Previous Page Table Of ContentsNext Page


Chapter 3- Project implementation

3.1 Physical Infrastructure development

The project site was divided into three sectors, Sector I in which the project field headquarters was located (in Sal Ngam Village) comprising the northern arm of the area, and Sectors II and III covering the eastern and western portions respectively of the southern section of the area (see Map 3). This arrangement facilitated contact with the population and contributed to better monitoring of project activity by the Deputy Field Project Directors who were based in the field offices of each of the three sectors. The arrangement also made It possible to plan project activity more realistically and deal with the unique characteristics of each sector. During the course of the project, two other offices were added in more remote locations. Communication was maintained between the field offices and field headquarters and between the field headquarters and the Korat office of the project in the compound of the Divisional Forest Office through the use of twoway radio equipment as there was no telephone service.

As mentioned earlier, the road network in the area was so poor that a stretch of road had to be built before project implementation (Phase II) could begin. As soon as the necessary heavy equipment became available in early 1982 and workers were trained in its operation, high priority was given to road building. Approximately 70 km of simple but adequate roads were built, providing direct access to most villages. Most roads were built by project workers using project equipment but some were constructed on a contract basis because of the demands on equipment for other purposes such as plantation and village site preparation. The District Offices of Pak Chong and Pak Thong Chai cooperated in the paving of 30 km of the 45 km Local Administration road connecting Pak Chong with the project area and the graveling of the remaining 15 km, greatly facilitating travel to this important market centre. As roads were completed, local entrepreneurs were quick to seize the opportunity to operate a public transportation service using small trucks for both passengers and freight.

Weirs and dams were also constructed in conjunction with road construction to impound water in reservoirs for local use. Whenever the topography permitted, rather than building an ordinary bridge or culvert over a stream while constructing roads, a dam the width of the road was built, thereby creating an artificial pond. The original plan was to construct dams only in the vicinity of the planned villages but the number built far exceeded the number of villages. A total of 17 dams or weirs was constructed, 14 by the project RFD staff. One dam and reservoir with a capacity of 330 000 m was contributed by the Royal Irrigation Department. The other two were built as a Department of Community Development initiative using village labour and funds provided by the Government Rural Employment Creation Programme.

Electricity was not yet available in the project area at the end of 1986 but as the power lines of the Provincial Electricity Authority (PEA) were only about 20 km away, it would be fairly easy to introduce.

Map 3: Social Forestry Project Area

There is a growing desire among the village population and some village leaders have contacted the PEA in this respect. The condition laid down for' extending the lines to the project area villages is that the villagers pay 15 percent of the costs. This is being actively discussed.

3.2 Forest rehabilitation

The need for forest rehabilitation for environmental protection and economic benefits was a central concern of the project. The approach followed included deliberate efforts to enlist the' cooperation of the local people. The definition and implementation of forest rehabilitation activities were guided by the land use plan described in Chapter 3. A work plan was drawn up for establishment and maintenance of nurseries to produce the tree seedlings needed for forest plantations; for establishment, maintenance and scientific management of project forest plantations; and for protection- of the remaining pockets of natural forest in the project area.

The species selected for planting in the project area were mainly Eucalyptus camaldulensis (Petford and Katherina provenances) and Leucaena leucocephala. Both species are fast growing and thrive in northern Thailand. Seeds were germinated in boxes and subsequently potted in black polyethylene bags 17 cm high and 7 cm in diameter. Each bag contained a uniformly mixed medium of four parts topsoil, two parts burnt rice husk and one part manure. The seedlings were watered daily. Each year, 200-300 ha of degraded natural forestland were prepared for the planting out of three-to-six month-old seedlings raised in the nurseries. Ground vegetation was cleared using hand tools and/or tractors and woody vegetation was cut up and stacked for use as fuelwood or timber. Burning of debris was kept to a minimum to avoid creating a fire hazari Gentle slopes without protruding rocks were ploughed. Those likely to be waterlogged during the rainy season were ridged to allow free flow of excess water. Approximately 50 grams of nitrogen and phosphorous fertilizer were applied to the seedling three to four weeks after planting out and again a year later. If no ploughing or ridging was done before the planting, the soil was loosened within a radius of about 50 cm around the seedling. The planting configuration was 2 m by 3 m in places where agroforestry could not be practiced, and 2 m by 4 m, or 4 m by 4 m in soils suitable for agroforestry. Beating up of areas planted in previous years was also carried out.

In areas where agroforestry was practiced, the tending was done by the farmers themselves. In other areas, labourers were hired for weed removal by line cleaning along one metre wide planted lines, circle cleaning within a radius of 50 cm from individual plants, or 100 percent cleaning of the whole area planted, depending on the nature of the weeds, the age of the plantation, the danger of fire, etc.

Roads were constructed through blocks of plantations to facilitate access and to serve as fire breaks. Villagers were educated as to the dangers of using fire for land preparation. A proposed project for the Fire Protection Unit of the RFD to train labourers and village volunteers to serve as a fire protection squad was not carried out because no funds were allocated in the Government budget.

A project report refers to a workforce of 120 in forest plantation and tending, paid out of the RFD budget. Project area residents were given priority for these positions as it was intended that this employment opportunity should be part of the overall socio-economic development plan for the area. However, it was never possible to recruit local people in sufficient numbers to meet plantation work requirements due to conflicts with farming schedules. Many outsiders had to be hired. Bureaucratic complications contributed to the lack of local participation as payment often lagged several months behind the performance of the work. As a result, persons requiring supplementary income preferred to work for other farmers. The majority of wage labourers appeared to be women.

