatively untouched areas of forest in steeply sloped areas accompanied by short fallow periods that lead to higher levels of soil erosion, loss of soil fertility, and higher incidences of weeds and pests. In short, an environmentally destructive and unsustainable form of agriculture not to be mistaken with shifting cultivation. (The definitions of ÂShifting cultivationÂ, Âslash & burnÂ, and Âpioneering cultivationÂ and the accompanying government programs to deal with them are rather complex and will be dealt with in a future essay.)

Higher Mortality Rates

Research has shown that resettled villages experience increases in mortality by up to 20 to 40% due to a number of interrelated factors, including: higher infection rates from disease (villages experience higher exposure to fatal diseases such and dengue and malaria in lowland areas then they would in upland areas); malnutrition due to greater food insecurity; lack of access to traditional medicine and remedies; lack of access to modern medical treatments and facilities, etc. The bottom line is that when communities are disrupted and moved into a new area where they are unfamiliar with the local ecology, and the promised infrastructure of clean water, hospitals, and pharmacies that are unavailable due to a lack of funding, village communities often experience alarming and serious increases in mortality.

Devaluation or loss of traditional knopracticesd practises

One important lesson that has been learned in recent decades is that ethnic and indigenous communities have had, or still possess, vast stores of in-depth, highly localized ecological knowledge with regard to their environment. There are many who now believe that this knowledge is not only important to the cultural identity of indigenous communities, but a crucial aspect in the drive towards achieving global social and envsustainabletainability.

Currently, there are extensive efforts underway by numerous international and local organizations within developing and developed countries alike to revitalize and regain the knowledge that has either been lost or is at risk of being lost. There are a number of reasons why local ecological and traditional knowledge may become threatened or even lost, including, but not limited to, loss of traditional lifestyles, disruptions to social cohesion and the ability of communities to store and pass knowledge on to younger generations, or through its rejection by contemporary society, wherein traditional knowledge is viewed as being inherently backward or antiquated. Many ethnic groups, including the Khmu are facing these challenges, which are, in my opinion, prompted and/or exacerbated by the rationalization and continuation of resettlement activities.

When communities are resettled for whatever reason, and are moved into new areas with differing climates and geographic features, the community must adapt and learn to survive in the new area. Despite the fact that many ethnic communities have always thrived in harsh climates and environments and integrated innovative strategies and means for survival, such moves can result in extreme pressures on the community with respect to their ability to develop and articulate their traditional ecological knowledge.

A central justification for resettlement is, in my opinion, motivated by the ideal that sedentary agriculture and its associated cultural manifestation of the Lao Leum (the dominate ethnic group in Lao PDR) and that of life in the lowlands of Lao generally is considered by many to be inherently more civilized and modern than that of the traditional livelihoods found in the upland areas. Although upland areas are often quoted as being extremely rich in environmental services and resources (i.e. high biodiversity), living in the upland areas is often associated with poverty without consideration given to what it means precisely to be impoverished.

Resettled communities, cut off from their traditional lifestyles and environs, are hindered in their ability to save their ecological knowledge and to pass it on to younger generations, resulting in its loss. Considering how much of our contemporary scientific knowledge of botany and pharmaceuticals have come from indigenous communities (i.e. the chemical compounds for aspirin were discovered by botanists who observed tribal communities boiling down the bark of a certain tree species to treat headaches and minor maladies). The loss of indigenous knowledge is not only potentially devastating culturally, economically and environmentally for ethnic communities, but a serious loss of resources and scientific and economic opportunities for Laos and the world community as well.

Greater Environmental Impacts and Degradation

In my limited perspective and understanding, the large majority of unsustainable human interactions with the environment and the resulting impacts are instigated when communities are thrown out of balance with the dynamic relationship they have with their environment. Resettlement of upland communities into the lowlands, and the drive by the government of Lao and international organizations to bring them greater development and economic opportunities has resulted in precisely this kind of disruption to the Khmu people and their environment. There are a number of environmental impacts that occur as a result. These include:
1. Unsustainable and environmentally destructivpracticese practises such as pioneering cultivation (again I will get further into this issue in a future essay),

2. The introduction of cash crop agriculture with large scale monocrop production of economically viable tree species (i.e. rubber, teak and eucalyptus),

3. Increased industrial and illegal logging,

4. Road construction (poor road construction, which is a major problem throughout Laos, resulting in the deposit of sedimentation into creeks and rivers, as well as the opening up of new areas of forest that were previously inaccessible leading to heightened levels of hunting and poaching of endangered wildlife,

5. More waste and poor waste management. Communities are often resettled into larger central settlements resulting in greater amounts of waste with little infrastructure or capacity to deal with management issues, and

6. Higher levels of pollution stemming from increased industrial and economic activities.

Loss of Social Cohesion and Increasing Social Problems
Despite their incredible resilience and fortitude, the above list of impacts and problems are more than many indigenous communities can handle. There has been an abundance of research that shows that such economic and environmental insecurities has forced many communities to change and establish new means of surviving that have placed incredible pressures on their ability to care for each other, and as a result many individuals, families, and communities are facing growing social problems such as poverty, disease, alcoholism, drug addiction, prostitution, human trafficking, loss of youth and skilled labour due to migration, and increasing levels of crime.

