Transcript Slide 1

BDC Mekong Project 2 –
Results of Case Study in Lao PDR
Stakeholder Validation Meeting, Vientiane, February 24, 2014
Department of Livestock and Fisheries
Savannakhet University
WorldFish
1
Outline
• What is BDC Mekong
Project 2
• Study Site in Lao PDR
• Upstream Study:
Approach and
Findings
• Downstream Study:
Approach and
Findings
• Conclusions/
Further analysis
2
The CGIAR Challenge Program on
Water and Food (CPWF)
• A global research initiative (2010 ̶ to complete in
2014)
• Basin programs in Andes system, Mekong, Nile,
Ganges, Volta, Limpopo
• “Mekong Basin Development Challenge Program”
aims to reduce poverty and foster development
through management of water for multiple uses in
large dams and reservoirs
• A series of coordinated thematic research projects,
working in Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam
3
Mekong Project 2:
Water Valuation
• Overall Project Objective:
Assess the value of water in its various uses and estimate
costs and benefits associated with different water
management strategies
• Case Studies:
– Lower Sesan 2 Hydropower project, Cambodia (planned)
– Theun Hinboun Expansion Project, Lao PDR (under
construction
operational)
– Yali Falls hydropower project, Vietnam (operational)
4
Human Impact
Hydropower development
Dam
Reservoir
Flow diversion
Mekong Project 2:
Organizing Framework
Human Response
- Coping strategies and
adaptation: over harvesting;
change in land use etc..
Emphasis of Assessment
Physical
Characteristics of
Surface Water
Freshwater/Wetlands
ecosystem goods and
services
Changes in :
- Flood recession agriculture
Where the water is
-River
-Reservoir
-Seasonal wetlands
Will determine - Regulating water
the habitat
When water is
available/accessible
- Flow regime
-Seasonal flooding patterns
Water Quality
- Sediment load
- Nutrient cycling
- Habitats for fish and aquatic
plants and animals :
Water
uses/values
-Who benefit from what
water use/value gains?
Use value
-Direct use
-Who bear the cost of
what water use/value
losses?
Non use value
-Relative importance of
each water value to
stakeholders - all year
around, seasonal?
Option value
-Level of dependency on
livelihood derived from
particular water value
-Indirect use
- Availability: when; where
-Quantity and diversity
Livelihood Systems
-What social/institutional
structure affect the water
access?
Freshwater and wetland services contribute to local livelihoods, while influenced
by the physical changes in surface water. Adapted from Springate-Baginski et al. 2009
5
Case Study in Lao PDR
 Geographic Scope: Theun Hinboun Expansion Project
Impact Zone
 Objectives:

Assess how upstream and downstream households
will be affected differently by the change in access to
water resources

Analyze changes in water benefits before and after
resettlement/relocation of villages
 Approaches:

Household survey of upstream and downstream
villages directly affected by the dam and reservoir

Assessing existing water use patterns and benefits
derived from direct access to river and reservoir
Case Study Sites in Lao PDR
NG Reservoir and
resettled villages
T-H Extension
Project
Nam Hinboun river
and relocated
villages
7
Data Collection Methods
• Focus Group Discussions and stakeholder consultations
(to ID key water uses and values at various levels)
• Upstream household surveys (100 HH in 4 villages),
before (April 2011) and 12 months after the
resettlement* (Sep 2012)
• Downstream household surveys (156 HH in 7 villages,
in January 2012)
• Follow-up surveys in both upstream and downstream
villages (December 2013)
* The actual resettlement of the 4 villages took place in May – July 2011
8
Timeline of Field Surveys
FGDs and
Stakeholder
Consultation
Upstream
HH survey in 4
villages
Before
Resettlement
100 HH
Feb. 2011
April 2011
Downstream
HH survey in 7
villages
Before
Relocation
156 HH
Jan. 2012
Upstream
HH survey in 4
villages
After
Resettlement
100 HH
Sept. 2012
Follow -up
surveys both
Upstream
and
Downstream
Dec.2013
Upstream
Resettlement
to Keosenkham
9
Study Site
in Lao
PDR:
Upstream
Google Earth image in 2003
Estimated reservoir extent in 2012, by
