首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


The politics of swidden: A case study from Nghe An and Son La in Vietnam
Institution:1. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR) in Vietnam, 172E Quan Thanh, Ba Dinh, Hanoi, Vietnam;2. CIFOR, Jalan CIFOR, Situ Gede, Sindang Barang, Bogor, Barat 16115, Indonesia, Indonesia;3. Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University, Kraftriket 2b, SE-10691 Stockholm, Sweden;4. Department of Forest Science, P.O. Box 27, Latokartanonkaari 7, FIN-00014 University of Helsinki, Finland;1. University of Florida, School of Forest Resources and Conservation, Gainesville, FL 32611-0410, USA;2. University of Florida, Center for Latin American Studies, Gainesville, FL 32611-0410, USA;3. University of Alabama, Department of Biological Sciences, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487, USA;4. Centro de Pesquisa Agroflorestal de Rondônia (Embrapa Rondônia), BR 364, km 5,5, Caixa Postal 127, CEP 76815-800 Porto Velho, Rondônia, Brazil;1. University of Hawaii, United States;2. East-West Center, United States;3. Center for International Forest Research (CIFOR), Indonesia;4. University of Arizona, United States;5. NGO from Bantaeng, South Sulawesi, Indonesia;6. Radboud University of Nijmegen, The Netherlands;7. Cornell University, United States;8. Independent Mapping, Indonesia;1. School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK;2. Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark;3. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Lima, Peru;4. Department of Geosciences and Natural Resource Management, University of Copenhagen, Denmark;1. Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI), 41 rue du Four, 75006 Paris, France;2. Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), Jalan CIFOR, Situ Gede, Bogor Barat 16115, Indonesia;3. World AgroForestry Center (ICRAF), JL, CIFOR, Situ Gede Sindang Barang, Bogor 16115 PO Box 161, Bogor 16001, Indonesia
Abstract:Swidden cultivation practices have been seen as a major driver of deforestation and forest degradation in Southeast Asia. Using two case studies from Vietnam, this paper examines discourses around swidden practices at multiple levels of governance. Our findings show diverse interpretations of swidden resulting in different policy preferences and policy translations when addressing the issue. At national level, swidden is blamed as a principal driver of deforestation and forest degradation, and as such is a practice to be eliminated. As a result of this national stance, provincial level authorities see the existence of swidden as a failure by which their political performance will be judged. Conversely, swidden communities are seen at district level as an innovative solution to help resource-limited police forces ensure national security in border areas. Local commune and village leaders view swidden as a traditional practice to be respected, so as to maintain harmonious relationships amongst social groups, and avoid ethnic groups protesting against the government. Such differences in discourses and political interests have led to swidden becoming an ‘invisible’ issue, with government authorities failing to collect and report on data. Not recognizing swidden also means that swidden actors are practically ‘forgotten’ in the design and implementation of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) and Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES). Their omission from forest conservation and management incentive programmes could lead to further social marginalization, and potentially result in deforestation and forest degradation in the area. Our findings suggest that REDD+ policies should take into account diverging political interests on controversial land uses such as swidden cultivation.
Keywords:Vietnam  Swidden  PES  REDD+  Discourse
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号