Reconstruction of the Livelihood of Resettlers from the Nam Theun 2 Hydropower Project in Laos. Bounsouk Souksavath & Mikiyasu Nakayama

Transcription

1 Reconstruction of the Livelihood of Resettlers from the Nam Theun 2 Hydropower Project in Laos Bounsouk Souksavath & Mikiyasu Nakayama February 25, 213

2 Nam Theun 2 Hydropower (NT2) Nakai Dam Constructed in 29 Reservoir Area 45 km 2 Capacity 17 MW Power Station Downstream Chanel Resettlement: 17 Villages 1,298 Households 6,738 People

3 Objec8ves 1. To compare the livelihood condi3on before and a6er rese8lement of people from four of the old villages. 2. To iden3fy the causes of problems observed in the present livelihood condi3ons of the rese8lers so that some correc3ve measure can be planed and implemented.

4 Methodology Reviewed literature for analysis (e.g., law and regula3on, project reports, take books). Focus group discussion: Interview and discussion with authori3es and key persons of projects. Household interviews by using ques3onnaire forms.

5 Survey about Nam Theun 2 Hydropower

6 4 Survey Villages from all total 17 Villages 6

7 Resettlement Process of 4 Survey Villages Boua Ma 76 Families (n=5) Resettled in 26 Boua Ma Sop On 15 Families (n=3) Ca Oy 35 Families (n=35) Done 145 Families (n=2) Resettled in 25 Resettled in 25 Resettled in 25 Resettled in 25 Sop On Done

8 Occupation Occupation 4 Affected Villages (n=135) Before Present HH % HH % Self-employment farmer Share cropper Public sector employee 8 6 Private sector employee 11 8 Laborer In the resettlement villages, the occupations have been changing, some villagers can work with the private and public sectors, but most of them are still self-employed or are share croppers.

9 Family Income in Before (per year) 3,981,2 3,43,571 5,232,5 4,298, 442$ 381$ 581$ 477$ Exchange 9,kip/$ (22) Family income in before were less than in present, however in before villagers have rice sufficient at least 6-8 months in yearly, some have fully sufficient, therefore they spend money less than in present.

10 Family Income in Present (per year) 1, ,638,285 9,988,15 9,898,783 1,241$ 1,122$ 1,176$ 1,164$ Exchange 8,kip/$ (21) While in the present, villagers have rice sufficient for only 2-3 months in yearly, and they have to buy rice and other necessary more than in before.

11 Income Sources Before 4 villages (n=135) Income Sources HH % Livestock NTFPs Fishing 12 9 Employment 1 7 Other NTFPs=Non-Timber Forest Products Present 4 villages (n=135) Income Sources HH % Forestry Employment Fishing Livestock Other In before the livestock and NTFPs were mainly income sources, while in the present forestry, employment and fishing are mainly.

12 Land Ownership/Farming Ac8vi8es Before: Paddy field 1.25 ha/hh (base on 6 family member) Photo 21 Present: Paddy field.66 ha/hh (base on 6 family member) Villagers are using this land for cultivating rice, and have rice sufficient for about 2-3 months annually.

13 The total quantity of fish harvested, in present catch more fish than in before. Photo 24 Before: 2,742kg/year (19 kg/capital/year) Present: 6,613 kg/year (4 kg/capital/year)

14 How did the size of the house change relocaaon? Most of them size of the house change in larger than after relocation. Some of them the same.

15 Rese8lement villages are more convenient for daily life Water supply Electricity Photo 21 School Village s hospital

16 Public Involvement Did you or any person let you know about the NT2 ConstrucAon? 1991 Feasibility Study 1994 NT2 Electricity Consortium 1996 Consultation at Villages Level 25 Process of Resettlement Photo 23 (Source: NT2 EAMP, 23) About the resettlement should informed in early since feasibility study in 1991, that the resettlers can have involved with the resettlement plan in early.