The main cause of the 20 percent shortfall in achieving the project target of 1 452 ha of forest plantation was the de facto rights of squatters in project area reserved forestland. The reforestation programme could only proceed with their consent and this required time-consuming discussion and persuasion. In the meantime, large areas of continuous blocks of plantations could not be established except on very steep hilly slopes, and planting schedules had to be extended. Nonetheless, the planting achievements of the project remain impressive. They suggest that although targets were over-optimistic, the project staff was successful in eventually overcoming the resistance of the encroachers and gaining their cooperation in the rehabilitation of degraded portions of natural forest (See table 4).

Table 4 - Forest rehabilitation achievements of the project

Activity

Target 10/81 - 9/86

Achievement 10/81 - 9/86

Percent of target

Nurseries ('000 seedlings)

3 060

3 531

115

Site preparation (ha)

1 264

1 576

125

Planting out (ha)

1 452

1 163

80

Tending in plantations (ha)

1 656

1 360

82

Fire protection in plantations (ha)

1 656

1 360

82

Protection of natural forest (ha)

660

360

55

Source: THA/81/004 Progress Report , Oct. 1985 - Mar 1986, p. 10

3.3 Village community consolidation and land allocation

The socio-economic development strategy of the project rested upon the double foundation of village community consolidation in an agroforestry context and land allocation in terms of the STK programme. As indicated in Chapter 3, in 1982 the project area population was 1 293 households (approximately 8 000 individuals). As most numbered village administrative units were composed of homesteads scattered through their territory without any obvious nucleus, their identification as village communities was difficult to determine.

New surveys were conducted in late 1985 and it was found that the project area population had grown to 1 5L-, households (about 9 516 individuals), an increase of 267 households. Compared to the period immediately preceding the 1982 surveys, this rate of increase was relatively low. Because of the project, a much more visible RFD presence in the area made new permanent encroachment difficult. In addition, as the 1982 population already occupied an estimated 85 percent of the tillable land, there was little land remaining to attract newcomers. The 1985 surveys also revealed a change in the configuration of village communities. The social survey report lists 23 villages (see Table 5). Although most of these villages still included scattered homesteads, there was evidence to suggest some consolidation of homesteads into enucleated communities. This was actively encouraged by the project staff in relation to the forestry village programme. Independently, several new village clusters were formed as a result of private initiative around new infrastructures - roads, water reservoirs. Although the new villages have names and are recognized as separate entities by the local population, as yet, not all have been granted official administrative status by the District Office.

The main thrust of the project to achieve village community consolidation was the development of forest villages. The original target was the creation of six such villages. The activity combined both forest rehabilitation and rural development objectives by grouping isolated forest encroachers who practiced shifting cultivation into viable communities to undertake settled agricultural activities. To achieve this, each community was provided with basic physical and social infrastructure, a package of agricultural development inputs and essential services in relation to health, education and the like. Anticipated benefits were an increase in income, a reduction in costs of transportation and of essential commodities, and improved social amenities, with the ultimate result of creating in the population a stronger sense of belonging to their rural environment.

The rate of occupation of the new villages was slower than anticipated due to problems in persuading some farmers to relocate and the problems some groups had in selecting leaders. At the end of Phase II of the project, 317 households or roughly one-fifth of the project area population had been accommodated in seven new forest villages.

The land allocation activity of the project was carried out in accordance with the Government-sanctioned STK programme. By law, the STK certificate can cover only up to 15 rai (2.4 ha) of land and this land can be transferred only by inheritance to direct descendants. It cannot be rented, given away or sold. STK holders are required to report to the forestry authorities all illegal activities which they observe in their neighborhood. Failure to do so can result in revocation - of their occupier rights without recourse to appeal or compensation. This clause makes many STK holders uneasy. Besides the allocation of 15 rai of land per household under the STK programme, the project also had provisions for the allocation of an additional 10 rai (1.6 ha) per household on a communal basis, mainly for the establishment of fruit trees.

Table 5 - Project Area villages, 1985

Village name

No.of households

Village number

Sub-District (Tambon)

District (Amphoe)

Nong Mak

55

2

Khlong Muang

Pak Chong

Mo Hin Khao

35

(2)

 

"

Pong Wua Daeng

110

6

 

"

Phai Daeng

NA

1

Wang Ka Ta

"

Khlong Makha Hin

80

3

 

"

Khao Kaew

NA

10

 

"

Pong Kathing

70

12

 

"

Raroeng

155

1

Raroeng

Pak Thong Chai

Khlong Ki

75

 

11

"

Khlong Hin Rong

55

3

 

"

Khlong Nueng

40

(3)

11

"

Khlong Luek

35

(3)

 

"

Wang Sapparot

80

(3)

 

"

Sapplakang

85

4

 

"

Khlong Kum

95

5

 

"

Nong Mai Sak

85

6

 

"

Sai Ngam

85

7

81

"

Pong Talat

45

8

 

"

Khlong Sombun

90

9

 

"

Pong Khang

45

11

 

"

Khlong Din Dam

NA

12

"

"

Khao So

50

(10)

Thakop

"

Wang Khan

15

   

"

Unrecorded (NA) pop. estimate

180

     

Total households

1,560

     

Increase since 1981

267

     

Source: Thanavadee Boonlue 1986, p.30

Claimants were screened to establish their eligibility, for example, those who owned farmland elsewhere did not qualify. If the residence registration of a claimant had not been transferred to the project area, this had to be done before an application for a usufructuary certificate could be acted upon. The most time-consuming part of the exercise by far was the discussion needed to get the people to accept the rule limiting land entitlement to 15 rai. Those who resisted most, of course, were big land holders. Whenever possible, these larger holdings were divided among older children and siblings, each making an individual claim to his portion of the land. In order to avoid dealing with the land negotiation process altogether, some simply sold their land on the informal land market to interested farmers for prices as low as Baht 500 per rai ($156 per ha). Another thorny issue was how to deal with the land of absentee claimants, for example land acquired by influential town-based entrepreneurs as a result of debt defaulting. The RFD officials responsible for administering the programme chose to be flexible and pragmatic, identifying packages of land for allotment that could be acted upon without too much difficulty and leaving the final disposition of problem cases for a later date.