The Snowball Affect and Wishful Thoughts of Spring
A common line from government officials and leaders is that these disruptions and difficulties are temporary, that eventually the benefits of resettlement and the opportunities it represents will overcome these difficulties resulting in greater prosperity and stability for all. There are many others, howeverÂI personally feel myself leaning more towards this groupÂthat feel that if these issues are not addressed the resulting social and environmental problems could continue to grow and eventually overwhelm any positive benefits that could come from such a program.

(When thinking of such things I canÂt help but turn my thoughts to the First Nations of Canada and how much they have suffered with respect to the loss of their lands, cultural identity, disempowerment, and traditional lifestyles. Yes, of course there are significant differences, but the disruptions and impacts are similar and as we have seen through the media, the resulting social difficulties (Davis Inlet anyone?) have been devastating and long lasting. A serious issue that I believe the First Nations will be dealing with for decades and generations to come.)

Future Instalments: Romanticizing Tribal Life, Definition of Epistomology & Politics, the Development Ethical Dilemma, and Addressing Resettlement: where to go from here?

A Learning Experience Part 5

2006-07-07T21:22:00.000-07:00

Resettlement

In my opinion one of the key stumbling blocks for a successful volunteer placement is twofold: 1. a lack of knowledge and familiarity with the socio-political situations of the people for whom we are supposed to be assisting; and 2. the relatively short length of time we will be living in the community and the high degree of turnover for volunteers.

For the first point, I can say without a doubt, I was, and still am to a large degree, ignorant about all things Lao. Sure, I did as much research as I could before coming here. I was aware of some of the larger issues like the limited access to potable water, or the degree of deforestation and illegal logging that was apparently taking place, among other things, but these are merely the surface, a reflection of those issues that are allowed to filter up to the general media and the public outside of Lao.

Upon my arrival and the start of my placement, I quickly learned just how little I knew and how wrong the little I thought I knew turned out to be. Unfortunately, CUSO was going through a fair amount of instability and turmoil when I first arrived (although they still did a great job of making us feel welcome and comfortable and that we had everything we needed), but nevertheless it’s not like they were able to sit us down and give us a full briefing on the issues we might have to deal with. As a result, I have mostly stumbled along at my own pace discovering certain realities and issues, mostly by mistake. The most perfect, and quite possibly one of the most important issues of this nature is resettlement.

Since the 1970’s the national government of Lao has had a policy of moving isolated upland villages down into focal areas closer to roads and larger centres. The government has given five official reasons for the policy. These include:

1. Provision of services and infrastructure
The government has insisted that by moving villages down into the valley bottoms and into larger villages, these communities will be easier to provide essential infrastructure such as roads, hospitals, schools, etc. Also, by being closer to roads villages will have access to greater markets and thus will become part of the market economy. The rational being something like “if we can’t bring development to the people, we might as well bring the people to development.”

2. Eradication of Opium production
Under pressure from the international community, particularly the United States, the Lao government had, until quite recently, the stated policy of eradicating opium production in Lao by 2005. Last year, they announced the successful completion of this goal, claiming Lao to be completely opium free. (I’m sure the drug dealers on every street corner in almost any sizable town in Lao had a good chuckle over that one!). As a part of resettlement the rational was that by moving seemingly impoverished communities out of the highlands and providing them land and new economic opportunities, the people would naturally move away from growing and selling opium.

3. Eradication/stabilization of shifting cultivation
Shifting cultivation, most commonly referred to as “Slash & Burn” denoting the practise of people in upland areas to clear land by falling and cutting bush and then burning it, is a very common feature of the landscape in Lao, and more often than not an essential livelihood strategy for nearly 80% of the population; a group that is typically the poorest and most marginalized throughout the country. Associated with poverty and environmental degradation, and with the support and pressure from international funding and development organization such as the United Nations Development Program and the World Bank, the government has a policy with the goal of eradicating the practise of shifting cultivation and encouraging and fostering the development of more low land sedentary agriculture. With respect to resettlement, the rational was that by moving shifting cultivators out of the uplands and supplying them land for agriculture and alternative forms of income generation, people would naturally move away from slash and burn.

