Livestock Waste Management in East Asia Project

(DRAFT)

LIVESTOCK WASTE MANAGEMENT IN EAST ASIA PROJECT

STRATEGY FOR ETHNIC MINORITY DEVELOPMENT

THAILAND

LIVESTOCK ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT SECTION

BUREAU OF LIVESTOCK STANDARD AND CERTIFICATION

DEPARTMENT OF LIVESTOCK DEVELOPMENT
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND COOPERATIVES (MOAC)
102 RAJADAMNERN NOK,

BANGKOK 10200, THAILAND

12 OCTOBER 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations

1. Introduction 1

2. Ethnic Minorities in Thailand 4

3. The Strategy 6

4. Guidelines for Preparation of Ethnic Minority Development Plans (EMPD)7

5. Screening 9

6. Social Impact Assessment 9

7. Ethnic Minority Development Plan 9

8. Implementation Arrangement 9

9. Monitoring 10

10. Schedule 10

11. Budget 10

12. Reporting/Documentation 11

ABBREVIATIONS

DOLA Department of Local Administration

DOLD Department of Livestock Development

DPs Displaced persons

EMDP Ethnic Minority Development Plan

EMP Ethnic Minority People

GEF Global Environmental Fund

MOAC Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives

MOI the Ministry of Interior

LEDS Livestock Environment Development Section

NGOs Non governmental organisations

NSC National Steering Committee

OP Operational Policy

PIU Project Implementation Unit(s)

PLO Provincial Livestock Office

PMU Project Management Unit

PRAs Participatory rural appraisal

RTG Royal Thai Government

Sangka Council Buddhist Religious Council

SIA Social Impact Assessment

Tambon Sub-district

TAO Tambon Administrative Organization

EQUIVALENTS

B.E. Buddhist Era, equal to –253 A.D.(B.E. 2547 = A.D. 2004)

Rai Thai measurement of land unit, equal to 400 Wah 2 or 1 600 m2

Wah 2 Thai measurement of land, equal to 0.0025 Rai or 0.007 Acre or

400 m2

Livestock Waste Management Project: Social Assesment in Thailand (2004) 11

Ethnic Minority Guideline (EMG)

INTRODUCTION

1. This project addresses one of the most significant and rapidly growing causes of land-based pollution in the South China Sea and the Gulf of Thailand – environmentally unsustainable industrial-scale livestock production. The overall objectives of the project is to reduce the negative local and global environmental impacts of rapidly increasing livestock production in selected demonstration areas in China, Thailand, and Vietnam. Specifically, the proposed project and its replication aims to reduce land-based pollution from livestock production in Thailand and, consequently, in the international waterways.

2. The proposed project consists of four components: Component 1: Conducive Policy Framework; Component 2: Demonstration of Livestock Waste Management; Component 3: Development of Decision Support Tools and Regional Co-ordination; and Component 4: Project Management and Monitoring. The first component should lead to the development ands implementation of policies for both livestock production and waste management with strengthened and better-enforced regulations, more effective institutions and financial incentives. The outcome of the second component would be improved livestock waste management technology demonstrations in livestock farms of different size, including the establishment of improved quality of surrounding agricultural land. The third component would develop common decision support tools for policy makers and promote the exchange of experience and lessons learned amongst the three participating countries directly involved in the project as well as those bordering the South China Sea. The last component would result in efficient project management and effective monitoring of political/institutional and environmental changes brought about by the project.

3. The focus of the proposed project is on the implementation of cost-effective livestock waste management in selection sites in Thailand, Vietnam and in one province of China bordering the South China Sea (Guangdong). The two provinces selected as demonstration areas in Thailand are Ratchaburi and Chon Buri Province. In Ratchaburi, the selected district is Pak Tho, whereas the selected district in Chon Buri is Ban Bung District. The demonstration sites are tabulated below, with information on ethnic minority groups in each province.

4. The ethnic minority peoples in the demonstration provinces are settled in the following districts and sub-districts and they are not culturally affected by the project activities.