Theun Himboun Power Company, Lao PDR
10
The Change: conversion of Nam Gnouang
river into a reservoir,
resettlement of local villages
Keosen
kham
180 HHs
2011
VG 1
VG 1
150 HHs
2009
VG 2
320 HHs
2010
VG 3a
160 HHs
2010-11
11
• To understand how local
communities use the river water
and river ecosystems
• To assess the economic
importance of the river for local
livelihood and income
• To compare water use patterns
and economic values before and
after the resettlement based on
two surveys
Approach:
Upstream
Study ̶
Compare
Before
and After
Resettlement
12
Upstream - Findings
• Domestic water access has dramatically improved after
resettlement, with potential economic benefit
• River bank gardens has been replaced with companyassisted agriculture programs for homestead garden
• Number of cattle holding declined for some families
because grazing land unavailable nearby
• Fishing is the most important use of reservoir in
general but some villages fish more than before, other
villages less than before
13
Upstream – Findings (continued)
• Fisheries continue to generate a large share of income,
while catch has become less diverse, no more harvest
of other aquatic animals
• Collection of forest products generally declined
because wetlands and forests are submerged. But NTFP
collection increased for some people in Tambing and
Sopchat located farther away from the reservoir.
• Natural resources such as fish and non-timber forest
products continue to play important role for cash
income during the transition
14
Use of Nam Gnouang Reservoir is still very limited compared to
diverse use of river before resettlement
Table 1: % Households Considering Nam Gnouang River/Reservoir as “Important” or “Very Important”
For
Before
Resettlement
After
Resettlement
Alternatives at Resettlement
Site (provided by the power
company)
Drinking
44
-
Public and private wells
Bathing
74
-
Public and private wells
Washing
76
-
Public and private wells
Irrigation (e.g. river
bank garden)
36
-
Homestead garden irrigated
with water from wells
Fishing
98
99
Reservoir
Livestock watering
55
25
Reservoir, wells
Transportation
91
4
Road access
Transporting goods
16
-
Road access
Micro-hydropower
25
-
Public power grid
Village events and
festivals (e.g. wedding)
68
-
Public and private wells
Rituals (e.g. funeral)
32
-
Public and private wells
15
Agriculture production was not fully recovered
14-15 months after resettlement (still in transition)
Compensation
from company
- Food
- Agriculture
inputs
- Cash
• Average household income fell
by approximately 72%, primarily
due to the significant reduction in
agriculture-related income which
had not been fully re-established
at the time of survey
• Fisheries has become the
biggest contributor to household
income, due to reduction in
income from agriculture
Figure 1: Changes in Income Portfolio
Before and After Resettlement
(including the value of items consumed at home)
Figure 2: Share of income sources before and
16
after resettlement
Most significant change in agriculture is the loss of irrigated
farming on river banks to reservoir impoundment
Figure 3a: River-based household
income Before Resettlement
Non Farm
2%
Total = 13 Mkip
Irrigated
Agriculture
33%
Fisheries
63%
Forestry
2%
Figure 3b: Reservoir-based household
income After Resettlement
Forestry
4%
Irrigated
Agriculture
0%
Total = 5 Mkip
Non Farm
0%
Fisheries
96%
17
Change from river fisheries to reservoir fisheries
• Fishing is the most important use of reservoir
to local communities
• Fisheries generate a larger share of income and
more cash than before, but are different:
– More fish catch, but less diverse & lower
market value
– seasonality shifted – from peak fish catch
in dry season to peak in rainy season
– no more harvest of other aquatic animals,
such as snails
– requiring investment in different fishing
technique and equipment
18
Figure 4 : Average monthly fish catch per household by village, before and after resettlement
Before
After
• Fish catch is distributed more evenly throughout the year, with peak in wet season