4. Security
Over the last several decades since the Indochinese/American war, Lao has had a series of ongoing internal and external conflicts. Internally, there are still factions operating in Lao to this day that are still loyal to the monarchy or have other grievances. In the not so distant past there have been shootings, bombings as well as other insurgent activities. As a result the government has endeavoured to move groups that are deemed a security risk and put them in areas where they can be watched or where they perhaps will lose their interest or motivation for certain “inappropriate” behaviours

5. Nation Building
By moving isolated communities out of the highlands and down into larger communities, they will naturally integrate into the larger, more civilized, Lao Leum culture and become more attached to the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (Does this sound familiar to anyone?).

*Although there are a number of reports and articles that discuss and describe the offical policy reasons for resettlement, the particular format I've just employed was taken from a research report recently published by a Canadian Research Institute. Should anyone want greater detail as to citations please email me and I would be more than happy to pass on all references and copies of this paper.

So there you have it, this is the official policy statements—as best I could find out about them anyways. Next blog I will discuss some of the issues and consequences I have learned of over the last 16 months. Stay tuned.

Khmu Mythology & the BioSand Filter

2006-07-04T03:45:00.000-07:00

Had a very interesting day out in Ban Tangnuey today. I went out with some of my colleagues from the Science Technology & Environment Agency, a friend and volunteer from the German Devlopment Service (DED), Joachim Kobold, and a friend from Luang Phabang, Joanne (can't remember her last name just now). Our visit had three objectives:

1. The villagers have built an additional 10 biosand water filters and I wanted to check on them to see that they had been built and were functioning properly. From what I could tell the villagers had done a fairly good job. All ten filters were finished and installed in homes through out the village. There were some problems however. For quite a few the water flow rate was far too high. It should flow through the filter at 1 litre per minute. At this rate you know the water is moving through the sand and gravel slow enough for the bacteria, viruses and parasites to be removed. any faster than this and the filter is not safe. I suspect the villagers were not putting in the proper amounts of sand to gravel for the different layers, so it looks like I will have to return and do some additional training. no big deal. There were a few filters that were working perfectly so the villagers weren't feeling too discouraged.

2. Joachim, who works as a tourism advisor for the Provincial Tourism Authority, came out to the village with me as he is interested in paying Ban Tangnuey to build some BSFs for the villages where he currently has some project activities around eco-toursim and homestays. There is no firm commitment yet but he is discussing the possibility of having the villagers build and install up to 12 additional filters. This could be a good source of income for the villagers and would possibly pay for the additional 15 filters they have planned for their own village. This project is really beginning to take on a life of its own.

3. My friend Jo, a brilliant english women who has been living in Luang phabang for the last six years, is the co -owner of two stores, Orkpoptok--or East meets west--that feature traditional ethnic textiles from around the north of Lao. I have been telling her for awhile about the amazing traditional textiles the villagers in Ban Tangneuy make using wood fibres. so she finally gave in and came out for a visit. I think she really like the bags but was not ready to commit to any kind of business relationship. There are some logistical and quality control issues, as well as dying problems with the bags right now, so we'll have to wait and see.

One very interesting aspect of the visit is what Jo was able to learn from the village chief. She managed to get him to tell us the Khmu creation myth. According to the village chief there are three types of Khmu people: the Khmu roc (that's how the village chief said it), the Kmu Leu, and the Khmu Ou. Ban Tangnuey is Khmu Ou. From what I understood the creation myth went something like this: Once there was many people in the world all watched over by a father god and a mother god. At one point, for one reason or another, the father god and mother god became very angry with the people and destroyed them all. After this, they discovered that a cow had eaten something (what it might have been was not made clear to me) and had become pregnant with a god child, who inturn was filled with many new people. Seeing this the mother god and father god decided they needed to help the cow out by taking a red hot poker and poking the cow with three holes so that the god child and its many people could get out. The first out of the cow were the Khmu Roc. As a result of being first they had the darkest skin. don't ask me why but they were first and have darker skin. Next came the Khmu Leu with a middle tan coloured skin, and then the Khmu Ou who have the lightest skin. and that's it. There's probably more to it but that's all I was able to get this time. Will try and learn more the next time I head out there.

I have to say that it is days like this that really make development all worthwhile. Can't wait to head back out again.