Province

District

Sub – District

Ethnic Minority

/ Effects from the project
Ratchaburi / Muang / Khu Bua / Thai Yuan / None
Don Takoe / Thai Yuan / None
Aung Thong / Thai Yuan / None
Jaydee Huk / Thai Yuan / None
Hin Kong / Thai Yuan / None
Don Rai / Thai Yuan / None
Khung Katin / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Khung Namwon / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Muang / Thai Chine / None
Pak Tho / Pak Tho / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Wang Manow / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Wan Dao / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Donsai /

Thai Khmer Lao Derm

/ None
Huay Yang Tone / Thai Song Dum / None
Bo Kradan / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Wat Yang-ngam / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Yang Huk / Thai Karen / None
Wat Plang / Ko Sanpra / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Wat Plang / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Dumnuen Sa-duak / Don Khlung / Thai Song Dum / None
Bua Ngam / Thai Song Dum / None
Thai Chine / None
Bangpae / Wat Kaew / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Bang Pae / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Hua Po / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Wang Namyen / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / None
Don Kha / Thai Song Dum / None
Po Huk / Thai Pueng Tin / None
Banpong / Nong Pla Moe / Thai Yuan / None
Tha Pa / Thai Lao Viane / None
Thai Chine, Thai Mon / None
Potharam / Nong Poe / Thai Yuan / None
Bang Kra-doe / Thai Yuan / None
Thai Mon / None
Ban Khong / Thai Lao Viane / None
Ban Leuk / Thai Lao Viane / None
Ban Sing / Thai Lao Viane / None
Kam Pang Nue / Thai Lao Viane / None
Thai Chine / None
Province / District / Sub – District / Ethnic Minority / Effects from the project
Jombung / Jombung / Thai Lao Viane, Thai Song Dum / None
Suan Peung / Suan Peung / Thai Karen / None
Ta -noa Wa Sri / Thai Karen / None
Ging Ampuer Ban Kha / Ban Kha / Thai Karen / None
Ban Bung / Thai Karen / None
Chon Buri / Ban Bung / Marp Pai / - / None

Sources: Ratchaburi Provincial Office of the Ministry of Culture. Eight Ethnic Groups in Ratchaburi. Publication without date.

:www.thai.net/prratburi/line/mtml

5. However, according to information collected from local authorities and the National Steering Committee these EMPs are not located in vicinity of the demonstration farms currently selected within each sub-district or in areas down-stream of these farms. Consequently it is not anticipated that EMPs will be negatively affected by project activities within the currently selected demonstration areas.

6. In the case of that future project demonstration activities will be located in the areas of EMPs, every special effort will be made through design, construction measures and construction schedules to reduce adverse impacts on these groups. For the establishment of public pig waste treatment systems, the adverse impacts would be at the individual level and at a low-intensity level, as land of some ethnic minority families may be exchanged or permanently acquired for building common waste treatment systems. Therefore, the project would not cause any culturally specific impact on the affected ethnic minority households and the nature of impacts does not result in community-wide socio-economic effects.

7. If there are ethnic minority people in the project selected sites then in line with the World Bank’s Operational Directive on Indigenous Peoples (OD 4.20), an Ethnic Minority Development Plan (EMDP) will be developed for areas that have ethnic minority households according to this strategy for ethnic minorities. Ethnic minority is defined as social groups with a social and cultural identity distinct from the dominant society that may make them vulnerable to being disadvantaged in the development process. According to OD 4.20 ethnic minorities can be identified in particular geographical areas by the presence in varying degrees of the following characteristics:

(a) A close attachment to ancestral territories and to the natural resources in these areas;

(b) Self-identification and identification by others as members of a distinct cultural group;

(d) Presence of customary social and political institutions; and

(e) Primarily subsistence-oriented production.

8. The purpose of this strategy is to ensure that the development process foster full respect for dignity, human rights, and cultural uniqueness of EMPs. More specifically, the objective of this strategy is to ensure that EMPs do not suffer adverse effects during the development process and that they will receive culturally compatible social and economic benefits.

2. Ethnic Minorities in Thailand

9. In Thailand, there have been flows of immigrants mainly of mainland China for over three hundred years. The gradual assimilation makes it difficult to differentiate the ethnic Thai and ethnic Chinese Thai, who engage mainly in the business sector, and have gained high economic status in the Thai society. Currently, the Thai comprise 75 percent, the Chinese 14 percent and other EMPs 11 percent of the total population of Thailand.[1]

10. Other EMPs mainly include the Laotian in Northeast Thailand and the Vietnamese in a few provinces in the Northeast. In the upland hilly borders in Northern Thailand, there are hill tribe minorities, including the Karens, Lawas, Lahus, Akhas, Lisu, Hmong, Mien, Khamus and the Phi Thong Luang.[2] The Royal Thai Government (RTG) is concerned about their movement across borders and the related issue of citizenship.

11. In Chon Buri Province, there is no ethnic minority, whereas in Ratchaburi Province there are eight ethic minority groups. They are: 1 Thai Pueng Tin; 2 Thai Chine; 3 Thai Yuan; 4. Thai Mon; 5 Thai Khmer Lao Derm; 6 Thai Lao Viane; 7 Thai Karen; and 8 Thai Song Dum.[3]. All these groups have been settled in Thailand for so long that they have attained Thai citizenship and are under the Thai Constitution.

