Annexes

Annex 1 - Suggested outputs of the SPPD mission. February/March 1999
Annex 2 - Timetable for second visit of SPPD mission. 14 February through 17 March 1999 - Travel schedule of mission members
Annex 3 - Government research. Extension and credit
Annex 4 - Forestry related policies and related instruments

Annex 1 - Suggested outputs of the SPPD mission. February/March 1999

Within the general context of the need to ensure sustainability, replicability, people's participation, partnership with NGOs and other potential donors, the Mission will:

I. Make recommendations for actions for consideration by the three FAO-executed HDI projects during the course of the third phase.

II. Report on evaluations of specific project activities.

III. Make recommendations for the improvement of monitoring and evaluation activities designed to measure the impact of project interventions (including group formation and the management of funds).

IV. More specifically, and within the disciplines represented, the Mission will undertake the following activities:

Farming Systems and Agronomy

I. Estimates of gross margins for selected enterprises.
II. Evaluation of selected project interventions.
III. Replicability/sustainability of project technical innovations.
IV. Access to inputs at local level.
V. Review of marketing, prices, credit facilities.
VI. Review of technical capability of project staff, and staff of government extension services.
VII. Review of participatory development and the transfer of technology to communities.
VIII. Demonstration effects in non-project communities.
IX. Review of constraints to development.

Natural Resource Management:

I. Current use of natural resources.
II. Environmental situation.
III. Linkages between environmental degradation and poverty.
IV. Environmental effects of project interventions (related to natural resources).
V. Recommendations regarding untapped resources or technical weaknesses.
VI. Needs and methods for monitoring.
VII. Sustainability and replicability of resource-based project interventions.

Community Forestry:

I. Recommendations for developing management plans for community forests;

II. Review of policy and policy instruments on the basis of actual project experiences with community forestry;

III. Review of methodologies and strategies adopted by the projects to implement community forestry;

IV. Recommendations for the further development of community forestry approaches, based on the above review;

V. Consequent upon case studies undertaken in all three project areas, specific aspects for review and recommendation include the following:

a) awareness raising and extension;

b) community forestry planning process, including management plan preparation and management plan formats;

c) user right security, site protection, and grazing issues;

d) plantation establishment, management and utilisation aspects (in collaboration with other mission members);

e) training of farmers and staff;

f) institutional development of community forestry user groups;

g) targeting (i.e. female-headed households, landless and small farmers);

h) sustainability and replicability.

i) monitoring and reporting

Social Planning/WID:

I. Review of institutions established in the three zones.
II. Development of village profiles.
III. Documentation of process of income generation through the revolving fund.
IV. Directions in the post-project period.
V. Training project staff in monitoring techniques.
VI. Study of migration from the Dry Zone.
VII. Spread of innovations in the Delta beyond the project coverage.

Annex 2 - Timetable for second visit of SPPD mission. 14 February through 17 March 1999 - Travel schedule of mission members

Date	H Marshall	D Hamada	A Sterk	T Thorp	JM Stainbum
14/02 Sun		Arrive Bangkok	Arrive Bangkok	Arrive Bangkok
15/02 Mon		FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP
16/02 Tue		To Yangon	To Yangon	To Yangon	To Yangon
17/02 Wed		Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
18/02 Thu	Arrive Bangkok	To Delta	To Delta	Yangon	Yangon
19/02 Fri	To Yangon	Delta	Delta	Yangon	Yangon
20/02 Sat	To Delta	Delta	Delta	To Delta	Yangon
21/02 Sun	Delta	Delta	Delta	Delta	Yangon
22/02 Mon	Delta	Delta	To Yangon	Delta	Yangon
23/02 Tue	Delta	Delta	Yangon	Delta	Yangon
24/02 Wed	Delta	Delta	Yangon	To Yangon	Yangon
25/02 Thu	To Yangon	Delta	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
26/02 Fri	To Shan	Delta	To Shan	To Shan	To Shan
27/02 Sat	Shan	Delta	Shan	Shan	Shan
28/02 Sun	Shan	Delta	Shan	Shan	Shan
01/03 Mon	Shan	To Yangon	Shan	Shan	Shan
02/03 Tue	To Dry Zone	To Dry Zone	To Dry Zone	To Dry Zone	To Dry Zone
03/03 Wed	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone
04/03 Thu	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone
05/03 Fri	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone	Dry Zone
06/03 Sat	Dry Zone	To Yangon	To Yangon	Dry Zone	To Yangon
07/03 Sun	Dry Zone	Yangon	Yangon	Dry Zone	Yangon
08/03 Mon	To Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	To Yangon	Yangon
09/03 Tue	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
10/03 Wed	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
11/03 Thu	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
12/03 Fri	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
13/03 Sat	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
14/03 Sun	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon	Yangon
15/03 Mon	To Bangkok	To Bangkok	To Bangkok	To Bangkok	To Bangkok
16/03 Tue	FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP	FAO-RAP/depart	FAO-RAP
17/03 Wed	FAO-RAP	Depart	Depart
18/03 Thu	Depart