A silly poem about being a development worker in Lao

2006-07-03T01:35:00.000-07:00

Asasamak (The Volunteer)

The sun is a broken embryonic egg yoke
Dripping through a dirty coffee sock filter sky
Dust and smoke combine to form nuclear halitosis and hellenic BO
choking & blinding like a closet full of second hand smoke from cheap third world cigarettes
Lao PDR (Post unDergraduate Reality)
An ashtray lined with palm trees
Funny that I feel so comfortable here
Or perhaps not
I am a volunteer after all

Turtles carrying birds & boys w/ stinky armpits
Tigers w/ dirty asses heckled by smart-ass monkeys
Laoation mythology
Larium dreams
Avoiding foreigners while seeking foreign familiarity
Shields, guards, & blinkers worn down to the point I can loose myself in senseless moments
& not be concerned with what might happen next

But something will happen next:
A bloated ear sniffing gasoline
Getting lost & loosing myself at the market
Beerlao & ladyboys on the banks of the Namkong
Endless packs of diseased dogs snapping at my heals
Unexpected, unsolicited homoerotic encounters on the backs of motor scooters
Or allowing myself to feel smitten, highschoolish
& kissing like it’s 3:30pm on a Friday & the ‘rents aren’t due home for another 30 minutes
Cow tail, bile dip, tripe laced beer snacks & Lao Lao drunken tuk tuk drivers
Puking my guts out from dehydration & heat stroke
Putting out grass fires
& watching your expectations go up in the smoke of moments so embarrassing you feel like a balloon deflating on the business end of drunken insensitivity
a bursting of the bubble
a flatulent disaster
a whoopee cushion cultural holocaust
& every flick of movement in the corner of my eye is a spider, a cockroach, a snake, or mosquito w/ malicious intent
I give up
take a cold shower
Lie on the bed naked under the fan
a heap of crumpled cooperant

Later, I will get up, get dressed
& reapply a carcinogelicious blend of deet & sun block like I’m basting a turkey
But for now, Lao can have me anyway she wants
I submit
I volunteer myself

-For Stephanie, Kim, Chad and volunteers everywhere

Ongoing Activities

2006-06-27T23:40:00.000-07:00

These past few weeks since I arrived back in Oudomxay after travelling through Vietnam with Paul have been even crazier than I thought they would be.

On June 13 we had our innaugural meeting to officially start the research phase of our watershed project in the Nam Ko River Basin. We had community leaders from 23 villages meet with us in a central village called Ban Konoy. We also had some government officials from district and provincial offices join us.

It was a interesting day as the staff from PSTEO (my Lao counterparts) organized and planned the entire event. It started off in typical Lao style with all the community leaders and government officials were sat down at tiny little desks (the meeting took place at a primary school) and the staff from PSTEO lectured them for over an hour about being good environmental citizens, what the project objectives are, etc etc. And then the community leaders each took their turn to stand up and say how happy they were to be there, how great the government is for doing such a project, etc etc.

I even had to put in a word (in Lao) and got up and told everyone who I was, that I was glad to be there and that they could call me "Patchit"-guy who travels too much, "Falangnoi"-small foreigner, or "Falangjeun"--fried foreigner, which are my nicknames in Lao. This went over well and finally got a laugh and some smiles out of the room--Lao folks can be far too serious in my opinion.

After this was finally finished, we broke up into working groups of four or five villages, and the staff from PSTEO held discussions about land use and environmental problems. It was very interesting to see what the villagers felt were important environmental issues were and the level of understanding they had of the environment and watershed issues. Some of the issues they identified were: deforestation and lower water flows in the river; restrictions on access to land and resulting shorter fallow periods--meaning the villagers are forced to reuse the same land more often than in the past thus degrading the soil; water pollution; and loss of fisheries.

So, for the next step we will be heading out and doing some in-depth participatory research in 7 of the 23 villages to get a better idea of exactly how all this is happening.

An unfortunate turn of events for another project, the Community Learning Centre assessment with DED, has been put on hold indefinitely, or at least PSTEO's role in it. It seemed as though my counterparts either didn't understand the project or lost interest as I just couldn't get them to do their part. so I had to call DED and let them know that it seemed we wouldn't be able to do any assessment after all. Thankfully, DED has been understanding so far and I don't think it damaged our relationship. The problem is that whenever someone asks PSTEO to get involved in a project they say yes without thinking about whether or not its feasible, so sometimes things fall apart.

The Ban Bo water project has been seeing some rocky ground as well. There has been a lot of confusion between my office and German Agro Action, who approved our project and is supporting us with $2500 USD to put in a gravity fed water system and biosand filters. I won't get into details, but suffice to say at one point this week my bosses called up GAA and politely told them we would no longer do the project as we were tired of all the nonense. GAA responded back, apologizing for the confusion and asking us to please stay on the project. I think we will still do it...at least I hope so for the villagers sake.

Anyways, that's been my last week and a half of fun and games.

A Learning Experience Part 4

2006-06-19T23:01:00.000-07:00

Development as a Social Experiment

As with many things in life, there is always more than one side to an issue: pros and cons, positives and negatives. All too often, development is cast in a light that focuses entirely too much on either the positive or the negative. That all development is good and the world can never improve without the “developed” world assisting the “underdeveloped” world; or as being a giant social experiment run amok, causing more harm than good and something that should be stopped immediately; that by allowing developing nations to help themselves, they’ll do a far more effective and practical job than the largest amounts of aid money and volunteers could ever hope to accomplish.

