Trip report Bolikha.. - TABI

Trip report: visit to Lao-Luxembourg Rural Development Project,
Bolihan district, Bolikhamxay, 17/02/2004
Joost Foppes, FRC/SNV Tel. 020-5508760, e-mail: jfoppes@loxinfo.co.th
Sounthone Ketphanh, FRC, Tel. 021-770892, sounthone53@yahoo.com
1. Objectives of the visit
The Lao-Luxembourg Rural Development Project (Lao-Lux Project) requested a one day
visit from two NTFP specialists from the Forest Research Centre (FRC) and SNV, the
Netherlands Development Organisation. The aim of the visit was to explore options for
sustainable use of Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs). More specifically, the Lao-Lux
Project wanted to discuss:
Training requirements
Data collection requirements
Options for planting NTFPs in and outside forests
Options for managing NTFPs in forest blocks
Any other suggestions for NTFP development
The NTFP specialists had a meeting with the management team of the Lao-Lux Project
in the morning in Paksan, the capital of Bolikhamxay Province, followed by a site visit in
the afternoon. This report presents main findings and recommendations from the trip.
2. Background of the Lao-Lux Project
The Lao-Lux Project has been active in Bolikhan district, Bolikhamxay Province, since
1999. The project is aimed at poverty reduction for permanent settlement of 20
communities (2,062 households, 10,500 people), mainly of ethnic minorities, who have
recently moved into the project area. These communities previously practiced shifting
cultivation. The main achievements of the project to date have been:
• establishment of 2 new irrigation systems (141 and 79 ha) and rehabilitation of an
existing scheme (466 ha), transfer of irrigation management
• construction of 39 km of rural roads, 2 secondary schools and 3 primary schools,
clean water supply systems for 10 communities and 3 markets
• various agricultural extension and training activities
• credit schemes, village development funds
• capacity building for Government staff and village development groups
• participatory village administration committees established
• establishment of 29,654 ha protected forest areas
• establishment of village nurseries for tree plantation
The forests of the area have been subjected to intense commercial logging over the last
ten years or so, and this has had a visible impact on landscape. Yet local communities
still collect many forests products to supplement their livelihoods. How can the project
help local communities to keep on benefiting from the forest, without losing it?
1

3. Meeting with management team
The participants in the meeting were:
Mr. Keo Oudone, head of forestry, Province Bolikhamxay
Mr. Sonexay, head of forestry, Bolikhan district
Ms. Southa, acting national project coordinator, Lao-Lux Project
Ms. Sheena Sloan, teamleader, Lao-Lux Project
Mr. Manisengphet, province liaison officer, Lao-Lux project
Mr. Sounthone Ketphanh, deputy director, Forest Research Centre (FRC)
Mr. Joost Foppes, NTFP adviser, SNV-FRC
The meeting covered the following topics:
1) Reviewing the project activities in forestry to date
2) Brainstorming on key NTFP products, production and marketing issues
3) Training requirements
A) Project Activites in forestry to date
The project has assisted in the establishment of four protected forest areas:
- Phou Meuang, 4,150 ha (around Ban Nalong)
- Phou Phalan, 4,032 ha (around the Muang Huang)
- Phou Meun/Nam Xao, 5,200 ha (around Muang Bo)
- Phou Heo/Phou Hat/Phou Mathan, 20,800 ha (Ban Thasy/Xieng Leu area)
In total these areas cover 34,182 ha. The areas have been mapped and general access
regulations seem to have been drawn up. There not yet any specific guidelines on NTFP
extraction from these forests. The project also supports a tree nursery at Houay Kham,
which produced 65,000 tree seedlings, mainly fruit trees and agarwood (Aquilaria sp.),
distributed for planting in 2003. It is too early to say how these plantations perform.
B) Key NTFPs from the project area
Participants identified 14 key NTFPs collected from the project area (see table 1 below).
