report Sowing Seeds of Solidarity: The Mekong Regional Meeting on Tree Plantations Tree plantations are changing the landscape throughout the Mekong Region. Their expansion is rapid and extensive, swelling onto community territories and all too often taking the place of dense or regenerating forests, upon which typically the poorest peoples depend. Watershed reports on a recent meeting in Kratie province, northeast Cambodia, where villagers, nongovernmental organisations and media gathered to discuss the impacts of plantations on local livelihoods and share lessons to develop a common understanding and strengthen their networks. The Mekong Regional Meeting on Tree Plantations held in Kratie, northeast Cambodia, from 21-22 November 2006, was the first of its kind, bringing together representatives of people s organisations from around the region. It is never easy to invite a diverse group of village people, nongovernmental organisations (NGOs), academics and the media together to exchange ideas, even within one country. However the increasingly hot nature of this issue made it possible to draw community representatives from 12 provinces of Cambodia, the south of Laos and from the north and northeast of Thailand, as well as other participants from five countries of the Mekong Region (Cambodia, China, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam). Contributions were also made by friends from other countries (Australia, India, Philippines, the UK and Uruguay). The two-day workshop was preceded by field trips to the provinces of Mondolkiri, Kratie, and Stung Treng to witness the major plantations already being implemented in these areas and to learn from the villagers directly affected about the different impacts they experience. Participants to the field trips included people from each of the target sectors, local people, academics, NGOs and media. The main meeting began with a keynote presentation by Ricardo Carrere of the World Rainforest Movement (WRM), drawing on case examples of communities resisting plantations from around the world. The current situation was reported by villagers from Cambodia, highlighting cases from O-Svey commune in Stung Treng province, Ou Rieng district in Mondolkiri province, Sre Ambel district in Koh Kong province, Kampong Chhnang province, and from Salavanh province in Laos. Presentations by villagers in Thailand concentrated on the lessons drawn from past experiences, from the time company representatives to hold Villagers in Stung Treng met with them to account for the loss of when their struggles their lands, but so far there has to regain land were at been no response from the company s head office. their height (see box: Key issues: Cambodia, Laos and Thailand). Each of the country panels also included presentations by NGOs to explain the legal and policy context in each country and finally there was a presentation identifying the roles played by some of the main actors in the global pulp and paper industry. The second day was mostly devoted to discussions, allowing the villagers groups from other areas in Cambodia a chance to contribute their views and experiences. Thus four small working group discussions were held on building networks, support and solidarity at different levels, legal action and identifying and drawing key lessons from success stories. A plenary session brought in the work from the groups into a discussion on local work on plantations: existing and proposed networks. The concluding sessions of the meeting were devoted to the drafting, debating and agreement of a statement of unity which was declared and presented before the Deputy Governor of Kratie province, Mr. Van Sokkhuay Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007 Page 47
(see box: Statement of Unity). Some of the main points from the discussion are highlighted below. Loss of land, loss of livelihood Governments around the Mekong Region have granted thousands upon thousands of hectares of large land concessions for industrial tree plantations, with the most startling increases in Laos and Cambodia. Granting companies the right to the exclusive use of large tracts of forest and agricultural land has alienated the people Villagers in Mondolkiri concerned for their future as the Wuzhishan company starts planting thousands of hectares of living in these pine plantations in their traditional lands. areas from the land and natural resources upon which they rely on for their survival. The loss of people s individual and common lands as a result of land concessions was a recurring experience conveyed by local people at the meeting. A villager from Koh Kong province in Cambodia told the meeting that a concession in his area affects people from 439 households in three villages, affecting 5,000 hectares of paddy fields, farmlands, lakes, grasslands, and spirit lands of up to 1,500 hectares. This year, the people cannot access their rice fields, farmlands, and the forest to collect forest products. Our animals cannot go there to graze. We fear we have no land to pass on to our children. Another representative from a village in Stung Treng province reported that as a result of a concession in his area, 75 rice farming households have lost their income and now can only feed themselves with rice for four months in the year. Usually, their food needs are fulfilled and sustained by forest products, but the evergreen forests are fast disappearing. Our religious beliefs are being violated as the spirit forests are being destroyed. A woman representing an ethnic minority community in Mondolkiri province, who learned of a 199,999-hecatre concession granted to the Wuzhishan Group only once the planting had begun, explained that our rivers, farms and animals are being poisoned by pesticides used by the company in their plantation. Cows and buffalos are dying; they have been poisoned by drinking water from the plantation area. Villagers kept in the dark, promises unmet Contracts are being signed in secrecy. One representative of a community in Salavanh province, southern Laos where approximately 6,000 hectares of land has been given in concessions for plantations and agribusiness explained that in my village, the company came to meet