Honestly, my opinions run back and forth between these two extremes on a daily basis more or less depending on my mood. “Development” is the proverbial onion, once you start to tear back the layers, the underlying complexity and unexpected consequences can make your eyes water and your head spin, but in order to get to the core its an exercise that must be undertaken.

First Layer-The Handout Mentality

When I first arrived in Ban Tan Nguey I was surprised to learn I was not the first development worker to be taken there. In fact, German Agro Action, a German NGO had done some agriculture and infrastructure development five years previously. During that time they had installed a gravity fed water system (GFWS) that was now no longer functioning due to sediment build-up in the pipes, which blocks up the system and leads to leaks. Also, the GFW system had been built for the village in its previous location when the people had still been living on a hill 250 metres above the current town site. As a result the village had no source of water within the village boundaries.

During my first visits to the village, the residents cited this as a major priority along with a means for filtering water for personal consumption. This led to the clean water project described previously, and I was more than happy to do it. As the work was underway however, I was forced to ask myself what would happen after we installed the GFWS? In five years, would the sediment simply build up and the GWFS would be broken again? If so, who would fix it? Who would pay for the repairs? Was the project sustainable?

Although Ban Tan Nguey is certainly a poor village the residents do have sources of income stemming from agriculture exports and non-timber forest products. The benefits of these activities can be seen throughout the village. Many residents are currently building new homes; some even have TV’s, stereos, motorbikes, and cell phones. Electricity in the village is generated through solar panels and micro hydro that the villagers essentially rent for 10,000kip/month ($1.00/month) from the local energy company. As a result I was rather surprised by the responses I got from both my colleagues and the village residents when I brought up the issue of who would pay for the repairs. “We don’t have the funds? Can you find money for us?”

I couldn’t help but wonder how it could be that there was money for luxury items, but the villagers were seemingly unwilling to organize their own money around something so essential to their communal and individual health and well being. I probed further into the issue and received some interesting answers. The villagers simply replied that the Falang (foreigners) had given them the money last time; I had just finished supplying the moneythis time; so, it seemed reasonable to them that there would be money available again in the future.

My colleagues echoed these same sentiments. Why bother paying for something yourself when if you wait long enough someone will come along and give you the money for free? Can anyone honestly say they would do anything differently under these circumstances?

During my time in the village I have never ceased to be amazed at how ingenious and skilled the villagers are. I’ve watched them rig up all kinds of new forms of technology for their day-to-day labours without pausing to even think it over. Also, they are organized on many levels. Without any kind of meeting the entire village will come together and build a new toilet, lay the pipes for the GWFS through 2500m of dense jungle, organize land use, etc etc etc. Whatever needs to be done, they do it as a group, fast and effectively. I couldn’t understand why they seemed hesitant to do so with regard to maintaining their water system.

The whole situation reminded me of an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, I once saw on TV. (A friend reminded me of the episode while I was visiting in Luang Nam Tha). The Enterprise (the main Star Trek space ship for you non-trekkie dorks) had come across an alien ship that was broken down and stranded in space.

The captain, Jean-Luc Picard, hails the ship and offers assistance. As it turns out the aliens are in need of a new part that the Enterprise just happens to be capable of “simulating” a new one. Jean-Luc orders it up and sends it over, pronto. Just as the Enterprise is about to leave, they get a distress message from the alien ship: they don’t know how to install it. Would the Enterprise be able to send someone over and install it for them? Jean-Luc, although somewhat annoyed, agrees and sends over his best engineer, Geordie (can’t remember how to spell his name).

When Geordie arrives and attempts to show the aliens how to install the broken part he is baffled by their hesitation. “Can’t you just do it for us?” they ask. “It would be so much easier and quicker if you did it. We can figure it out later.” Geordie, worried about being away from the Enterprise for too long, agreed and just installed the new part. Just as he was about to “beam” back to the Enterprise, the aliens had one more request. “Our navigational system is broken. Can you fix it for us?” Again when Geordie offered to show them how to fix it so they would know how to do it themselves in the future, the aliens hesitated and said, “We don’t want to hold you up, we know you have to get back to your ship, why don’t you just fix it and we’ll figure it out later.” Next thing you know the aliens had Geordie working on yet another project and had another way of convincing him to just go and ahead and do it for them.

Meanwhile back on the Enterprise Jean-Luc was wondering what had happened to his engineer and sent his first officer “Number One” over to find him. Before he could even get off the “Beaming Pad” (sorry I can’t remember all the proper terms for these things—I guess I’m not that good a trekkie) the aliens had Number One fixing something for them. Before long, half of the crew from the Enterprise were on board the alien ship fixing things. Throughout the entire ordeal, the aliens were finding ways to keep from learning how to fix and maintain their own ship. By the time Jean-Luc, very upset now from having lost so much time, goes over to the ship. We learn that this is how the aliens manage to travel through space and survive. They had evolved by getting others to fix everything for them.

