Presents findings from three studies in Indonesia on social forestry, in Laos on REDD+, and in Vietnam on swidden agriculture. The presentation was given at the ASFN Annual meeting in Palawan in June 2016.

1. ASFN ANNUAL MEETING
PALAWAN
June 2016
CIFOR’S CONTRIBUTION TO ASFCC:
EVIDENCE, CAPACITY BUILDING AND ENGAGEMENT

2. CIFOR’S CONTRIBUTION TO ASFCC
Swidden systems as a form of social forestry. CIFOR is undertaking
research on swidden systems and livelihoods to understand their
relevance for REDD+, and how swidden communities can participate
meaningfully in, and benefit from REDD+.
 Provide solid evidence on social forestry systems and its
contributions to ASEAN countries’ social, economic, and ecologic
objectives in response to climate change.
 Generate new knowledge and understanding of social forestry,
food security and climate change.
 Share knowledge and contribute to capacity building in ASEAN.

3. APPROACH AND METHODS
• Generating knowledge and understanding of forest and fallow
management, food and livelihood security and climate change in
swidden systems by
– Providing a deeper understanding of how existing horizontal and vertical social
networks can serve to enhance opportunities and diminish obstacles for forest
communities to participate meaningfully in and benefit from REDD+ and/or PES
– Providing analysis of how the forest management systems of shifting cultivators
contribute to local people's livelihoods, food security and their implications for
carbon trajectories in the landscape
– Providing a deeper understanding of the migration and multi-locality of
swidden households and communities and how their existing social networks
influence information and resource exchange, and implications for REDD+
• through social network analyses, land use change and carbon
stock mapping, livelihood assessments, policy network analysis of
adaptation and mitigation

4. THINKING beyond the canopy

5. INDONESIA
A Review of Traditional Social Forestry in Indonesia: What
constitutes as “Success”?
Waty et al. (2016), in prep

6. Social forestry is a continuum of diverse practices
Traditional SF practices:
- Practiced mainly for livelihoods
- Dynamic, evolves in response to various social,
political, ecological, and economic changes.
- Not formally recognized
- Well integrated into local cultural/customary
structure
Formal SF practices:
- Exogenous initiated/
supported
- Limited evolution due to
policy constraints
- Formally recognized
- Uniform
A literature review focused on traditional SF practices* in Indonesia:
- What constitutes as a successful SF (measures of success)?
- What factors are associated with successful SF in Indonesia?
* Examples include tembawang, tomawakng (W. Kalimantan), kaleka, pangale (C. Kalimantan),
simpuwn (E.Kalimantan), Borong Simenanggama (S.Sulawesi), kaliwu (W. Sumba), huma
(Java), parak (W. Sumatera), empus (Aceh)

7. MEASURING ‘SUCCESS’
 Social forestry: the management of forests by local communities to
achieve various environmental, social and livelihood goals, including
climate change mitigation and adaptation, food security, nutrition
and livelihood support.
 A traditional SF is considered successful when it achieves a ‘fair’
combination environment, social and livelihood outcomes
(Wollenberg, 1998; Pagdee, 2006).
 Challenges in measuring traditional SF success:
 Complicated and dynamics nature of the practices.
 Difficult to decide the fair proportion combination of those three
outcomes to make it as a ‘success’ SF practice.

8. PRELIMINARY RESULTS
• Out of 50 reviewed cases of traditional social forestry practices in
Indonesia, more than half (60%) mentioned all three environment,
social and livelihood outcomes.
• The most mentioned outcomes of local forest management is
Livelihood (discussed in 100% cases), followed by Environment
(86%) and Social/culture (64%)
• Factors considered as influencing the success of SF (in order of
most frequently discussed ≥20%): role in meeting subsistence
needs (82%), as source of cash income (74%), representing social-
cultural value (60%), providing ecosystem services (58%),
capitalization of traditional knowledge/practice (50%), act as
investment/safety net in time of crises (24%), existence of
customary rules (28%), requiring low inputs/maintenance (22%), and
clear ownership (20%).

9. THE FUTURE OF TRADITIONAL SF SYSTEMS?
 Changing/ disappearing with policy and market drivers:
commercialization of a forest product, desire to increase land productivity,
and allocation as concessions for logging, mining and cash crop expansion.
 Formal recognition is not perceived as an important success factor, but in
face of rapid change, formal recognition is considered as a strategy to
maintain the practice and multidimensional outcomes of traditional SF
systems.
 Formalizing traditional SF systems into Indonesia’s SF schemes can work
best when the formal scheme reconsiders forest land classification to
include traditional SF systems and is flexible enough to accommodate the
diversity of traditional SF arrangements.
 Research gap: most studies reviewed measure outcomes qualitatively and
are not directly comparable. ASFN leaders could put in place a collaborative
process for identifying suitable indicators for measuring the success of SF
(and hence, of SF policies), data collection and analysis.