Annex 3 - Government research. Extension and credit

Research and Extension

Agriculture

Agricultural research in Myanmar is focused on crop diversification and farming systems involving important commodities such as rice, maize, cotton, oilseeds, pulses, sugarcane, fruits and vegetables. This is undertaken through a network of research facilities, at the head of which is the Central Agricultural Research Institute (CARI) located near Yezin. The institute is one of the twelve Divisions of the Myanmar Agricultural Service (MAS), a major Agency of the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation. The mandate of CARI is to carry out basic and applied research on agronomy, botany, soils and agro-chemistry, plant pathology and entomology, particularly for rice and the important industrial crops. The work is oriented to increase production through improved seeds and varieties, better crop management and protection techniques, better plant nutrition and better cropping systems suited to each agro-ecological condition. The Institute provides training for research and extension staff from the 16 Agricultural Experiment Stations and 54 sub-stations located in different regions of the country. Results from the research programmes of the Institute are passed on to these regional stations and sub-stations for further testing. The stations are also responsible for solving specific agricultural problems in their respective areas of responsibility.

An annual transfer of technology meeting is held at CARI, before the onset of the rains, attended by senior headquarters officers, and research and extension officers from State or Division, District, and Township level. This meeting provides a forum for exchange of information, presentation of research findings, and planning to deal with problems raised by field officers. A programme of work is determined for implementation by the various research stations in the country. Quarterly coordinating meetings review the progress of the research and extension programmes.

Extension services reach to township and village tract levels. At township level, there is the Township Manager (TM), two deputy TMs and several High Yield Station Officers. Beneath this, theoretically, there is a Manager for each Village Tract, but frequently only about half of these positions are filled. At village level there is occasionally a village extension worker. Under the present conditions of underfunding, shortage of transport, limited international contacts in recent years and a consequent lack of incentives and motivation, research and extension staff have difficulties in implementing their mandates. Direct contact with the farming community is limited, not least because of staff shortages. Identified contact farmers manage extension demonstrations on their lands. It is estimated that, at present, Myanmar has fewer than thirty "researchers" per one million hectares, compared, for example, to about 330 "researchers" in China.

In the Dry Zone the MAS is the lead cooperating agency with the Dry Zone project and has assigned six township level staff to work with the project on a full time basis. Training has been provided to the Land Use and Planning Department in soil and water conservation and soil mapping. As a direct result of the project's work, the MAS has allocated funds under its 1999-2000 budget to replicate in nine adjacent Townships a number of soil and water conservation and agricultural activities. Early in the process the MAS intends to initiate work on soil sedimentation dams, check dams and contour bunds.

Under the UNDP mandate for Myanmar, direct links with Government line Agencies and institutions are not permitted. However, it may be possible for the projects to further explore the establishment of contracts with individuals from agricultural and livestock institutions to carry out specific work assignments in research, and in the technical monitoring of activities.

Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Medicine

Within the Ministry of Livestock and Fisheries the Department of Livestock Breeding and Veterinary Medicine is responsible for research and development of livestock. Within this are several Divisions including Animal Health Development and Research, and Disease Control. There are three regional diagnostic laboratories and a Central Diagnostic Laboratory in Yangon. There are also several livestock enterprises and institutes under the Ministry. Within each State or Division of Myanmar, there is a Chief Veterinary Officer, a Veterinary Officer for each District, a Township level officer for each Township and a Village Tract officer for each VT. Veterinary staff at Township and VT levels are trained in a multi-disciplinary approach to livestock production and health care. The Department has initiated a programme of training auxiliary veterinarians at village level, drawn from interested farmers. These "bare-foot vets" will receive a veterinary medical kit, the "Blue Cross" kit, to enable them to dispense animal health care to farmers. The Department is severely underfunded and understaffed. FAO has supported the Ministry with several small TCPs.