The aliens were by no means unintelligent or unable. In fact they had other skills that were highly developed and superior to the humans from the Enterprise, they just had developed their own form of intelligence with regard to getting other races and species to fix things for them.

Standing in Ban Tan Nguey, I couldn’t help wondering if by providing the funds for the BioSand Water Filters and the GWFS if I had not played a part in creating a similar situation. This is a classic question of development: if we just keep giving people money are we helping them to be self-sufficient or are we creating a dependency? It’s rather cynical but I believe a fair and necessary question. Let’s make this very clear: I don’t think that the villagers are helpless or incapable of doing the work themselves; exactly the opposite, but I couldn’t help thinking of the above analogy whenever I receive blank looks from them and my office colleagues when I asked how they would like to plan for future maintenance. An exceptionally ironic point was made when my boss said, “You’ll just have to find us some more money. Could you stay for another three years?”

"Engage engines, Scotty, we’re outta here!"

I have seen this kind of situation in other villages as well. A new village I'm currently working in, Ban Bo, had a large project with the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) about five years ago. They also built a gravity-fed system for drinking water and an irrigation system. Now the gravity-fed water system no longer works and the irrigation system, although still functional, is in need of repairs. The villagers have asked STEO and myself to assist them in getting them to work again.

Again, the villagers seem to possess ample knowledge to fix the problem themselves. When I asked why they hadn’t done it yet they claimed to not have the funds. This is not one of the poorest villages I’ve been to. There are many new homes, satellite dishes, cars, trucks, etc. When I asked why they didn’t organize and save the funds over the last five years, the Phorban (Village chief) could not have put it more succinctly, “We’ve been waiting for someone like you to come along and help us get money”.

The fact of the matter is that people in Lao have grown accustomed to the idea of Aid money continuously flowing into their communities. Who wouldn’t? And they have gotten fairly good at figuring out what each institution or NGO might be able to offer them and then working to get it. In my experience, this has created unsustainable and detrimental dependencies that must be addressed if “development” is ever going to help anyone.

STEO and I are attempting to address the problem for Ban Bo by working out contractual agreements with the village residents that if we do find funding then they must develop a community development fund whereby all affected residents make contributions (with consideration that some families will be able to contribute more than others)—perhaps a barter system where people can trade sweat equity in maintaining the system, while others contribute money. It’s an ongoing process and we have agreed no money or materials will be provided until a system has been developed that is practical and has the support of all the project participants. I don’t know if this will work any better, but I figure we have to try something.

A Learning Experience Part 3

2006-06-13T22:03:00.000-07:00

A Confused Do-Gooder

Like many development workers I was attracted to the prospect of living in a developing country and “helping” people for many years. My interested began as far back my social studies classes in junior high school. Sitting in class, looking at text books that showed Canadians working abroad, rural settings in Africa or South America, amicable, smiling, invariably sun burnt individuals standing next to groups of locals looking over one development project or another: perhaps an irrigation project or a water pump. In this context, Canadians were cast as a heroic humanitarian lot who were out changing things, making improvements, small yet effective contributions towards global problems that often seemed overwhelming and elusive to a young teenager. These images provided a small yet powerful glimpses of hope, of opportunities to travel, to have life altering experiences, and to change the world for the better, all something I wanted terribly to be a part of. That feeling never went away, and guided all my choices through seven years of post-secondary education: college and university. I always had it in the back of my mind that I was going to get “out there”, that I was going to “help”. With this position in Laos, the opportunity had finally arrived, yet here I was, staring at a one-way plan ticket and a two-year contract, realizing I had no real idea what any of it meant.

So what happened?

I’ve been in Lao already for one year. How would I answer Garnet now after all that I’ve been through? And I have been through quite a bit already. Two months of language studies in Savanakhet and now eleven months at my placement in Oudomxay. As many of you know I have managed to facilitate and implement a community based development initiative in a small ethnic Khmu village, Ban Tan Nguey, not far from the town of Oudomxay where I am stationed. The project, which involved introducing and training village residents in the construction, use and maintenance of a technology called the BioSand Water filter to provide clean drinking water, repairs and upgrades to the village gravity fed water system that would bring water into the village, and the construction of sanitation and toiletry facilities for the village primary school, was in many ways everything I had always thought development was about. Improving the lives of people living in poverty. Providing much needed infrastructure and enhancing their health and well-being. I recall, upon the completion of this pilot project, an immense feeling of satisfaction. I could experience the direct benefits of my presence and see the happiness and improvements brought into the lives of the people in the village. I could have left my placement right then, gone back to Canada and claimed the entire experience a success. I had “helped”. Or had I?