10. LAO PDR
Objectives, Ownership and Engagement in Lao PDR’s
REDD+ Policy Landscape
Cole et al. 2016, in prep

11. LAO PDR FOREST POLICY CONTEXT
 REDD+ is engaging long-term forestry objectives to conserve and
increase forest cover, with NPAs and forest allocation and zoning as
key tools
 Economic development and growth in Lao PDR is heavily reliant on
natural resources (especially hydro, extractive industries, land
concessions) – while rural development is geared towards
promoting commercial agriculture and reducing swidden (often in
proximity to NPAs)
 Shifting institutional mandates – two ministries responsible for Lao
PDR’s forests, while powerful actors/industries circumvent
regulations
 REDD+ projects and organisations generally plug into existing
contestation over resource access, use versus conservation
 Study examines the perspectives and discourses on REDD+ across
different stakeholders to gauge challenges and opportunities in its
implementation

12. Organization category Number of
orgs
Analytical category
State organizations 17 [GoL]: Government of Laos – includes state
agencies at central, provincial and district levels
Foreign/multinational
business
2
[PS]: Private Sector – includes domestic and
foreign origin companiesDomestic business 2
International non-
governmental organizations
4
[IO]: International Organization – includes
country offices and provincial site offices
Inter-government
organizations
2
Foreign government agency 6
National research institutes 1 [LNG]: Lao Non-Government – includes unions,
industry and national research bodiesOther 4
Total 38
METHODS
• Analysis of actor perceptions in Lao PDR’s REDD+ policy landscape in 2013-14
• Purposive sample, semi-structured interviews supported by Department of
Forestry (MAF) and Faculty of Forestry (NUoL)

13. INDICATIVE FINDINGS
Limited national ownership resulting from externally designed solutions:
“Sadly a lot of government officials still think that it is your project, it is your
process, it’s not my process.” [GoL8]
Internationally-driven projects often focused in NPAs, follow long-standing
policy objectives:
“We undertake the poverty reduction, shifting cultivation stabilization
initiatives, [REDD+ is] still the old job but with a new concept.” [IO4]
Broad spectrum of interests/goals among other actors, including elite interests
beyond policy debate
“There are strong interest groups [with] economical interests in logging,
which are very well connected of course, and which is difficult to bring
under control by, by national organizations that [are] supposed to enforce
and implement the laws and decrees.” [PS4]

14. CONCLUSION
REDD+ approaches in Lao PDR could be more effective in addressing
deforestation via:
• Stronger national ownership through more inclusive planning
• Moving beyond the discourse on deforestation drivers (e.g. swidden farming
in proximity to NPAs):
“One of the things about working in Laos is that you have to work with the
Laos government and essentially support their mission, with a view to
supporting any initiative in so far as it overlaps with what we think is
important.” [IO9]
• Engagement of powerful actors absent from debate, especially resource-
based/extractive industries, powerful provincial level actors
“Perhaps one of the failings about how REDD is being rolled out here in
Laos right now is that all of these actors that work in the REDD space have
essentially no contact with any of those [organizations].” [IO6]

15. VIETNAM
The Politics of Swidden at Different Levels of Governance:
A case study of Son La and Nghe An provinces
Pham et al. (2016), submitted to journal

16. RATIONALE AND METHODS USED
• Swidden, a long-held agriculture
practice in Vietnam, is considered
as one of the major drivers of
deforestation and degradation.
• This study examines how swidden
is seen by diverse actors at
different levels of government.
• The varied discourses and
perspectives on swidden shape
their implementation of policies
relating to land, forests and
swidden.
• Uses the 4I framework (Brockhaus
and Angelsen 2012) in the
discourse analyses: Institutions,
Interests, Ideas, Information
Case studies: Son La province and
Nghe An province, Vietnam
• Legal review on national
government policies and measures
on swidden and forest conservation
• Semi-structured interviews (22)
with key informants at national,
provincial, district and commune
levels
• Focus groups discussions (6) in
2 villages
• Household surveys (88) in 2
villages of each province
• Consultative and feedback
workshops (5) at national,
provincial and village-levels

17. ACTORS’ PERCEPTIONS ON SWIDDEN
National level: swidden is considered as a major driver of deforestation
and forest degradation and needs to be eliminated
Provincial level: persistence of swidden is considered as a failure of
political performance, thus no data is collected
District level: swidden is allowed at the margins as one way to maintain
national security at border areas
Commune and village level: allows swidden to harmonize interests of
different groups and avoid protest of ethnic groups to government
Household level: swidden as a normal practice for food security

18. IMPLICATIONS
 Swidden is a political issue with different interpretations and
conflicting perspectives at different levels of governments
stakeholders.
 By focusing on swidden, the other major drivers of deforestation are not
addressed in policy.
 Politics of control and power might exacerbate environmental
degradation in constraining managed adaptations of swidden systems.
 The “invisibility” of swidden farmers in design and implementation of
policies that generate local benefits, such as PES and REDD+,
exacerbates inequity and potentially negative behavior spillovers.
 PES and REDD+ policies may be misinformed due to inaccurate (or
lack of) information on the extent of swidden, the actors engaged in the
practice and the potential contribution of swidden landscapes to the
policies’ objectives.

20. POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND CAPACITY BUILDING 2015-16
 Contributed knowledge and information to REDD+ decision makers and
practitioners across SEA, responded to demand for REDD+ research
results in countries (e.g. REDD+ benefit sharing training, SNV/Laos)
 Partnerships developed with:
 Laos: National University of Laos – scholarships provided to 3 MSc
students, and REDD+ Office for research-to-policy uptake
 Indonesia: Universiti Tanjungpura, West Kalimantan – internships
provided to 2 students
 Vietnam: Vietnamese Academy of Forest Sciences – team of 4 VAFS
researchers engaged with field work, analyses and research-to-policy
uptake
 Methods training on Focus Group Discussion techniques held in
Indonesia, 19-23 October 2015; and on Survey techniques held in
Laos, 15-19 February 2016
 PhD student, National University of Singapore, working on migration and
land use patterns along development corridors in Laos

21. KNOWLEDGE SHARING AND COMMUNICATION 2015-16
 Presentation at 16th ASOF conference (“Forests and the Climate Change
Agenda Beyond 2015”), Yogjakarta, August 2015
 Presentation of research results at the World Forestry Congress, Durban, Sept
2015
 Contributions at ASFCC partner learning events: ICRAF-led working group on
community forestry in Vietnam, RECOFTC training on gender and climate
change, ASFN Executive study tour
 Website http://www.cifor.org/asfcc/ launched in 2014:
 Project publications have 963 downloads: Pham, T.T. et al. 2014. Integration of
adaptation and mitigation in climate change and forest policies in Indonesia and
Vietnam Forests (528).
 Project technical reports: 324 downloads.
 Publication dissemination: distributed 1,231 research publications in 2014,
and 1,021 research publications in 2015.
 17 CIFOR ASFCC presentations on Slideshare: 9,339 views.

22. RESEARCH AND KNOWLEDGE GENERATION, 2015-16
 Continued analysis of how existing horizontal and vertical social networks
can affect local community participation in REDD+ or PES.
 Three papers submitted to journal: 1) Governance in Swidden and REDD+
in Vietnam by Moeliono et al (accepted in Human Ecology).; 2) Interventions
and information exchange in swidden communities of West Kalimantan:
Lessons for designing REDD+ by Kallio et al. (accepted in International
Forestry Review); 3) The Politics of Swidden by Pham et al. (submitted to
Land Use Policy)
 Literature review of migration and remittances within rural landscapes of SE
Asia, “Reworking the Land” published as CIFOR working paper (Cole et al.)
 Land use and carbon mapping of swidden landscapes across all ASFCC
sites, undergoing peer review to be published as CIFOR working paper
(Anandadas et al.)
 Ongoing analyses: Review of customary social forestry practices in
Indonesia, and comparative analyses of social forestry policies in Indonesia
and Vietnam

24. ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR 2016
Policy development and capacity building
 Support through intense backstopping and capacity building of
partners in field research (Focus Group Discussions, household and
social network surveys) and data analyses
 Support ASFN country partners and ASFN focal points:
 Support Laos REDD+ Office in designing research on REDD+,
benefit sharing and social forestry;
 Respond to requests from Vietnam MARD (MOU signed in April
2016) and Community Forestry Working Group;
 Sharing knowledge with Mr. Wiratno, newly appointed Director of
Social Forestry and his office in Indonesia

25. ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR 2016
Knowledge sharing and communication
 Produce country-specific briefs on social forestry based on research
results and in national language
 Contribute to ASEAN, ASFN and ASFCC partner learning events
and hold country-level knowledge sharing
 Seminar on Social forestry and REDD+ to be held (e.g. with NUOL
in Laos, elsewhere as requested)
 Panel session “Policies, Governance and Economics at the
Intersection between REDD+ and Swidden in Southeast Asia” at
IUFRO conference in Beijing, China in October 2016

26. ACTIVITIES PLANNED FOR 2016
Research and knowledge generation
 Fieldwork on track in all countries: Field data collection, data
management, joint analyses, knowledge sharing (through committed
partnerships)
 Support country and partner specific research through demand
driven and flexible research design:
 Indonesia (West Kalimantan): changing governance in
swidden-forest landscapes, economics of land use change, and
assessments of migration and remittances.
 Laos (Huaphan): assessments of migration and remittances,
and use of biodiversity (NTFPs) in swidden-forest landscapes.
 Vietnam (Son La and Nghe An): assessments of migration and
remittances, and forest incentive programs (PFES, REDD+).

28. CIFOR-ASFCC PHASE 2 TEAM
CIFOR
Christine Padoch
Grace Wong
Maria Brockhaus
Moira Moeliono
Pham Thu Thuy
Indah Waty
Cynthia Maharani
Shintia Arwida
Le Ngoc Dung
Robert Cole, PhD student, NUS
Collaborators:
University of Berne
Kyoto University
Lao partners:
Dept of Forestry – REDD+ Office
National University of Laos – Faculty
of Forestry; Faculty of Social
Science
Indonesia partners:
Universiti Tanjungpura, Faculty of
Forestry
Vietnam partners:
Vietnam Academy of Forest Sciences
District forestry officers, village and
commune leaders in Nghe An and
Son La

29. THANK YOU!
For more information:
http://www.cifor.org/asfcc/