Because of these problems, the process of land allotment and of conferring usufructuary certificates took longer that anticipated and targets had to be reduced. Actual accomplishments were 1 832 ha of land surveyed prior to allocation and 920 STK documents issued. In relation to the total project area, this covered 32 percent of the 5 704 ha found to be suitable for agriculture and affected 59 percent of the 1 560 households residing in the area at the end of 1985.

In the period immediately following the end of Phase II of the project, the use of as yet non-allotted land by resident farmers continues to be tolerated pending its eventual disposition either as land held in terms of the STK document or as communal land. Farmers are also allowed temporary use of land ear-marked for forestation but not yet planted.

3.4 Project agricultural development strategies

Past experience in all land settlement programmes in Thailand for rural poverty alleviation has shown that the allocation of land to poor farmers is a necessary but not sufficient condition to ensure success. There is a need to guarantee that the situation created is indeed financially viable, i.e. that sufficient support is provided to make it possible for the farmers to generate adequate income from their farms. The special challenge of the forest village project was to create a financially viable situation for farmers having exclusive cultivation right to only 2.4 ha of agricultural land while at the same time meeting the forestry objectives of natural forest protection and forest rehabilitation.

Several approaches were possible. Theoretically, the simplest though not the most efficient way would have been an orderly Increase in the area cultivated by individual farmers by 10 rai (1.6 ha), to be used on a communal basis as provided for by the regulations of the STK programme. This would have brought the total area under cultivation by each farmer to 25 rai (4 ha). In practice, this was very difficult to achieve and even at the end of Phase II In September 1986, the project was still faced with a de facto situation of the majority of farmers cultivating or at least holding considerably more than 25 rai while, at the same time, many others had less than 15 rai. A more workable approach and, in fact, the one pursued by the project was to get the farmers to make more efficient use of available land by better farm management and to introduce various sideline activities to supplement farm income, for example, cottage industry and part-time off-farm work on tree plantations.

The strategy employed by the project implementors to help the farmers to enhance their Income earning capacity drew heavily but not exclusively on agroforestry. For most types of farm production, the promotional or extension package included several components: training; demonstration; provision of necessary production Inputs including Improved seed strains or planting material for new crops; and follow- up by extension workers. All villagers were expose' to this activity as much of it was conducted in the project site and all villages were regularly visited by extension workers. A number of village leaders or outstanding farmers were selected to receive more intensive or more specialized training and were taken on study tours to successful development projects in various parts of Thailand. Six were sent to visit projects In other countries of the region - two to Indonesia, two to the Philippines, and two to the Republic of Korea. A number underwent training in specialized institutions such as the North East Regional Office of Agriculture, Khon Kaen University, Pak Chong Agricultural Research Station, etc. These specially trained farmers were then expected to return to their home villages and share their experience within the community.

3.5 Crop diversification promotion

Given the disadvantages and inefficiencies of maize monocropping, diversification of annual cropping was seen as an important measure to improve efficiency of farm management practices. Introduction of other crops grown in rotation would help maintain soil fertility and provide a reasonable income continuously throughout the year thereby encouraging shifting cultivators to practice a settled form of agriculture. Promotion of diversified cropping activity was coordinated by the project agronomist and executed mainly by the staff of the Agricultural Extension Offices of Pak Thong Chai and Pak Chong Districts in conjunction with local and regional agricultural experimental stations. Back-up extension activity was also provided by locally based staff of the Department of Community Development. Farmers were given instruction on improved practices including choice of strains, cropping patterns, use of fertilizer, pest control, postharvest practices, etc. for a variety of appropriate crops.

Maize continued to be the most important crop and efforts were made to improve hybrid strains. Programmes were initiated through which the farmers could exchange some of their grain for improved seed grain. The culture of baby corn which can be grown in all seasons was introduced and proved quite popular. Cassava was also a fairly important crop but following Government policy, efforts were made to substitute it with sorghum.

The main additional crops proposed were cotton, mung bean, soybean, castor bean, ground nut (peanut), upland rice and kenaf. The introduction of upland rice had some importance as it addressed the problem mentioned earlier of maize farmers having to spend a significant part of their income on food because they did not produce rice. The soybean promotion programme using rhizobium, a nitrogen-fixing soil bacterium, was supported by SVITA, a Bangkok-based non-government development organization. A small number of farmers were trained in mushroom production.

Demonstration was an important component of the promotional programme and by mid-1986, demonstration plots had been established on a total area of about 15 ha. One plot divided into three sub-plots, for example, demonstrated the results of rotation between three crops: soybean, maize, and upland rice. Another planted to hybrid maize demonstrated the effect of the correct application of NPK fertilizer. Some were used to demonstrate the method of preparing compost fertilizer. In some cases, e.g. for soybean, school gardens were used to demonstrate not only how to grow the crop but also its profitability; proceeds from the sale of the crop were used to pay for the children's school lunches. Production inputs such as planting materials, fertilizer, insecticide, etc. were provided to poorer farmers free of charge by the District Agricultural Offices and by the project.

Estimates of crop production in the project area for 1984 and 1985 are given in Tables 6 and 7.