A Learning Experience Part 2

2006-06-13T21:57:00.000-07:00

HELP!

I had of course looked over my job description provided by CUSO Canada. It had all the prerequisite points on alleviating poverty, empowering communities, encouraging good governance, and other feel good, yet frustratingly ambiguous goals. It did have some concrete objectives like training my counterparts in participatory research (although I honestly had very little understanding of what this really meant in a development context), proposal writing and fundraising, small business planning, project management, etc. Still, I had no idea as to how I was going to actually achieve these objectives once I arrived or how my counterparts might view or understand these ideals, or even if they agreed with them in principle. I had been provided with a week long intensive orientation to development and training in cultural integration, workshops on power and privilege, and gender equality and racism through CUSO, all of which had provided me with a plethora of tools and strategies for adapting to and coping with the mental and emotional strain that can come with taking a volunteer position in an isolated community in a developing nation.

Flexibility and patience. These were the key terms that were pounded into our heads repeatedly during the orientation week. Our job descriptions as told to us by our workshop facilitators, were intended to only provide a framework to guide our actions, not a concrete or tacit agreement, a snapshot of the interests or needs of our Lao partners at a certain time. The only thing we could expect for sure is that everything would change upon our arrival. Given this reality, CUSO cooperants (the term given to volunteers to imply the cooperative and mutually empowering exchange that is supposed to occur between us and our host national colleagues), are encouraged to do practically nothing doing their first six months of their placement, except “watch TV”. A phrase intended to convey the idea that initially we should try only to observe our partners, their day to day activities, their work practises, cultural idiosyncrasies within the office environment, how they identify issues or opportunities and how they go about making decisions and strategies to address them.

In other words: don't rush in thinking you already know everything. Build relationships first, gain people’s trust and get them to open up to your presence. Only then can you hope to approach that elusive question: what can I do? Nevertheless, all of this added up to the only one answer with which I could reply to Garnet with any confidence that day in his office: “I have no idea. I’ll have to see when I get there.”

Project Activities

2006-06-12T04:13:00.000-07:00

The Science Technology and Environment Office in Oudomxay, my partner organization, is a provincial government agency mandated to identify environmental problems or issues and then develop and implement projects to address them. My job as Community Planning Facilitator, is to assist the office and to develop their capacity to conduct community based environmental research, find funds for project activities, assist the office in writing and submitting proposals (although truthfully at this point I do most of the writing) and then to facilitate the implementation and evaluation of projects.

Thus far, we have completed one project: the Clean Water and BioSand Filter project in Ban Tang Nguey, a small Khmu village of 150 people north of Oudomxay Town. The project went well and included the construction of a gravity fed water system, construction of a sanitation and toiletry facility for the village (the biggest in northern Laos) and the introduction and training in the construction, use and maintenance of the BioSand Water Filter. The project went very well and as of this time the villagers have construced and are using a total of 14 filters. The big task for STEO is to get back out to the village and test the filters and make sure that they were built properly.

Other activities that have either started or will be starting in the next little while include:

Community Learning Centre Assessment Initiative
This project involves our working with DED, the German Development Service here in Lao, to assess the feasibility of continuing support for Community Learning Centres in village communities around Oudomxay Province. DED approached us about four months ago, asking us to look into some CLC's that had been set up in recent years by a number of international NGO's, and to identify those centres that would most likely benefit from and would use additional support and financing from DED in the future.

The CLC's were set up to provide training and education in village communities for any kind of training requirement from literacy to business administration. DED is interested in having us research and pick 6 or 7 centres which would receive new money and support and could continue their activities in the future. At this time the project has yet to get started but I'm hoping we can get going sometime this month.

Ban Bo Clean Water and BioSand Water Filter Project
This project was started when STEO was approached by the village chief of Ban Bo. Ban Bo is a Phonoy and Thai Leu ethnic village of about 1000 people located about 7 km north of Oudomxay Town. We were told by the Phor Ban that the village desparately needed a gravity fed water system and some means of filtering water for personal consumption. Fortunately, STEO has already done precisely this kind of project in Ban Tang Nguey (please read above) and we were more than happy to investigate. Our preliminary participatory planning meetings with the villagers confirmed the village chief's concerns and we set about finding funding. As mentioned previously, we have just recieved just under $2500 USD to build and gravity fed water system, and introduce and train the villagers in the construction, use and maintenance of the BioSand water filter. the project starts next week.