12. According to information collected from local authorities and the National Steering Committee for the project, the following Ethnic Minority People (EMP) are located in the two demonstration sites selected during the project preparation phase:

Province / District / Sub – District / Ethnic Minority*
Ethnic Minority / Average Annual HHD Income**
(Baht) / Income Sources
Ratchaburi / Pak Tho / Pak Tho / - / 50 000 (USD 1250) / Paddy farming and horticulture(coconuts & mangoes)
Wang Manow / - / 50 000(USD 1250)
Wan Dao / - / 50 000 (USD 1250)
Don Sai / Thai Khmer Lao Derm / 50 000(USD 1250)
Huay Yang Tone / Thai Song Dum / 50 000 (USD 1250) / Glutinous and non-glutinous paddy farming, subsistence capture fishery, vegetable gardening

Note: *The groups in the selected sub-district only.

** Per com., Paa Lumduan, traditional leader of Thai Song Dum ethnic

community, October 9, 2004.

13. Thai Khmer Lao Derm people have the Khmer ethnic origin. There is no record of the year of migration to Thailand but according to historical record, a large number of Khmer people were forced by war to settle in Thonburi Province during King Narai Period of Ayudhaya dynasty. In B.E. 2314 (A.D. 1771), King Taksin of Thonburi period ordered them to migrate and settled in Ratchaburi Province. The language is similar to the Thai northern dialect. The informal record of this ethnic group claims that they used to be Siamese whose settlements were scattered in the northeastern part of Siam. The settlement pattern is that of clustered villages with several households in each village. They have varied tight kinship system. In terms of religion, they believe in ancestral worship and Buddhism. There are traditional festivals throughout the year, for example; in March, there is the tradition of making glutinous rice roasted in bamboo joints and April is the traditional New Year. Modernization has changed the traditional Thai Khmer Lao Derm such that the traditions are not observed very seriously and it is difficult to differentiate them from any ordinary Thai. The major occupation has been paddy farming and horticulture. For the last 30 – 40 years, the major horicultural crops are mangoes and coconuts. They have been engaged in fresh water fish capture for subsistence and the left over was preserved for future use.

14. Thai Song Dum’s original settlement was in Kwang Sipsong Juthai near Dien Bien Fu, the northern part of Vietnam that is adjacent to Laos. The settlement was on the route along which the Vietnamese and the Chinese moved their troops to fight against each other. During these wars between Vietnam and China, the Thai Song Dum settlement was often devastated. As Siam considered Thai Song Dum to be an ethnic minority of Siam, Siamese kings had ordered the minority group to resettle in Siam for five times. In B.E. 2322 (A.D.1779), they were settled in Petchburi, Saraburi, Ratchaburi and Chanthaburi Province. In B.E. 2335 (A.D. 1792), they were settled in Petchburi and Bangkok. In B.E. 2378 (A.D.1835), B.E. 2379 (A.D.1836) and B.E. 2381 (A.D.1838), they were settle first in Bangkok and then in Petchburi. Gradually, they moved to various provinces such as Supanburi, Kanjanaburi, Nakhon Pathom, Saraburi, Loburi, Nakhonsawan Pijit, Pitsanulok, Sukhothai, Chumphon, Suratthani Province. At present, there are settlements of Thai Son Dum in Pak Tho, Bangpae, Dumnernsaduak, Jombueng District of Ratchaburi Province. In terms of religion, they believe in Pi Fa (angel; elves; sky) and in ancestral worship. This ethnic minority engages in agriculture (agronomy and glutinous and non-glutinous paddy farming. Their major staple food are glutinous rice, vegetables and homemade preserved food such as dried fish, fermented fish as well as fresh water fish and pork. They are diligent, honest and have high ethnic group solidarity and lead simple ways of life.

15. Khmer Lao Derm and Song Dum communities are located in the project sub-districts of Ratchuburi. The SA team interviewed Mr. Nit Muangsawat of Thai Khmer Lao Derm ethnic minority in Moo 4 of Don Sai Sub-district on 15th July 2004. His community comprises about 200 households, all of which are of the same ethnic group. The majority engage in rice farming. The growth of pig farms in the area negatively impacted the water quality in the rice fields, but not the EMP culture. They filed complaints and the Department of Land pronounced their community and their land the “Green Area”. Those engaged in pig farming can be in the areas, provided that they have a good waste management system. At present, the overall environment situation is getting better and it is not likely that the community member would need to resettle.