Table 6 - Estimated production of main crops and beans excluding cassava in the project area of April, 1984

Crop

Area (ha)

Yield (kg/ha)

Total Yield (Metric tonnes)

Price/kg.

Maize

4 224

1 560

658.9

Baht 2.5 ($ 0.11)

Mung bean

50

750

37.5

10 ($ 0.44)

Ground nuts

145

750

109

10 ($ 0.44)

Soybean

22

750

16

3 ($ 0.13)

Upland rice

111.2

1 560

173

-

Source: THA/81/004 Progress Report Nov. 1983 - April 1984

Table 7- Estimated production of main crops i n the project area 1985

Crop

Approx. area 1st season - Rai (Ha)

%

Appr ox . area 2nd season - Rai (Ha)

%

Maize

29 000 (4 640)

88

24 863 (3 978)

75

Cassava

1 500 (240)

5

800 (128)

2

Cotton

-

 

2 900 (464)

9

Mung bean

1 300 (208)

4

1 100 (176)

3

Soybean

-

 

350 (56)

1

Ground nut

800 (128)

2

1 050 (168)

3

Upland rice

-

 

1 517 (243)

5

Kenaf

-

 

40 (6)

-

Vegetables

450 (72)

1

320 (51)

1

Total

33 050 (5 288)

100

32 940 (5 270)

100

Source: THA/81/004 Proqre ss Report Apr. - Sept. 1985

3.6 Forest tree farming promotion

Project-initiated agroforestry included forest and fruit tree planting by the people for their own use; forest pastoralism; forest-related apiculture; and charcoal making. Extension was provided by project staff and Associate Experts as well as by locally-based workers from the Department of Agricultural Extension.

In the case of forest trees, the project produced Its own growing materials and conducted research and field trials to determine which tree species were most appropriate in relation to local environmental conditions and to their usefulness to the people in an agroforestry context. All species promoted in the project area were fast-growing varieties. Although there were others, the main varieties promoted were the same as those used for forest rehabilitation, i.e. Eucalyptus camaldulensis and Lucaena leucocephala. In bee-raising areas, Calliandra calothyrsus and Eucalyptus deglupta were also promoted as a source of nectar and pollen. The project supplied 167 950 seedlings to farmers and to schools, both in the project area and outside in response to demand. Instruction was provided in the planting and care of trees. Schools were a focus of this activity. Some project staff taught agroforestry lessons and the school children planted trees on the school grounds. Several agroforestry trials were established both as experimental and demonstration plots, e.g. Leucaena hedges on contours of steep hillsides Intercropped with maize.

Response to forestry extension efforts was lukewarm at first for several reasons. As there was no critical shortage of fuelwood in the area, there was little perceived need to plant trees for this purpose. In addition, the people felt it would not benefit them to plant trees for, in their experience, it was illegal to fell trees in a reserved forest area. The very concept of agroforestry was alien to these maize farmers who felt that planting trees in their fields would

interfere with tractor plowing. Gradually, however, interest in planting trees began to gain momentum. According to a sample survey conducted in 1985, 56 percent of the sampled farmers had at least started to establish hedgerows around their homelots and 51 percent had started to plant forest trees. Only 3 percent, however, had ever at any time participated in establishing or managing village woodlots.

Although the practice of planting trees had become fairly well established by 1985, silviculture as such had not yet become a source of Income. Some farmers did indeed market some of their trees but the income generated was so insignificant - mainly because the trees sold were small - that they lost all motivation to continúe. Clearly, the economics of silviculture had not been worked out for the project area. To help remedy this situation, the project' retained the services of a marketing expert who conducted a study on supply and demand for wood products in northeast Thailand in December 1985.

The study confirmed that farmers in Nakhon Ratchasima Province producing the fast-growing trees recommended by the project for sale faced many problems. They were currently selling predominantly to only two buyers: the Phoenix Pulp and Paper company In Khon Kaen Province (Northeast Region) and the Thai Plywood Industry Co. in Samut Prakan Province (Central Region). Prices received were low in relation to production and other costs including middlemen brokerage fees and transportation costs (one quarter of the sale price). Farm gate prices which excluded the cost of felling, preparation, loading and unloading, and transportation were Baht 450 (ÚS$17.30) per tonne while factory gate prices were Baht 600 (US$23.08) per tonne. Nonetheless, the study concluded that in spite of Initial difficulties in this enterprise, in the longer term, the net profit per unit of land used for tree plantation would be high compared to its use for other crops. Assuming a 2 m by 2 m spacing of trees on three-year rotation and a minimum price of Baht 450 per tonne, the internal rate of return would be between 20 and 25 percent.

This optimistic view of potential economic opportunities from silviculture was bolstered by the study's projections of greatly increased demand over the next 15 years for trees for housing and furniture, pulp and paper production, fuelwood and charcoal. In order for the benefits in terms of income of this increased demand to reach the producing farmers, however, other conditions would need to be met, for example, the provision of low interest loans to tide farmers over the period before trees reach maturity, and the promotion of more wood consuming industries in the Northeast.

From a policy perspective, the marketing study concluded that private sector (farmer) tree plantation should be promoted, especially because the only alternatives were meeting the increased demand by increasing wood or wood products imports leading to a worsening national balance of trade situation; or drawing on existing forest resources, the result of which would be an increasingly rapid rate of deforestation.