with the village headman to get some land without the villagers knowing anything. The company representatives wanted to find out who owned the land. They said they just wanted to know. Shortly after, the company was granted a 30-year concession to grow cassava in the village land. The company then promised that there would be employment for the local people. In the beginning, the company did hire a few people, he said, but their wages were low. And there s been no compensation for loss of forest and land that people used to use. Legal limits Tactical approaches in the struggle for land were debated throughout the two-day meeting. It is important for villagers, in particular in indigenous communities, to know their rights and how they can be exercised. One participant argued that in Laos, the government has announced more than 60 laws related to land and forest, but generally village people do not understand the law. He believed that part of the problem is that villagers legitimate cases have not been submitted to government through the proper channels. It is clear that national contexts are different and it is important to assess what is effective in the local cases. However, from examples raised in Cambodia, even when complaints are filed, petitions submitted with thousands of thumbprints, cases are often stalled in the bureaucratic process. Policies and laws that are meant to control resource exploitation and secure rural people s land rights, while promoting entrepreneurial development, have proven endlessly contradictory. Speaking from 20 years of experience in struggle for land in northern Thailand, Mr Tana Yasophon raised the question whether people really want to wait five to ten years for the [official] processes to be exhausted? It may be too late; entire forests could be gone by then. Faced with the desperate consequences of their loss of land, and when the official and legal channels for support to villagers prove ineffective, especially as a result of corruption, many participants saw few options but to begin public protest. Representatives from Kampong Speu province, Cambodia, explained that their communities stuck to the legal process as far as they could; but when the legal Page 48 Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007
Key issues: Cambodia, Laos and Thailand Impacts of tree plantations in Cambodia It is clear from the presentations that the implementation of large-scale tree plantations are affecting people s livelihood, through the occupation of villagers agricultural land by plantations companies and the destruction of forest areas from which a variety of products used to be harvested. Participants, particularly from minority ethnic groups, also emphasised that loss of land also has indirect but serious impacts on traditional beliefs and customary practices. Plantations explicitly affect the environment. Amongst the several examples raised were the use of pesticides which has caused severe pollution of local water sources. Despite all these publicly reported impacts, companies have never consulted the local people, from which we can imply that no social or environmental impact assessments have been carried out. Laws are in place but often secondary legislation is missing and enforcement of existing rules is almost negligible in the case of large concessions. On the other hand, villagers, whose rights are supposedly protected under national legislation, are being intimidated by local authorities, who listen more intently to the companies seeking to occupy the land, than to the local people. Several companies receiving concessions have not used the land for the development of the local area, nor the people in it, but for their own benefit. In practice, companies acquire more land than was officially issued to them by the government. Even despite protests that have gained the support of UNCHR and NGOs, solutions have not yet been found to address the needs and concerns of the affected communities. Emerging issues from Laos Villagers in Laos have been submitting their complaints to the government about land concessions using the normal channels and processes available, but often they have yet to see any results. Contracts are kept secret, villagers have no access to information; on the other hand, villagers are giving up information about the local area, without knowing how that information will be used. The Government of Laos is promoting plantations and concessions are being granted at different levels by different agencies; local elites are supporting the companies. There is a lack of compensation to local people for their losses; the amounts offered are unsatisfactory, and in the case of certain areas of land, such as old fallow lands, grazing lands etc, no compensation is offered at all. Offers of employment do not live up to their promises. Villagers who lose their forests also lose their grazing lands; forests provide a large portion of villagers income and subsistence goods. Communities can be empowered with information and knowledge about laws. Key lessons from Thailand The people s struggle in Thailand began at the local village level. Through discussion with other villagers in the area experiencing similar problems, networks expanded and established at provincial and national levels. Now there s a huge number of villager groups/networks working together. Villagers use different methods to achieve their aims, including rallies, forums, marches, destroying plantations, occupations of land, and establishing alternative models such as community title. Some problems regarding land and forest have been resolved, but new problems have also emerged over the last 20 years. Networks need to develop their analysis regularly. There is strong solidarity in the struggles in Thailand, different networks have common interests with other people s groups, and by joining together they can strengthen each other. The panellists showed that if people are not united, they do not have as much power to negotiate, to demand, to have their concerns listened to. NGOs play a facilitating role to support people-led struggles at various levels. Communities have the right to say no to plantations. system itself was stalled and could not protect their rights, villagers resorted to blocking the access roads. This reflected the company s actions in blocking villagers access to the land. Some successes In some cases, protests have proved successful. For example, local villagers protested against the massive Pheapimex concession, covering over 300,000 hectares in Kampong Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007 Page 49