• 71% of resettled households reported increase in fishing activities, while 11%
reported reduction in fishing activity
• Fishers in Phonkeo increased the share of fish catch sold to market/middlemen,
while fishers in Sopchat and Tambing increased share of fish catch kept for home
19
consumption
Changes are not homogeneous ̶
Distance Matters
• Before resettlement: 4-5
minutes walk to the river
• After resettlement : up to
30 minutes walk to the
reservoir
20
Distance to the reservoir an important factor in
new livelihood strategies
Figure 5: Change in River/Reservoir–based Income
Before & After Resettlement
Million
Kip/HH/year
CLOSE
MEDIUM
FAR
16
14
Non Farm
Irrigated
Agriculture
Forestry
12
10
8
Fisheries
6
• Close: < 15 mn walk
• Medium: 15-33 mn
• Far: >33 mn
Reasons for fishing less:
• Reservoir is too far from home
• Investment on fishing boat is
needed
• Investment on different fishing
tools is required to fish in
reservoir
4
2
0
Before After Before After Before After
Households located closer to the
reservoir have invested more in
boats, fishing gears and fishery
licenses than those located far
21
Distance to the original villages an important
factor in livelihood strategies
• 45% reduction in the total
number of animals because
of the lack of grazing land
within or near the new
resettlement site
• Households/villages whose
original grazing land is
closer and more accessible
were able to keep more
animals
Figure 6: Total number of livestock before and after
resettlement by village
22
Domestic Water use – from river water
to private wells
23
Complete changes in main sources of water
Figure 7: Share of water supply from different sources
before and after resettlement, in dry and rainy seasons
Dry Season
Tap
2%
Before
Resettlement
Spring
44%
Rain and
spring
7%
River
54%
Rain Season
Tap
2%
Rain and
river
5%
River
36%
Spring
50%
After
Resettlement
24
Access to Water is Easier.....
Figure 8: Ease of Access to Sources of Water Before and After Relocation
(1: Very easy; 5: Very difficult)
25
and water consumption increases
Figure 9: Water Consumption Before and After Resettlement
(liters/household/day)
26
....and it saves time
Figure 10: Water Collection Time Before and After
Resettlement (hours per week)
27
...and saves money!
• Assuming a $2 per day of
economic productivity
• The total annual
economic benefit of the
reduction in water
collection time adds up
to approximately
$19,000 (for all 4 villages
combined)
Figure 11: Distribution of Economic
Benefits of Reduced Water Collection Time
across All Villages
28
Study Site
in Lao
PDR:
Downstream
29
Google Earth image in 2003
The Change: erratic
flow of Nam
Himboun river,
“relocation” (partial
resettlement)
of local villages
30
Approach: Downstream Study ̶
Status Assessment Before Relocation
• To understand how local communities use the river
water and river ecosystems
• To assess the economic importance of the river for
local livelihood and income
• To understand which livelihood activities are likely to
be affected by river flow changes
31
Downstream - Findings
• Already affected by the first T-H dam built in
1980s
• River is an important source of water in dry
season, and collecting water is generally difficult
• Communities have access to irrigation scheme
supported by THPC
• Relatively diversified sources of cash income, high
rate of wage labor and remittances
• River-based agriculture and natural resources are
still very important sources of cash income and
subsistence
32
Rivers and natural springs still very
significant as sources of water
Dry Season
Rain Season
River
River
Spring
Spring
Private
Well
Private
Well
Public Well
Public Well
Figure 12: Share of water supply from different sources in dry and rainy seasons
• 55% of households report river as primary source of water in dry season,
while rain becomes primary source of water in rainy season (51%)
• No significant difference in water collection effort between households
relying on river and households using other sources, but water collection from
river is rated as more difficult than other sources of water
33
• Approximately 47% of the households have access to public or private wells