17 Before General Sa8sfac8on Are you satisfied with the place you live? Boua Ma (n=5) Ca Oy (n=35) Done (n=2) Sop On (n=3) Answer HH % HH % HH % HH % Satisfied Don't know Present Boua Ma (n=5) Ca Oy (n=35) Done (n=2) Sop On (n=3) Answer HH % HH % HH % HH % Satisfied Don't know Most of them were satisfied with the place of they live both in Before and Present, while no body answered not satisfied. However Ca Oy village given more with an answer don t know. 17

18 Did you ever agree to the resettlement plan? Answer Boua Ma (n=5) Ca Oy (n=35) Done (n=2) Sop On (n=3) HH % HH % HH % HH % Yes Yes, but reluctantly Don t agree Most of them answered with an answer of yes, that they agree to the resettlement plan (except Ca Oy village). However, some of them answered with an answer of yes, but reluctantly.

19 What was the most important element for your decision? Answer Boua Ma (n=5) Ca Oy (n=35) Done (n=2) Sop On (n=3) HH % HH % HH % HH % Money Land Place House Job The house was the most important reason for most re-settlers, while land uses was the second important reason. Except Sop On village, job is the most important reason. 19

20 Merged of Resettlement Ca Oy Village 35 Families Ethnic: 66% Tai Bo & 34% Makong Sop On Village 15 Families Ethnic: 79% Tai Bo, 19% Makong & 2% Lao Done Village 145 Families Ethnic:.7% Tai Bo, 96.6% Makong & 2.7% Lao Majority ethnic group of these villages are belonging to the same Upland Lao Group (Lao Thoang)

21 Did you want to be resettled only with your old village? Don t know 2% Done Village Don t know 1% Sop On Village Yes 8% Yes 9% People in these old Villages wanted to be resekled into their own villages. Don t know 31% Ca Oy Village Yes 69%

22 Leader of my village 1% Who decided that people in your village should be merged with people from another village? Done Village Don t know 5% Don t know 1% Sop On Village Project plans 85% Project plans 9% It was however decided by the Project that these Villages should be merged with other villages. Don t know 34% Ca Oy Village Project plans 66%

23 After resettlement, did you experience difficulties by the merge with people from Other village? Don t know 15% No 25% Done Village Yes 6% Don t know 13% No 33% Sop On Village Yes 54% Merger with other Villages created DifficulAes even in Those in majority Villages. Don t know 34% Ca Oy Village Yes 34% No 32%

24 Considerations of Resettlement Development The paddy field of.66ha/hh is not enough for cultivation, therefore the extension of land uses for agriculture is necessary.

25 Consideration of Land Used for Agriculture of Resettlers by NT2 The existing of.66ha/household, villagers are using this land for cultivating rice, and have rice sufficient for about 2-3 months annually. It is considerable to extent of land uses by dividing land 1ha/household, or about 1,298ha (7%) for total of 17 resettlement villages from community forest of total 18,26ha (1%). Community forest Community forest

26 Conclusions It is clarified that most re-settlers are satisfied with the place of they live in the present resettlement villages, and they will continue to live there. By the better of public infrastructures, most of them believe that the places they live are good for their children. It is observed that most re-settlers wanted to be resettled only with their village member, however it was impossible for every village due to limitation of land and resource uses in the resettlement areas. The resettlers also did not want to move far away from their old villages. It is also considered that the extension of land and resource uses for agriculture of re-settlers is necessary to make the livelihood conditions of re-settlers sustainable after the project will suspend the support in 214.

27 Acknowledgements The authors are profoundly grateful to Professor Masahiko Kunishima, Professor Ryo Fujikura, and Dr. Hajime Koizumi for their guidance and intellectual support. The authors would like to acknowledge with sincere appreciation that this research was partially funded by the fund of the Mitsui & Co., Ltd, Environmental Fund. This study was also partly supported by KAKENHI ( ).

28 References

29 Thank You