Chhnang and Pursat provinces, Cambodia. Villagers initially managed to delay the planting of eucalyptus in the area around the Tonle Sap Lake. As planting resumed in October 2004, grenades were hurled at the protestors camp at 1 a.m. while all were asleep. Un-intimidated, over a thousand villagers marched to the provincial government offices. When they were prevented from entering by police blockades, they simply blocked the roads causing long traffic jams. By November, the government agreed to negotiations with the villagers and company officials. However, the situation has not yet Indigenous Phnong villagers in been resolved. Cambodia explaining their land was taken without any warning. Chea Sophoan, a leader from Kampong Chhnang province explained, We do not give up our struggle and we will never give up our lands and forests and spiritual areas. We are a non-violent people and we will use [non-violent means, including] community forestry to protect our traditions and forests. A petition of over 3,000 signatures has also been submitted to the King and the government asking their intervention to ensure the villagers will be able to keep their land. Getting organised While most of the protests in Cambodia and other countries have remained local, largely involving those directly affected in each case, in Thailand, villagers highlighted the importance of a broader network. During the protests at the government s flagship Khor Jor Kor programme, which was to allow the private sector to plant millions of hectares of eucalyptus in the forest reserves of northeast Thailand in the early 1990s, a network of villagers at local, district, province and eventually regional level was established quickly. We cannot rely on others to lead the struggle for us, we have to have our own plans, struggles and believe in the ability of people to manage their own resources, explained Mr Sawad Upahad, a leader of the land network from Khon Kaen province. We ve had some successes and some failures but the main thing is that we ve opened up spaces to discuss strategy and forced the government to come to the negotiating table with us. Following extended protests, long marches and a change of government, the Khor Jor Kor programme was scrapped in 1992. Local networks A clear call from the meeting was to devote greater energy and resources to networks at the local level. Local networks are usually the first recourse for help and solidarity when villagers face problems relating to their land. They can improve information sharing and facilitate exchanges, but are often vulnerable without additional support. Unfortunately some national and international NGOs were seen to be working among themselves; isolating themselves from local organisations and community federations. However, the energy and solidarity developed amongst the participating groups during this meeting, gave some hope that local networks that add strength to villagers voices through collective action and shared learning could begin to raise their profile and gain greater support. Statement of Unity An important output of the meeting was the development of a common understanding by which to guide action amongst the different groups in their different roles. The statement of unity, agreed by participants in the concluding sessions of the meeting, reflects the commonalities found amongst the impacts of plantations on the lives of communities across the region and around the world. It also recognises that despite differences in the social, political and economic conditions in the different countries of the Mekong, important common principles can be identified and adopted by the groups working on this issue. In sum, this meeting was an important step in a process to stop the destruction brought about by plantations in the region. The urgency of the debate was tangible in the room, and different strategies were vigorously discussed. Mr Sawad summed up the feeling of many participants when he said today we have had a great opportunity to meet together because such meetings don t happen often. We are faced with plantations because of agreements between governments and companies. Our governments are talking to each other all the time, discussing what kind of agreements they want. Compared with governments and companies who meet often, we, who all face the same situation, have few opportunities to meet. We hope this meeting can be a step towards setting up a realistic network of local communities. The only way we can protect our forests is if we work together. Page 50 Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007
STATEMENT OF UNITY Mekong Regional Conference on Tree Plantations Kratie, Cambodia November 21-22, 2006 We, people from five countries from the Mekong region including Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand, Vietnam and China, and friends from other countries gathered together on November 21-22, 2006, in Kratie, Cambodia, to share experiences and lessons learned on the issue of industrial tree plantations and their impacts on local peoples livelihoods. We also shared ideas and suggestions to resolve the problems arising from tree plantations. During our time together, we heard directly from local community representatives from twelve provinces in Cambodia and also from other countries in the region about how their lives, livelihoods and environments are affected by large plantations in their respective areas. We learned about the importance of forests, lands and other natural resources for the livelihoods and cultures of communities who depend on them for food, medicinal plants, income and spiritual security. Plantations are not forests. When forests are replaced by plantations, the livelihoods of numerous communities who live in and around these forests and protect and nurture them are lost. Plantations impoverish communities and their environments. We found that there are many common elements in how plantations impact the lives of communities across the region and further afield. In particular: 1. There are close relationships between the companies that obtain forest and land concessions for plantations, and governments at various levels. 