3.7 Legal charcoal production promotion

While the idea of planting trees for sale to wood-based Industries might have been viewed with skepticism by the forestland encroachers, the alternative of transforming the trees into charcoal for their own use or for sale was immediately attractive. Farmers had considerable understanding of the economic value of charcoal and were familiar with the production process. The prevailing market price of charcoal was Baht 45-60 ($1.73-2.31) per 50 kg bag, the price differential due apparently to transportation costs. According to a survey of 244 of households conducted in early 1986, more than 60 percent of the households depended exclusively on charcoal for cooking; another 27 percent used a combination of charcoal and fuelwood. Some 13 percent used only firewood for cooking. The average annual charcoal consumption per household was about 14 bags (700 kg). Although 28 percent of the households interviewed purchased their charcoal, most of the charcoal consumed was produced from local forest wood by the people themselves.

This situation entails problems of considerable consequence for the forest resources of Thailand. The exploitation of forests for firewood and charcoal production is illegal in terms of existing forest legislation and consequently, the charcoal trade has always been viewed with suspicion by the RFD. Any sizable movement of charcoal is, In principle, presumed to be related to the illegal felling of trees. On the other hand, charcoal is an essential commodity in Thailand, especially in rural areas where alternative sources of energy for cooking use such as electricity or liquefied gas are unavailable or too expensive. There is therefore an urgent need to normalize its production. The project provided an ideal setting to work out a solution that was consistent with both the forestry and developmental objectives of the project and which could be replicated by rural charcoal producers in other parts of the country.

Although this element of the socio-economic development component of the project was included in the original project document, its implementation was delayed to the last few months of Phase II of the project in 1986 because of difficulties in recruiting a suitable local dendro-energy expert. The approach adopted was a two-pronged effort. First, local charcoal producers were encouraged to shift from dependence on natural forests to the use of their own plantation trees. Second, the project attempted to introduce more efficient but inexpensive charcoal production technologies. A minimum objective was to meet local domestic demand for charcoal on the basis of legitimate enterprise.

The most popular types of charcoal kilns in use in Thailand are the brick beehive kiln, the mud beehive kiln, and the earthmound/rice husk mound kilns which, according to RFD figures, account for 17 percent, 37 percent, and 36 percent respectively of all charcoal production in the country. The brick kiln is the most efficient -- it has a 35 percent rate of recovery of raw material in the form of charcoal -- but it is less popular as it involves an initial investment of Baht 3 000-5 0003($115-192) depending on the size of the kiln (from about 2 m to 8 m ). The earthmound kiln is preferred by many, especially in forestland areas, because It is inexpensive, requiring only family labour, and is not very conspicuous -- an important consideration in illegal activity. On the other hand, it is very inefficient with only a 13 percent rate of recovery. According to RFD figures, this type of kiln consumes 52 percent of the annual total wood raw material for charcoal production to supply only 36 percent of what is produced.

The third type of kiln, the mud beehive kiln, is twice as efficient as the earthmound kiln with a 25 percent rate of recovery. This is lower than that of the brick kiln but family labour is the only investment required for its construction. If this kiln replaced the earthmound kiln on a national scale, it would mean a saving of nearly five million tonnes of wood raw materials per annum for charcoal production.

The mud beehive kiln was therefore selected for promotion ín the project area. T I o sizes of kilns were proposed with capacities of 2 m and 3.7 m respectively. Larger sizes would have been unacceptable to the RFD, presumably because not enough trees were grown privately to supply them and they could not be operated without drawing on the natural forest or on the reforestation plantations. Seven of each size kiln were built with at least one of each located in each of the three sectors of the project area.

Fourteen farmers were trained in mud beehive kiln construction and operation in the first half of 1986 with the expectation that these would later train others. In addition, more than 300 persons from the project area as well as from outside came to observe the operation of the kilns. A simple illustrated manual on the construction and operation of the kilns was prepared and distributed to farmers.

A survey of 68 project area farmers was conducted to determine their willingness to build the kiln. The response was less than enthusiastic but inconclusive because it was based mainly on inaccurate perceptions of the cost of construction, space requirements, and legality of the kilns. If the responses were candid, they indicate that more time and more extension efforts are needed for the kilns to gain acceptance. There could be deeper reasons for the resistance, however. As mentioned above, charcoal is used extensively in the project area and there is sufficient illegal production using the simpler though less efficient kilns to meet demand.

3.8 Silvo-pastoral activity promotion

The reforestation programme of the project provided considerable scope for the promotion of silvo-pastoral activity in tree plantations. Surveys conducted at the inception of the project reported little cattle raising but when the project area was visited in mid-1986, there was evidence that this had become a rather important activity, especially in the southern sectors. One farmer interviewed in Khok Samran/Khao So village had a herd of more than 200 head of cattle. This was exceptional but herds of 40-50 were not unusual if not yet very common. Even though not used locally, some farmers even raised water buffalo for sale to farmers in lowland paddy growing areas. The project supported this activity by allowing the farmers to graze their cattle in tree plantations under controlled conditions. This was mutually beneficial as it contributed to weed control. Moreover, about 16 ha of forest plantation were planted in guinea grass and other forage plants to improve forest grazing.

It should be mentioned here that agricultural extension for animal production was not limited to cattle raising in the forests. Local raising ín the village environment was practiced and special attention was given to upgrading this enterprise as well as to duck raising in and around the water resources of the area. Government services were made available to the farmers to assist them in all aspects of animal raising, for example, the North-East Regional Office for Agriculture (NEROA) staff provided training in breeding and the Livestock Department extended treatment to the animals including vaccination of fowl.

3.9 Fruit tree plantation promotion

Besides promoting village-level forest tree plantations, the project also supported planting of fruit trees and the establishment of orchards. Fruit-trees provided a kind of psychological point of convergence catering to the interest of both foresters and local people, and leading to better mutual understanding and more positive attitudes. This was encouraged, especially in relation to the new forest villages and other consolidated villages, as a means to foster permanency of settlement. Local people were already growing some fruit trees and did not need to be convinced of their value.

