| Community forest allocation to the Ma Lieng people of Cao village improves income and protect forests |
|
| Author: |
CIRUM, CIRD & LandNet |
|
|
| Publication Date: |
2017 |
|
|
| Pages: |
15 |
|
|
| Publisher: |
CIRUM |
|
|
| Keywords: |
community forest, land, allocation, Ma Lieng, income |
|
|
|
|
| Abstract: |
|
|
This report describes and explores the impact of resettlement on the lives of Ma Lieng communities in an area of Quang Binh province, detailing the poverty they faced when removed from the forest on which they depend for their livelihoods. Its focus is the policy advocacy and detailed reallocation processes required to redress the problems caused by this resettlement, and the beneficial effects of forest allocation and management processes at community level.
The report starts with the history of Ma Lieng settlement in the area and their traditional spiritual and livelihood practices, before describing their forced resettlement to locations alongside the Ho Chi Ming highway, and the effects of this on their daily lives. The research describes the inadequacy of the resettlement allocation of land and forest, and records the ensuing poverty and environmental damage to forest when no one manages it. The second part of the report describes in detail the process of advocating for community forest land allocation, and the various steps required to set up management procedures that can be agreed by all stakeholders. The third section explores the post allocation benefits to the Ma Lieng, and the day to day reality of forest management and protection.
The authors have detailed findings of the income generated by non-timber and timber forest products in the allocated forest areas as well as noting the possibilities from plantations such as Acacia. They have positive initial conclusions about the benefits of this community allocation model on income, environmental protection and bio-diversity. They also highlight some shortcomings in policy that hinder possible community forest protection and limit community access to management fees. Finally, they make recommendations to policy makers on resettlement and community allocation and management.
Read full here
|
|
|