2. Plantations severely limit the amount of land available to rural communities for agricultural production. Many plantation concessions allow companies to take prime fertile land away from villages and divert it for monocultural production. This has serious negative impacts on local environments, including loss of biodiversity, soil degradation, increased aridity and pollution of local water sources. 3. The application of existing laws tend to favour companies interests and investments more than those of local communities; in many cases, concessionaires do not respect and follow national laws and are not prosecuted nor penalised. 4. In many cases, there is evidence that concessionaires are breaching their contracts and are encroaching on and appropriating village lands, common/public lands and forests used by communities. Not only does this restrict the abilities of villages to meet their livelihood needs in the present day but also it affects the growth of village communities since there is no land left for future generations. 5. Contrary to government claims that plantations contribute to national economic development and poverty alleviation, plantations have increased poverty by displacing entire communities, destroying crucial livelihood resources and preventing the access of communities to natural resources. 6. Promises made by both companies and governments that local people will be employed in plantations, get roads, schools, health centres and electricity, and have better livelihoods, were all broken. At first, people believed in what companies and governments told them but were let down by them. 7. In many cases, plantations have come into communities with a certain level of violence; in some cases the violence has been open and obvious as in killings and imprisonments; in other cases, communities are subjected to intimidation and threats in order to frighten people so that they do not take action. The very act of taking land away from villagers is an act of violence. When communities stand up for their rights, they are often repressed by the police, local authorities and even at times, the military. Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007 Page 51
8. In all cases the only way to create change has been through peoples struggles. Struggle does not mean violence; it means the different ways that local people adopt to secure and defend their rights. 9. Using the law is very important, but laws alone do not guarantee that peoples rights are protected. 10. The most effective strategies for peoples struggles come from the affected communities themselves, not from NGOs and other outside groups. 11. By working together with other communities and finding common positions, people can strengthen their cause. 12. The role of NGOs is to support peoples struggles, not take their place; leadership has to come from the community. The social, political and economic conditions in each of our countries are different and we must all find a variety of ways to address the problems caused by tree plantations. At the same time, based on our sharing and learning over the past two days, we identified the following important principles. 1. The people who know most about forests, lands and the negative impacts of plantations are village residents in and around plantation areas; we must listen to them; all policy makers must listen to them. 2. Peoples security physical, economic, cultural and political must be protected. 3. Learning processes among communities about laws and regulations that can protect their rights, land and natural resources must be supported. 4. The abilities of communities to organise, share information and build networks with other communities facing similar problems must be supported. 5. The terms of plantation concessions and contract farming agreements must be made public and in particular, must be given to affected communities in their local languages. 6. Community and government decision makers must be made aware of the serious negative impacts of plantations and contract farming. 7. Affected communities have the right to determine their strategies to solve problems arising from plantations. 8. Village residents have the right to participate in the formulation of policies that affect their resources and lives. 9. International Financial Institutions (IFIs), bilateral donors and multilateral agencies (including UN agencies) should stop promoting large scale or industrial plantations. 10. Governments must recognise and accept that adequate compensation is due to local communities affected by plantations. 11. Natural resources on which communities are dependent should be protected by law and not destroyed by development projects. 12. Tree plantations that have been shown to seriously affect social, economic, cultural aspects, as well as livelihoods of local communities should be cancelled. On the basis of the lessons that we have learned from the many different communities represented here and the principles we have developed together, we are stronger in our resolve and can move forward in our struggles. We recognise the importance and value of regional exchanges such as this and we support the creation of further exchanges between people s organisations in the region to continue our learning and develop our strategies. The media can play an important role in exploding the myths about plantations and presenting accurate information to the public, based on the real experiences of local people. We will share our findings and principles with all our movements, networks and governments. **The Mekong Regional Conference on Tree Plantations was jointly organised by: NGO Forum on Cambodia; Oxfam Great Britain (Cambodia); Towards Ecological Recovery and Regional Alliance (TERRA); and World Rainforest Movement (WRM). Page 52 Watershed Vol. 12 No. 1 July 2006 February 2007