Fruit tree seedlings were distributed to the farmers at the very beginning of the project as a good will gesture. Twenty-eight farmers and two project staff were trained in plant propagation in May 1982. After the training, the farmers were supplied with grafting material from good varieties of mangoes to do their own propagation. In addition, the project supplied four grafted mangoes of popular varieties to most households to grow and to use as a source of grafting material. Many farmers subsequently produced their own grafted trees, especially mangoes, instead of paying Baht 50-100 per seedling to purchase them.

As of April 1986, approximately 60 000 seedlings had been distributed to the farmers and the area in fruit orchards was estimated to be 590 ha. Many different kinds of fruit as well as other tree crops such as coconut, cashew, and bamboo (to be harvested in the form of edible bamboo shoots) were grown. The most popular fruits were mangoes, jackfrults, custard apples and sweet tamarinds, but papayas, bananas and limes were also produced. An agri-business firm tried to get the farmers in one village (Pong Wua Daeng) to establish 32 ha of cashew plantation and supplied 200 kg of cashew seeds but the seedlings proved too delicate to handle. While by the end of the project, the acreage in fruit orchards was still relatively small compared to that in field crops (about 11 percent), it had grown significantly in the lifetime of the project.

By 1986, several farmers who had planted fruit trees at the beginning of the project were deriving an income from them. One farmer visited in mid-1986 had sold Baht 40 000 ($1 540) worth of mangoes and bought his own pick-up truck to deliver them to the market i n Pak Chong.

3.10 Bee-raising promotion

Apiculture was Included in the project socio-economic development plan and arrangements were concluded with the Faculty of Agriculture of Khon Kaen University for provision of a staff apiculture expert. At the end of March 1982, eight farmers were sent to Khon Kaen University for a one week training session covering basic knowledge of bee keeping and the production of boxes for bee hives. Each farmer was loaned three bee hives with colonies purchased by the project and beekeeping commenced In early April using the European bee Apis mell1fera. Three project staff members were also trained in bee keeping to assist in extension work. By the end of the year, 30 hives had been purchased for use in the project area. Success in bee raising was highest In the south-western sector, apparently because fewer crops there required heavy applications of insecticide. It was decided not to increase the number of bee keepers for the time being until the problem of providing alternative sources of feeding during periods when pollen supply is inadequate could be overcome. In the meantime, 3 570 seedlings of Calliandra calothyrsus and 500 seedlings of sunflower were produced for supply to interested bee keepers to provide bee forage during the dearth period from May to September.

1984 was the take-off year for apiculture in the project area. Ten additional farmers were trained in bee keeping in June but the growth of the industry soon became a self-sustaining process as other farmers were trained by those already trained. New bee colonies were formed from existing colonies. Even bee-keeping boxes and frames were produced by local farmers for sale. The October 1984 - March 1985 Project Progress Report describes this development as follows, "There were 11 bee keepers in July 1984; by December the number of bee keepers had risen to 18; between January and March 1985, the number had further increased to 28. Within a period of nine months (July 1984 - March 1985) the number of bee keepers had increased from 11 to 28; the number of bee colonies increased from Mr. Nong's ten colonies (in 1983/84) to 211 colonies." By March 1986, the number of beekeepers had reached 41, and the number of colonies, 350. It is interesting to note that although the training in bee keeping had been given to men, it came to be practiced almost exclusively by women who presumably acquired the skill from their menfolk.

Table 8 provides an Illustration of the economics of bee keeping in the project area in early 1985 from a single bee keeper who specialized in honey production. Total honey production of five out of the six villages from October 1985 to March 1986 was 2 522 kg. However, at this level of production, the farmers were beginning to experience marketing problems. The price of honey varied from Baht 70 ($2.70) per kg at the peak of the production period in January - February to Baht 100 ($3.85) after the end of March. During this production period, the project office in Korat assisted in the sale of 595 kg of honey through Informal channels and was exploring the possibility of developing more regular and permanent marketing arrangements which would continue after termination of Phase II of the project. Honey producers interviewed in mid-1986 expressed concern about falling prices but were still optimistic about prospects. Even at Baht 70 per kg, the margin of profit was attractive enough to motivate them to expand their operation.

Table 8 - The economics of bee keeping in the project area illustrated by the actual accounts of one farmer over 20 months.

Inputs

Baht

Timber for production of 9 colonies

270

9 boxes of 9 frames each with metal cover

900

250 wax foundation sheets at Baht 25 each

6 250

Sugar for supplementary feeding in May-July when pollen is scarce (10 kg at Baht 5)

50

Paint for painting the boxes

900

310 Bottles (approx. 750 ml) at Baht 1

310

labour cost 8 days/month for 22 months at

Baht 40/day (shadow cost)

7 040

Miscellaneous

1 000

Total

16 720 ($643)

Returns

 

Nov. 1983 - Apr. 1984: 250 bottles honey at Baht 100 from 9 colonies

25 000

Nov. 1980 - Mar. 1985: 200 bottles honey at Baht 100 (colonies increased to 17)

20 000

Sale Of: 15 colonies (1 queen'-''bee + 5 full frames) at Baht 1 500 each

22 500

2 colonies (full) at 3 000 each

6 000

wax produced: 4 kg at Baht 150

600

50 queen bees at Baht 200

1 000

Total

75 100 ($2 888)

Net Income

 

(a) Including shadow labour cost

58 380 ($2 245)

(b) Discounting shadow labour cost

65 420 ($2 516)

Source: THA/81/004 Progress Report Oct. 1984 - Mar. 1985

 

The success of the project in promoting apiculture has contributed to its spread beyond the project area to other villages of Pak Chong and Pak Thong Chai Districts. The RFD has adopted apiculture promotion as a regular feature of its forest village projects throughout the country and some 40 staff members assigned to these villages were trained by the project. A video tape and manual on bee keeping were produced as training aids. However, marketing issues are yet to be adequately addressed.

