SBR- Content.pmd - INBO

State of the Basin Report - 2003As Map 1, above, shows, deforestation has not been evenly dispersed across the entire LMB. Rather,there have been quite distinct “hot spots” of deforestation, found mainly around existing populationcentres (see clusters of deforestation around and near Chiang Rai, Luang Namtha, Attapeu, KonTum, Buon Ma Thuot, Ban Lung, Kampong Thom) and in the vicinity of roads. Further, deforestationis found in particular along the Thai-Cambodian and the Lao-Chinese borders. Also note that thetwo densest clusters of deforestation (Attapeu and Ban Lung) are both linked by road to nearbymore-populated neighbouring countries, thushaving potential access to their markets fortimber and agricultural produce.It appears from this geographical distributionthat deforestation does not take placerandomly, but at least to some extent followspredictable patterns. To a certain degree,deforestation further appears to be aninternational (cross–border) problem. Thisindicates that reducing deforestation mayrequire regionally-integrated approaches, theimplementation of which may in a number ofcases be beyond the capacity of any singlegovernment.The current rate of logging in the LMB is at anunsustainable levelForest cover data availability: issues and problemsReliable data on forest cover, and even more so on its changes, are difficultto obtain. For example, data sampled from a limited number of publiclyaccessiblesources show an enormous variety of forest cover figures. ForCambodia (whole country), one academic source 28 offers “Scientific DataProducts” which, when evaluated, yield forest cover figures of 27.3 percent(1985) a and 47.6 percent (1992) b . Had this been the case, Cambodia wouldhave enjoyed an annual reforestation rate of 8.25 percent. For the Lao PDR(whole country), forest cover figures range from 47 percent (in 1994) 29 , 47.2percent (in 1992) 30 , 54.4 percent (in 1989) 31 , 54.4 percent (in 2000) 32, 33, 34 ,55.5 percent ( in 1989) 35 , 56.7 percent (in 1990) 36 to over 80 percent (in2000) c . One source attempts to clarify: “A massive 85 percent of Laos isforested, with 47 percent classed as forests in the 1989 inventory and 38percent as unstocked and bamboo forests…” 37 Such diversity of figures makesreliable determination of deforestation rates nearly impossible. Even worsethan their numerical uncertainty is the fact that most available figures andtheir source data are fuzzy in a geographical sense, i.e. they do not allow theidentification of deforestation “hot spots”, and thus do not supportprioritisation of intervention measures.What causes such enormous diversity? Likely causes are incompatible datageneration methods, lack of background knowledge on the analyst’s part,lack of funds or time, politically-motivated interference with study methodsand results, and the classic dilemma of public goods. Incompatible data194