Importance of the Nam Himboun River
Table 2: % Households Considering Nam Himboun
River as “Important” or “Very Important”
For
% total consider
river important
Drinking Water
24.4
Washing Clothes
91.0
Bathing
91.0
Irrigation
74.4
Fishing
96.8
Aquaculture
• More than 90% of households
consider the river as important
for domestic uses such as
washing clothes and bathing
1.3
Livestock watering
64.1
Transportation
50.6
Tourism
16.7
Trade/Moving Good
17.3
Disposal of garbage
0.6
Ceremonies & festivals
39.7
Rituals
15.4
Micro-hydropower
• Very diverse uses of river and
river water, despite influence of
the first dam
2.6
• 24% rely on the river for
drinking water, especially in dry
season when other sources of
water (rain or small water
bodies) are not available
34
Relatively diversified sources of income, nonfarm income significant
Figure 13: % share of average household income
(including value of items consumed at home)
Total = 17 Million
Kip
Agriculture
16.4
Livestock
38.8
13.9
Fisheries
Forestry
Non farm
9.0
Remittances
15.0
6.9
35
Million Kips
Large difference in average household income
from village to village
25
Figure 14: Share of income sources (including the value
of items consumed at home)
20
15
Remittances
Non farm
10
Forestry
Fisheries
5
Livestock
Agriculture
-
36
Million Kips
But income from river-based activities still
important in many villages
25
20
Figure 15: Share of river-based income
60
50
40
Non river-based
income
30
River-based
income
15
10
20
5
0
% River-based
income
10
0
37
Importance of river for agriculture
Table 3: Status of land holding and irrigation
Type of land
Owned by %
of HHs
Plot size/HH
(hectares)
% irrigated
(water source)
Irrigation
methods
68% - Bucket
5% - Canal
Home garden
33
0.2
52% (River)
10% (Pond)
8% (Well)
Upland Field
69
1.22
13% (River)
13%- Bucket (For
germination only)
Lowland
91
1.37
32% (River)
32% -Canal + pump
River Bank garden
43
0.18
83% (River)
5% (Stream)
88%-Bucket
Garden/Plantation
34
1.1
28% (River)
28% - Bucket
• 32% of households that own lowland field have access to canal irrigation
supplied with the river water
• Less than 50% of the surveyed households own river bank garden
• Agriculture does not generate a high income; most of the agriculture
production is for household consumptions
38
Fisheries is important for food and income
100
20
80
15
60
40
10
20
5
0
0
% of Fish catch sold
Fish catch (kg)
Figure 16: Average fish catch/month/HH
• 96% of households are involved in fishing, and much of the catch is used for
home consumption
• Average monthly household income from fishing ranges from 200,000 to
300,000 Kips in rainy season but is reduced to less then 50,000 in dry season
39
Limitation of our research
• Time for survey was short (each survey 2
weeks)
• “After resettlement” survey was to soon (1214 months after the resettlement)
• Geographic scope of the survey was small (4
villages upstream, 7 villages downstream)
• Closed questionnaire did not allow for more
detailed discussions with the villagers
40
Conclusions/Lessons Learned
• During the transition after resettlement, households
rely more on natural resources
• Need to take into consideration of the differences
within the resettlement village in terms of access to
reservoir, forests, original fields and grazing land
• Need to ensure access of the resettled communities to
fisheries resources and forests
• Provide specific support to enable livestock-based
activities to continue at the resettlement village
41
Conclusions/Lessons Learned
• Important to manage reservoir fisheries sustainably as
it is the most important community use of reservoir
• Cash–based activities, rather than subsistence
activities, are becoming more important to the
resettled communities
• Domestic water access has dramatically improved and
made more time available for income generation
through other activities
• More skills training needed to help communities reestablish a range of income generating activities
• More research is needed to protect and enhance the
fisheries resources in the reservoir
42
Thank you
for your
attention!
43