Table 1: Lao-Lux Project team’s short list of NTFPs, with price estimates (February 2004).
No Lao name Latin name Description Price /kg
1 Khisi Vatica sp. Hard damar resin 500 kip
2 Nyod boun Daemonorops schmidtiana Large edible rattan shoots 1,000 kip
4 Vai thoun Calamus poilanei Large diameter rattan for furniture 5,000 kip
5 Vai noi Calamus solitarius and others Small diameter rattan for furniture 1,000 kip
6 Mak tao Arenga westerhoutii Palm fruits used as sweets 1,500 kip
7 Mak neng Amomum sp. Chinese cardamom, medicine 1,000 kip
8 Khem Thysanolaema maxima Grass used to make brooms ?
3 Nyod san Raphis sp. Small edible palm shoots 3,000 kip
9 Nor Mai Many Dendrocalamus sp. Edible bamboo-shoots 500 kip
10 Hed Many species Mushrooms ?
11 Pak wan Melientha suavis Forest vegetable 3,000 kip
12 Mai ketsana Aquilaria crassna Agarwood, a valuable scented wood variable
13 Mai hia Schizostachyum virgatum Bamboo canes 1,000 kip
14 Yang bong Persea kurzii Bark used for incense making 3,000 kip
2

Participants tried to prioritise some of these products for action, using several criteria,
e.g. income raising potential, sustainability, social impact (no of families involved),
suitability for planting, in-forest management or marketing improvement (see table 2).
This type of priority ranking could be applied also at village level.
Table 2: example of prioritising NTFPs for action according to several criteria
Product Income Sustainable Many families Planting In-forest Marketing
Khisi high low very many no need yes ?
Boun/san medium medium everybody no need yes very good
Vai thoun high depleted many hard: 20 years yes good
Mak tao medium low many no need yes good
Mak neng low high many 4 years yes ?
Khem medium high many no need no need good
Nor Mai low low everybody 4 years maybe good
Hed low good some how? how? good
Pak wan low good some 2 years no ?
Ketsana high depleted only a few hard: 15 years seed trees ?
C) Discussion on sustainable NTFP options management options
Some key products are becoming very hard to find due to commercial exploitation, e.g.
the large rattan “vai thoun”, bong bark and “ketsana”, agarwood. It would seem urgent to
promote plantations of these products, but who will do it? Cultivation of agarwood trees
is possible, but the techniques for producing the valuable bits of black wood are still not
available. Until this problem has been solved, it is not recommendable to invest in
agarwood plantations.
There is little incentive for poor families to plant rattan for canes and wait 15-20 years
before the canes are grown. This is too a risky enterprise for small farmers, it is better
left to private companies. However, private companies in the area seem also reluctant to
invest in long-term commercial rattan plantations. The Lao-Lux Project best bet would
probably be to assist the Province Forestry Department in starting trial plantations of
rattan for cane production around the nursery at Houay Kham. It would especially be
wise to pay villagers to collect rattan seed from the forest and protect seed sources,
before it is too late. The intended effect would be to raise awareness among private
sector investors on the potential for growing rattan and securing a stock of seed material
for the future.
Bong bark can easily be planted and is ready for harvesting after 5-7 years, production
and marketing seem much more secure. This may be a better alternative for income
raising among poor families. Hundreds of families are already engaged in bong planting
in Salavan and Champasak provinces, with support of the local Province Forestry Offices
there. The Lao-Lux Project could consider a study visit to these provinces.
For some other products, e.g. bamboo, cardamom and mak tao palm fruits, it may be
easier to promote sustainable harvesting from the forest. Several issues remain to be
addressed by the project to achieve sustainable harvesting systems:
- How could local communities become motivated to invest time and labour into
managing forest resources in the area? What incentives could be offered to them?
3

- Who is the owner of the forest? What are the access/use rights of villagers
compared to the logging company and the Government?
