Maize Commercialization and Livelihood Transition in

Viengthong District, Huaphan Province, Lao PDR

ASEAN-Swiss Partnership on Social Forestry and Climate ChangeKhamphet Phomphoumy (NUoL), Rob Cole, Maarit Kallio, Grace Wong (CIFOR)

Contents

1. Introduction to ASFCC, research aims and methods

2. Policy context

3. Maize contract farming in Viengthong district, Huaphan province

4. Motivations

5. Constraints

6. Conclusions and policy recommendations

1. Introduction to ASFCC, research aims and methods• CIFOR ASEAN Swiss Partnership on Forests and Climate Change

(ASFCC) project works in partnership with DoF and NUoL in Lao PDR• Project aims to use data from household surveys and interviews with

central organizations to support REDD+ policy design• Household surveys look at social networks linking rural to urban areas

that exchange information, financial or other resources• One of the most active of these networks, that involves most

respondents in our study locations, is maize contract farming

2. Policy context: Agricultural Master Plan 2011- 2015GOAL 1: Food security is first priority of livelihood improvementGOAL 2: Increased and modernized production of commodities will lead to “pro-poor and green value chains” GOAL 3: Sustainable production patterns, including stabilization of shifting cultivationGOAL 4: Sustainable forest management to preserve biodiversity, improve forest cover-- (GoL, 2010)

MAIZECOMPANY

DISTRICT AUTHORITY

CLUSTER & VILLAGE

HEADHOUSEHOLD

VILLAGE TRADER

DISTRICT TRADER

3. Maize contract farming in Viengthong district,Huaphan province

Total HH

Livestock

NTFPs

Wage - construction

Wage - farm

Village staff/ teacher

Shop / service

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

1

1

2

1

1 7

4

3

4

20

13

13

5

3

4

8

3

5

6

1

1

1

Livelihood Composition: Village A

Paddy only Upland maize only Paddy + swidden Paddy + maizeSwidden + maize Paddy + swidden + maize Non-farm

Total HH

Livestock

NTFPs

Cassava

Wage - farm

Village staff / teacher

Shop / service

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

2

1

1

1

4

3

1

1

1

1

20

9

11

2

4

1

9

7

5

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Livelihood Composition: Village B

Paddy only Swidden only Paddy + swidden Paddy + maizeSwidden + maize Paddy + swidden + maize Cassava Non-farm

Paddy

Rice swidden

Maize swidden

Garden / other

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

53

48.5

71.5

10.5

66

110

111.5

19

Total declared land use (ha)*

Village B Village A

Rice *

Maize

Livestock*

NTFPs

Cassava

Wage - construction*

Wage - farm*

Govt salary (inc. teachers)

Shop / service*

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 20026

108

19

9

0

19

3

91

0

0

182

40

22.5

17

0

7

119

48

Total declared income (LAK millions)*

Village B Village A

Motivations1. Income: Maize is the biggest earner “According to the real situation,

I see only growing maize that makes higher income than other activities” (RespA32)

2. Land quality: Shortening fallow periods affects rice, but “Maize isn’t selective about soil, you can grow it everywhere” (RespB5)

3. Market engagement: District and village head “lead people to change their occupation, to make progress to help themselves” (RespB9)

4. Labour: Youth out-migration reducing supply, “Doing upland rice is very hard, growing maize is easy. Weed the grass only one time, then the second time use the knife to cut … the maize gets more than rice, if the rice gets 5 tons, the maize gets 10 tons.” (RespA1)

Constraints1. Contractual issues: “They broke the contract about buying-selling, they

said that the maize was in the low price period, they can’t buy maize at 1,000 kip/kg, they would like to buy 800 kip/kg.” (RespA39)

2. Sustainability: “The first year of growing maize the yield would be good, but if they continue at the same place the yield would reduce … here land is limited, so villagers have to grow maize at the same place.” (District Trader)

3. Land access: “The rice is not enough to eat, because our land is small … the place suitable for cultivating is in prohibited areas, so we don’t have land for production. We are newcomers.” (RespB3)

Staying behind …

“I would like to grow maize but have no land in (village B), and maize traders can’t reach here as there is no good road. Rice is more useful for us for food, maize you can only transport once and sell.” (RespB41)

Conclusions: Agricultural Master Plan 2011-2015GOAL 1: Food security – Already food secure HH continue to be with maize as income stream, food security of those lacking land is not improvedGOAL 2: Increased and modernized production of commodities will lead to “pro-poor and green value chains” – Production not yet modernized / green, farmers benefit but from weak power positions, value captured externallyGOAL 3: Sustainable production, stabilization of shifting cultivation – Shifting cultivation remains active in maize producing communities GOAL 4: Sustainable forest management – Farmers converting fallows to maize continue clear old forest for rice: “Maize swidden is near the village but we have to walk 1 hour and a half to reach the rice swidden, and clear the big trees.” (RespA15)

Policy recommendations

District and sub-district:• Local authorities could play a stronger role in mediating contracts to

lessen risks to farmers• Support provision of cost-benefit information on emerging market

opportunities (together with NUoL, NAFRI and NERI)National-level:• Central agencies could at the same time set safeguards for managing

agricultural investments – including contract farming systems – to minimize social and environmental costs and support sustainable growth

Thank you.