3.11 Fish raising promotion

Fish raising was another option introduced to the area by the project. At its simplest, it involved supplying fingerlings provided by the Korat Fisheries Station to the various public ponds and water reservoirs created by the project in the area. In order to promote more scientific fish raising, '18 farmers and two project staff were given a five-day training course in practical aquaculture at the Korat Fisheries Station in May 1983. At the close of training, the trainees were provided with fingerlings to raise in their own ponds.

Very little resulted from this exercise for several reasons. Although the Korat Fisheries Station staff continued to make themselves available to advise farmers on aquaculture and to provide fingerlings as needed, no follow-up was made in the project area because of station staffing and budgetary constraints. In addition, the farmers were not motivated to set up ponds of their own as fish were already available for catching in the public ponds. Moreover, fresh fish from the large Lam Phra Phloeng reservoir was regularly brought to the villages for sale by small traders on motorcycles. There were exceptions that demonstrated the potential of aquaculture in the project area, however. One enthusiastic farmer of Khlong Hin Ran Village was in regular contact with the Korat Fisheries Station for advice and fingerlings and was raising several species of fish in four beautifully maintained fish ponds on his property.

3.12 Agricultural credit facilitation

The dependence of local farmers on informal sector creditors was discussed in Chapter 3. A major stumbling block in dealing with formal sector credit institutions such as commercial banks was the routine requirement of collateral for loans, usually in the form of a land deed in the case of a farmer. As has been pointed out, the project area farmers initially had no land holding rights whatsoever. Gradually they were issued STK usufructuary certificates which legitimized occupation of the land but rights were not transferable except to natural heirs. Because of this limitation, land thus held was normally unacceptable as loan collateral to commercial banks for the obvious reason that in the case of debt defaulting, such land could not be claimed in lieu of repayment.

In late 1982, discussions were initiated with the Government Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) on the prospects of providing loans to farmers in the project area. Following the issue of 237 STK certifictes to farmers in the project area in early 1983, bank officials came to the area to hold discussions with farmers on loan conditions and loan issues generally. Credit application forms were given to 70 STK certificate-holding farmers. In July, one group of 13 and another of 24 farmers were asked to complete joint liability forms in order to qualify for consideration for loans. Of these, six of the first group and 13 of the second group (19 out of the original 70 applicants) eventually received loans of Baht 1 5002 000 ($58-77) each. BAAC loans could only be used for agricultural production and not, for example, for the purchase of household consumer goods such as food. Loan funds were used for labour hire, field preparation, fertilizer and insecticide. Reasons for disqualification, apart from credit risk, included age, failure to produce a marriage certificate, and lack of local residence registration. District Office. personnel were instrumental in helping to correct these irregularities. In one week, for example, the Pak Thong Chai District Officer issued marriage certificates to 170 couples. All loans were repaid on time.

In the meantime, 60 new applicants were proposed to the bank for credit consideration of which 24 were accepted after screening. The previous 19 applied for new loans which were granted. Because of the perfect repayment record of the first group, the loan ceiling was raised to Baht 3 000. The loan repayment level for the second round was also 100 percent and the bank raised the ceiling to Baht 4 500 ($173).

In the second half of 1983, the Pak Thong Chai District Agricultural Extension Officer arranged for 63 project area farmers to join the newly formed Lam Phra Phloeng Cooperative, one of many cooperatives set up by the Department of Agricultural Cooperatives of the Ministry of Agriculture. Its main purpose is to make agricultural credit available to its members who are required to pay a fee of Baht 250 ($9.62). These fees are paid into the loan fund but the bulk is supplied by the BAAC. Cooperatives are popular because loan ceilings are higher than those of the BAAC and the policy with respect to the use of the loan funds is more flexible. They can be used to obtain rice for home consumption, for example. There are usually more applications than can be accepted. In 1983 and 1984, 203 loans were made to 140 project area beneficiaries in amounts ranging from Baht 5 000- 7 000 ($192-269). Payments were made partly in cash and partly in kind in the form of fertilizer, seed and rice. The loans were used for land preparation, fertilizer, seed and family sustenance. As in the case of the BAAC loans, the performance of the borrowers was monitored and guided by the project agronomist and the repayment rate was again 100 percent.

Overall achievements of the efforts to make agricultural credit available to project area farmers exceeded project targets by 21 percent. Between July 1983 and March 1986, a total of 303 loans were granted by the BAAC and the Cooperative In the cumulative amount of Baht 2 173 500 ($83 596).

