The politics of swidden: A case study from Nghe An and Son La in Vietnam

Author(s): Thu, P.T., Moeliono, M., Wong, G., Brockhaus, M., Dung, L., N.
In: Land Use Politics. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.057
Year: 2018
Type: Journal / article
Theme affiliation: Landscapes, Stewardship
Link to centre authors: Wong, Grace
Full reference: Thu, P.T., Moeliono, M., Wong, G., Brockhaus, M., Dung, L., N. 2018. The politics of swidden: A case study from Nghe An and Son La in Vietnam. Land Use Politics. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2017.10.057

Summary

Swidden cultivation practices have been seen as a major driver of deforestation and forest degradation in Southeast Asia. Using two case studies from Vietnam, this paper examines discourses around swidden practices at multiple levels of governance. Our findings show diverse interpretations of swidden resulting in different policy preferences and policy translations when addressing the issue. At national level, swidden is blamed as a principal driver of deforestation and forest degradation, and as such is a practice to be eliminated. As a result of this national stance, provincial level authorities see the existence of swidden as a failure by which their political performance will be judged. Conversely, swidden communities are seen at district level as an innovative solution to help resource-limited police forces ensure national security in border areas. Local commune and village leaders view swidden as a traditional practice to be respected, so as to maintain harmonious relationships amongst social groups, and avoid ethnic groups protesting against the government. Such differences in discourses and political interests have led to swidden becoming an ‘invisible’ issue, with government authorities failing to collect and report on data. Not recognizing swidden also means that swidden actors are practically ‘forgotten’ in the design and implementation of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) and Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES). Their omission from forest conservation and management incentive programmes could lead to further social marginalization, and potentially result in deforestation and forest degradation in the area. Our findings suggest that REDD+ policies should take into account diverging political interests on controversial land uses such as swidden cultivation.

Share

Stockholm Resilience Centre is a collaboration between Stockholm University and the Beijer Institute of Ecological Economics at the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Stockholm Resilience Centre
Stockholm University, Kräftriket 2B
SE-10691
Phone: +46 8 674 70 70
info@stockholmresilience.su.se

Organisation number: 202100-3062
VAT No: SE202100306201