- What is the process by which access/off-take regulations will be drawn? How will
villagers participate in that process?
- How could villages set limits for the amounts of products allowed to be taken out
of the forest (village quota’s?) without depleting the resource?
- How can clusters of villages, all using the same block of forest, agree to respect
the same rules on access and NTFP harvesting?
- How can villagers get a fair price for their products, how will prices be determined
- Who will connect the villagers with markets inside and outside Lao PDR?
D) Marketing options
The income from NTFPs seems to be declining in the project area and buyers seem to be
moving away. It is difficult to see immediate areas for improvement. Ideally, the Project
should implement an NTFP Marketing Analysis and Micro Enterprise Development
Approach, as developed by FAO/RECOFTC. However, there may not be enough time
and money left for such an approach. During further brainstorming on marketing
options, a number of ideas were proposed for action:
- Linking NTFP selling groups to the on-going credit program of the project
- Province level stakeholder meeting on marketing of rattan canes and shoots
- Using the project’s links with Europe to link local rattan producers to European
furniture markets
- Try to identify local market opportunities, e.g. for edible shoots of rattans
(“boun/san”) to the cities of Thakek, Savannakhet and Vientiane.
- Identify 2-3 promising products and hire local/regional consultants to do an indepth
marketing/feasibility study for processing/marketing of these products
E) Capacity Building
NTFP activities can only be successful if they are developed with and carried out by the
local communities. A participatory approach is required to achieve such local ownership.
Based on earlier experiences with NTFP development in Lao PDR, the consultants
recommended that such an approach should comprise the following steps:
- Basic analysis/awareness raising/ initial staff training (1 week)
- RRA baseline data collection (2 weeks)
- Translating RRA findings to options for action (1 week)
- Target group formation (2 weeks)
- Exposure of target groups to new ideas/options (e.g. by study tours) (2 weeks)
- Planning activities with target groups (2 weeks)
- Agreements between target groups and project for implementation (3 weeks)
- Implementation (6-12 months)
- Monitoring and Evaluation ( 1 month)
The project needs to reflect if it still has the time and means to go through such a
process. The approach would require a training plan. We discussed some key questions
to be considered by the project. Who will be the trainers/facilitators? Suitable people
could be selected from various district organisations, e.g. Lao Women’s Union,
4

Agriculture and Forestry Office, Trade Office. How many villages, how many families,
how many trainers are to be involved? Because NTFPs are often little understood, it
might be useful to start with a short training of staff to undertake rapid NTFP appraisal
studies in villages surrounding the four protected forests. Methods for this have been
published in Lao language, the Forest Research Centre can assist in finding suitable
trainers of trainers. Study tours could be considered to Bachiang district, Champasak,
where various NTFPs are being planted by local villagers (Contact: Ms. Vansi
Chantapone, PAFO Champasak, tel. 020-5531141). Another option is to visit the area of
Sakhon Nakhon in neighbouring Thailand, where many families grow rattan
commercially for edible shoot production (Contact: Mr. Charnchai Ngamcharoen, Royal
Forestry Department, Bangkok, tel: +66-2-561-439-23).
4. Field visit findings
During the afternoon, Mr. Sonexai and Mr. Manivengpeth took the consultants on a tour
by car to the project tree nursery at Houay Kham and the nearby village of Ban Dong. On
the way back, a short visit was also made to a rattan processing factory outside Paksan.
The nursery contains around 20 beds of seedlings. Most of the beds were filled with
timber tree species (teak, Tectona grandis, 6 beds; rosewood, Afzelia xylocarpa, 2;
Acacia mangium, 2). There were also 2 beds of agarwood seedlings, 3 with “vai nyeh”
rattan seedlings (for edible shoot production) and 4 beds with various fruit tree species.
Most of the seedlings of timber tree species and agarwood are reportedly bought by local
timber companies, the fruit tree seedlings and rattan are mostly in demand by the
villagers. The nursery has running water from an irrigation canal, it is potentially a good
site to mass-produce seedlings of any kind.