While the project demonstrated that it was possible for farmers without land ownership title deeds to escape the grasp of private loan sharks, it does not follow that all had succeeded in doing so by the end of Phase II of the project.. A survey of 390 households of the project area conducted in September 1985 revealed that 247 (63 percent) of these had sought and obtained loans at the time of the survey. For 60 percent of these borrowers, the loans had been obtained from the informal sector. The survey also covered 138 households in three villages just beyond the southwestern boundary of the project area in which the STK programme was not implemented. Here, 103 (75 percent) of the sampled households had obtained loans, 93 percent of which where provided by the informal sector. Although less than In other areas, the proportion of project area borrowers dealing with the private sector was still very high. An obvious explanation is that more time was needed for "the farmers and the banks to fully appreciate the new opportunities. Many were probably intimidated by or impatient with the complicated screening procedures. In many cases, the farmers did not qualify for loans. Finally, although borrowing from town traders was financially disadvantageous, it does not follow that the farmers' relationships with them were necessarily bad. In many cases, there were enduring relationships based on mutual trust and understanding with which the farmers were quite comfortable. Transactions were uncomplicated and the traders provided services the formal lending sector could not. For example, in a single visit to his regular trader in Pak Chong, a farmer could get an Immediate loan, obtain fertilizer, insecticide and even food supplies, make arrangements, for a tractor to plow his land, for a truck to pick up his produce, etc. If funds were needed for a wedding reception, funeral, or a Buddhist merit-making ceremony, these were also provided. The personal touch, the informality and the flexibility all contributed to dispose the farmers to go to the traders for their credit requirements rather than to an unknown, regulation-bound bank official.

Before concluding this section, mention must be made of another credit scheme which was launched at the end of 1985 in Khlong Kum, one of the new villages In the project area. Sponsored by the Department of Community Development, the Savings for Production Group was organized with an initial membership of 45 farmers. The first of these multi-purpose cooperatives was set up around 1975 with the cooperation of the Krung Thai Bank, a Government-owned commercial bank. Basically, It Is a scheme to organize groups of people who make regular deposits into a group savings plan. This amount is deposited in the group savings account in a branch of the Krung Thai Bank and earns Interest (8 percent per annum in 1975). As this capital builds up, it is used as collateral for the savings groups to receive loans from the bank at the rate of interest of 10 percent per annum (In 1975) . The actual cost of loans to individual members is the difference between the income derived from the interest on the savings and the rate of interest for the loan, namely 2 percent per annum in this case. The total of all loans at any given time cannot exceed the total, amount deposited in the group savings account. As of mid-1986, the Khlong Kum savings group, had not yet accumulated enough savings capital to guarantee loans to its members.

3.13 Social development promotion

Although the main thrust of the project was economic development through agriculture and agroforestry-related enterprises, several activities bearing on social development/social welfare were also part of the programme. Most important were those dealing with health care and education. In most instances, the programmes were carried out by the staff of the relevant Government agencies. The activities were coordinated by the project social scientist and subsidized by project funds.

The national health development policy stated that medical services, primary health care, vaccination of children, and health and sanitary education were to be provided to rural areas lacking such services due to remoteness and poor road conditions. The Korat provincial health authorities had planned to implement this policy in the project area In 1985 but given the clear need for these services, they agreed, at project request, to advance their schedule by two years.

Beginning In January 1983, a mobile medical team made up of two physicians and six health workers from the Korat Provincial Maharaj Hospital visited the area once a month. In the first nine months, 1 026 people were treated. Although periodic medical visits would continue, the plan was to transfer responsibility of this service to the three Government Sub-District Health Stations operating Inn the area (Raroeng, Wang Katha and Khlong Muang). These in turn would be assisted by a corps of village health communicators and health volunteers working under their supervision.

The selection process of project area village health communicators began in late 1983 and involved consultations and interviews with prospective candidates. Four years of primary education and ability to read and write in the Thai language were minimum requirements. A total of 117 candidates from 13 villages of the project area were given a one-week training course in April 1984. On their return to the villages, the performance of these trainees was monitored on a monthly basis through December 1984.

A major health-related issue is that of the quality of drinking water. Normally, the population uses stored rainwater for drinking and cooking and water from wells or ponds for other household purposes. The method of storing rainwater is to collect the run-off from the house roof in a large cement jar. A farmer having several of these jars can store enough water to last him until the next rainy season and not have to draw on stagnant and unhealthy sources of water for drinking. At the beginning of the project period, there was an acute shortage of storage jars in the area, at least partly because those sold in the market towns were too expensive. To remedy the problem, farmers were taught how to make the cement jars themselves and the availability of good drinking water on a year-round basis greatly increased in the project area.

3.14 Project staff development

RFD foresters trained in traditional forestry were often poorly equipped to cope with the human, socio-economic development aspect of community forestry. They needed to be trained in the "forests for people" idea. The persons most directly targeted by this activity were RFD staff assigned to work full time on the project in the project area, i.e. the Project Field Director and his Deputies. Other RFD staff were also involved in project staff development and efforts were made to integrate the learning experience of the project into the RFD system as a whole. Finally, the staff of other cooperating Government agencies were invited to participate in many of the exercises.

RFD field staff were constantly under a form of on-the-job training. They were involved in virtually all development activities of the project and often joined the farmers in training exercises, e.g. in apiculture, in order to be better able to assist them in puting theory into practice. Project staff always accompanied area farmers on the study tours. Because of the camaraderie that developed, the staff were able to get to know the farmers better and hence to work with them more effectively.

Formal training was also provided within the framework of the project. Two of the Deputy Field Directors were given scholarships for study at the Master's level, one in social forestry at the University of the Philippines at Los Baffos, and the other in rural development planning at the Asian Institute of Technology in Bangkok. Shorter term (2-3 month) travelling scholarships were also awarded to other Deputies. Five took short courses In community forestry at the University of the Philippines at Los Bafios. The Project Field Director was scheduled to take a three-month course in rural research and rural policy planning at Sussex University in the U.K. Finally, four external study tours to the Republic of Korea, Indonesia, the Philippines and Nepal were sponsored by the project to study the experiences of these countries in community forestry.,, Four project staff and two project area farmers participated in each study tour.

As the project greatly emphasized development support communication, the Faculty of Communication Arts of Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, was requested to organize and run five training workshop on this theme.


Previous PageTop Of PageNext Page