Water for Life: A Land Use and Watershed Management Project in Khmu Villages in the Ko River Watershed
This project, which recieved a $9,380 CND grant from the Saskatchewan Council For Internation Cooperation, represents STEO's biggest undertaking with my involvement to date. The whole idea is to conduct environmental and community research on the connection between contemporary and traditional land use practises and the impact on watershed services (ie. clean water, flood control, etc.) From there we will work with the village communities to develop and implement strategies for land use, integrating traditional practises and uses where possible, and protect the natural environment.

The project area is the Nam Ko River, a 85 km river, which startes approximately 55km north of Oudomxay town, runs through the townsite and then turns north again to drain into the Phak River. The Ko is a sub-catchment to the Lower Mekong River Basin, an area of high biodiversity levels, and a key resource to the livelyhood and economic sustainability of the Khmu people living in the region. As noted previously this project starts tomorrow and will run for the next ten months.

Tourism Environmental Education and Infrastructure Project
This project is very much in the planning stages. It started when the Provincial Tourism Authority approached STEO looking for assistance in conducting environmental research and education in villages that are developing eco-tourism projects. Our involement will include conducting environmental education activities, environmental impact assessments on tourism activities, and introducing the BioSand water filter into participating communities, as well as developing environmental protection strategies and plans.

That's a summary of my activities to date. I will do my best to keep this blog updated along with general thoughts and essays on development as these projects progress.

Back to work and already feeling crazy

2006-06-12T04:02:00.000-07:00

Well, I'm back in Oudomxay now after a crazy two week trip to Vietnam with my brother Paul. First day in the office and already things are happening.

First thing, I recieved a phone call from the German Agro Action Office in Vientiane. A month or so ago I submitted a proposal to do a Clean water and Biosand Water filter project in the village "Ban Bo", a Phonoy and Thai Leu ethnic village about 7 km from Oudomxay Town. The proposal called for the building of a gravity fed water system and the introduction and training for village residents in the construction, use and maintenance of the biosand water filter. For those of you who are not familiar with this technology, it is a simple design that uses concrete, sand and gravel to filter water at the household level. It costs about 8 USD to make one. Our plan is to work with the villagers to build at least 10 of them and then to set up a community based cooperative to build and sell them to other villages and interested individuals. We figure the project is going to take about 6 months. GAA is going to give us just under 2500 USD to get the project off the ground.

Also, the Water for Life Project is getting off to a fast start. Although my office was unable to get any work done while I was gone, we start tomorrow with a big meeting in a village, Ban Konoy, about 15 km north of Oudomxay Town. The meeting will include village leaders from twenty different communities and a number of government agencies. Our plan is to brief them on the project and to solicit cooperation and participation. should be interesting. For those of you who are not familiar with the project...don't worry I will post a blog describing it in detail shortly.

A Learning Experience

2006-05-16T21:28:00.000-07:00

This blog represents the first installment in a series of short essays and journal entries I have been preparing over the last couple of weeks and months. I had been intending to send them out over email, but I believe this medium may prove far easier and more effective.

A Learning Experience
I am personally of the mind that the only time you really know you’re learning something is when you come to realize that everything you thought you knew about a given topic or situation turns out to be largely wrong. Nothing could be truer than what is occurring with my experiences of being here in Lao and that of development generally. I remember when I was preparing to come over here and take this position as the “Community Planning Facilitator” for the Provincial Oudomxay Science Technology and Environment Agency (PSTEO), Garnet asked me a simple yet very poignant question, “How exactly are you going to be of any help to the people of Lao?” He of course did not mean to be sarcastic in any way, but simply wanted to know how I, a person who had never lived in a developing country, who had very little experience in development or in environmental or community planning, could expect to provide any insight or “expertise” to people who had been living and dealing with the issues of poverty and development for their entire lives? What knowledge or skills could I possibly offer that they didn’t possess already? Leave it to Garnet to stump me with such a seemingly simple inquiry. And stump me it did. I remember sitting across from him in the office of his home, looking at him as he awaited my answer, with a feeling of terror creeping up my spine. Why terror? Because I realized immediately that I didn’t have an answer. I had less than a month to go before my scheduled departure and I had absolutely no real idea of what I was supposed to do once I got there. How could I possibly “help” anyone?

Stay tuned more to come.

A New Beginning, May 17, 2006

2006-05-16T21:24:00.000-07:00

Hello all and welcome to my new blog. I have enjoyed keeping a blog with my brother on our photodocumentary project these past few weeks that I decided it was time I started my own.

I have been in Lao now for just over 16 months and a great deal has happened. I won't bother trying to go back and recapture everything that I did or saw, but I would like to use this blog as an opportunity to discuss some of the things I have been learning and thinking about with respect to living in a developing country, what it means to be a volunteer, and what development is all about. I hope all of you will enjoy my blog and please feel free to make any comments you like. I would very much like to see this blog become a forum for discussion rather than simply me blabbering away. Stay tuned, many posts to come.