In the village of Ban Dong we had a chance to meet the village headman and around
eight other long-term residents (5 men, 3 women). They belong to the minority of 35
original families who have always lived here. The total number of families in the village
is now 108 families, most of the newcomers arrived around 1990.
It is important to note this, as the people we met seemed to be the only ones who were
not out of the village, collecting non-timber forest products at the time of our visit
(around 15.oo-16.00 PM in the peak of the dry season). They gave the impression that
NTFPs were not very important for their family economy. This could well be true for
them, as they are the older well-established families who get most of their income from
growing rice. It remains to be seen if this is also true for the larger group of poorer
recently immigrated families, who we could not meet as they were absent.
The village has an impressive area of 180 ha of rainy season wet paddy land at its
disposal, of which 15 ha are irrigated and useable for a second rice crop in the dry
season. The people we met estimated that selling of rice is the most important income
source of the village. They estimated that an average family could earn around 1.5
million kip per year from selling rice (50%), 1 million from livestock (33%) and 0.5-1
million from selling NTFPs (16-33%). They broke down the total sales of NTFPs in the
village as presented in the table 3 below.
5

Table 3: Estimated income from selling NTFPs in Ban Dong, 2003.
Product Quantity (2003) Total Value Income per family
Vai thoun rattans 5,000 canes @ 7,000 kip 35 million kip 324,000 kip
Khisi resin 2o tonnes @ 1,000 kip 20 million kip 185,000 kip
Yang oil 1,000 liter @ 1,500 kip 1.5 million kip 14,000 kip
Peuak meuak bark 2 tonnes @ 3,000 kip 6 million kip 55,000 kip
TOTAL 62.5 million kip 578,000 kip
It is interesting to note that two of the four products on this very short list were not
previously identified by the Project team: yang oil, an exudate of a large timber tree
(Dipterocarpus alatus), and peuak meuak, the bark of a tree used for chewing with betel
nut (Artocarpus species, N.B. not to be confused with “peuak meak” from northern Laos,
a bark from Boehmeria malabarica, used for incense making). This illustrates the need
for project teams to collect actual data at village level.
The share of income provided by NTFPs seems to be rather low compared to other
remote areas in Lao PDR (average 50% according to earlier surveys by the consultants).
One reason for this may be that the area seems to have an unusual high availability of
wet paddy land, making rice the number one economic activity as claimed by the
interviewed villagers. We did not have time to collect and compare actual rice production
figures and compare them to population figures for the area. If the project has such data,
it would be interesting to compare rice production and consumption to confirm the
claims of large surplus rice production.
A possible second reason could be that NTFPs supplies have simply been exhausted, as
most of the forest in the area is heavily degraded due to logging and intensive shifting
cultivation, as a result of the rapid influx of people into the area over the last fifteen
years or so. More detailed surveys would be needed to assert this hypothesis, linking
NTFP off-takes to actual forest blocks where they are derived from.
A third reason may be that prices of some NTFPs seem to have fallen over the last few
years. An example was given by the villagers of Ban Dong. Up to two years ago, the
village used to sell around 500 kg per year of dry Chinese cardamom (“mak neng”,
Amomum sp.). The price was around 30,000 kip/kg, giving an income from this product
alone of 15 million kip for the whole village or 139,000 kip per family. The price has now
dropped to around 12,000 kip/kg, as a result traders are no longer coming to the village
to buy this product. A survey of past trends in prices/off-takes of NTFPs could shed
more light on the development of the NTFP market in the area over recent years.
The total land area of the village amounts up to 5,000 ha. This includes two important
blocks of mature forest (“dong”): Dong Phou Pasang (400ha) and Houay Sanyeng
(200ha), both around 1 hour walking distance from the village. There is still a lot of
wildlife, especially deer (sambar deer, “kwang”, and muncak deer,“fan”) also duiker
antelopes (“kai”) and various species of snakes. Several other villages use the same forest
blocks as well.
6

The unanswered question remains what is the status of the remaining 4,000 or so ha of
village land. From our incomplete visual observation it would seem that most of the
remaining forest land is heavily degraded fallow-land, which was first logged over by
various logging companies and then used for upland rice cultivation. Erosion is visible at
several places and natural regeneration of the vegetation seems to be slow. It would
seem that the rehabilitation of these large tracts of land requires more attention.
We could neither get a clear answer on the ownership status of these lands, nor on the
rights of villagers to use these lands, nor on the land use planning for them. Some people
mentioned that these lands are still belonging to logging companies who are expected to
plant production forests, others thought they were protected forests, again others
suggested these lands could be available for villagers to develop tree gardens. It would
seem urgent to clarify this issue.
The interviewed villagers mentioned that vai thoun and “kheua wa” (another type of
rattan, similar to vai thoun but with red seeds), are the most rapidly depleting NTFP in
the forest. The villagers we met were not very interested in planting rattan for cane, as
they are not sure who would be the owner of the plantation. They also feel it would take a
long time to mature and they are not sure about the market in that distant future.
On the way back to Paksan, we met Mr. Khamla Sayboumi and Mr. Van Meuy of the
“Hongngan Poungteng Vai Leh Mai Phai” (Rattan and Bamboo Processing Factory).
This factory processes rattan canes by boiling canes in a preservative solution, followed
by stretching, drying and polishing. The resulting product is destined for export to
Vietnam for furniture making. Last year, the company bought around 40,000 stems of
big diameter cane (“vai thoun”) and around 30,000 stems of small diameter cane (“vai
hang nou” and “vai tok”). Each year, the company buys less big canes and more small
canes, as the big canes are getting harder and harder to find. The company does not
expect to be able to continue its business for more than five years. There are apparently
two other similar sized rattan exporting companies in/around Paksan.
The growing time for plantations of big canes (“vai thoun”) is estimated to be 20-25
years. The growing time for plantations of small cane (“vai hang nou”) is expected to be
around 10 years, which may be more economically feasible. In either case, it would seem
urgent to start planting now, before natural stocks are completely exhausted. The
company has so far not considered investing in commercial rattan cane plantations.
7

5. Recommendations
By way of conclusion, the following actions are recommended to the project:
A) Training:
‣ Train district staff to:
- learn to analyse status of NTFP use and dependency in project villages
- learn with villagers about NTFP options through study tours
- plan and implement suitable activities through agreement with villagers
B) Data collection:
‣ Document actual NTFP use and dependency in project villages, in comparison to
other livelihood and income sources (e.g. rice, livestock)
‣ Map forest areas where NTFPs are collected and estimate yields from each block
for key products, as a basis for management rules
‣ Identify sustainable harvesting systems for key NTFPs based on local knowledge
‣ Study NTFP marketing history, options and constraints
C) Options for planting NTFPs
‣ Explore the feasibility of bong bark plantations with local communities
‣ Promote rattan cane plantations, collect/conserve seed/planting stock
D) Options for NTFP management in forest
‣ Clarify the ownership and access rights to all lands in the project area, promoting
village access and security to encourage sustainable use
‣ Develop specific targets and arrangements for sustainable use of NTFPs as well a
regeneration/reforestation of degraded forest land
E) Other options:
‣ Link NTFP selling groups to the on-going credit program of the project
‣ Organize a stakeholder meeting on marketing of rattan canes and shoots
‣ Link local rattan producers to European furniture markets
‣ Identify local market opportunities, e.g. for edible shoots of rattans (“boun/san”)
to the cities of Thakek, Savannakhet and Vientiane.
‣ Identify 2-3 promising products and hire local/regional consultants to do an indepth
marketing/feasibility study for processing/marketing of these products
8