Credit

The Myanmar Agricultural and Rural Development Bank (MARDB) is an agency of the Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation. It provides credit to farmers traditionally to support the monsoon paddy crop. Recently it has started to give support to summer (dry season) paddy. It has branches at Village Tract level and in each village a bank representative is appointed. The credit it can provide is extremely limited and is related to farm area: K. 4,000 for 1 to 5 acres; K. 8000 for 6 to 10 acres, and K. 12,000 for over 10 acres. The interest rate is at about 21 percent per annum. An average of 10 percent of debtors default on loans but all monies are eventually recovered. There are indications that in 1999 there will be more flexibility and larger loans will be available. In effect, it will probably mean that loans will be geared more towards the richer farmers whilst the poorer farmers will be even more hard pressed to obtain loans at a reasonable interest rate. MARDB has difficulties in operating a savings scheme due to lack of proper banking structures and security at Township and VT levels. However, it has recently instituted a compulsory savings scheme that obliges farmers who take out a loan to pay 5 percent of the value into a savings account.

The informal credit schemes (revolving funds) set up through the three projects for various CBOs, including agricultural and livestock groups, are at present working reasonably well but the ability of many of them to continue to operate should the projects exit in the near future is a cause for concern. Leadership and experience of the executive committees will be of critical importance. All three projects are placing considerable emphasis on training in accountancy, management and book keeping, but they themselves have very limited staff to do the work.

Apart from the need for good management, an ability to generate additional funds through diversification of activities will be pivotal to the sustainability of the credit schemes. Projects are already encouraging CBOs in this direction but it is difficult for many communities, particularly the poorest and less well educated, to visualise what they could do. Such CBOs will need at least three more years of project support and advice to ensure that they become firmly established.

Annex 4 - Forestry related policies and related instruments

Forest Law (1992)

The present Forest Law was enacted on 3 November 1992. This Law replaces the Forest Act of 1902. 'Forest Land' is defined as "land including Reserve Forest and Protected Public Forest". The Law empowers the Minister of Forestry, with the approval of the Government of the Union of Myanmar (GOUM), to constitute Reserve Forest and to declare Protected Public Forest on land at the disposal of the Government. The Forest Law defines "land at the disposal of the Government" as "other land with the exception of land in which a Government department, organisation or any person has acquired right of cultivation, right of possession, right of use and occupancy, beneficial enjoyment, heritable right or transferable right under any existing law". The Forest Law specifies the following five categories of Reserve Forest: (a) Commercial Reserve Forest; (b) Local Supply Reserve Forest; (c) Watershed or Catchment Protection Reserve Forest; (d) Environment and Bio-Diversity Conservation Reserve Forest; and (e) Other Categories of Reserve Forest. The Law states the following purposes of Protected Public Forest: (a) protection of water and soil; (b) conservation of arid-zone forests; (c) conservation of mangrove forests; (d) conservation of environment and bio-diversity; and (e) conservation for sustainable production.

The Forest Law does not mention, nor does it provide, a definition of community forestry. The closest reference to community participation in forest management is found among the basic principles for implementation of the Forest Law (Chapter II, Article 3). The third principle says: "to promote the sector of public cooperation in implementing the forest policy and the environmental conservation policy of the Government". The next principle speaks about a contribution "towards the food, clothing and shelter needs of the public", while the final principle refers to a contribution "towards the fuel requirement of the country".

Myanmar Forest Policy Statement (1995)

The Myanmar Forest Policy 1995 was approved on 20 July 1995. In the preamble a reference is made to the forestry principles adopted at the UNCED. The Policy sets out six imperatives, to which the Government must give the highest priority in order to achieve broader national goals and objectives. These include protection, sustainability, basic needs (of the people for fuel, shelter, food and recreation), efficiency, participation (of the people in the conservation and utilisation of the forests) and public awareness.

Among the policy measures proposed in the Statement, the following seem especially relevant in relation to community forestry, farming systems and food security:

I. establish a National Land Use Advisory Board with the responsibilities to oversee and coordinate overall land utilisation in the country;

II. base rehabilitation of shifting cultivation areas not only on extension and welfare but also on investment and development;

III. gazette 30 percent of the total land area of the country as Reserve Forest and 5 percent under a protected area system;

IV. establish plantation cooperatives and provide institutional finance for the establishment of man-made forests on degraded/denuded lands;

V. reforest an area of 20,000 hectares annually to restore degraded lands and meet rural needs;

VI. recognise the socio-economic importance of non-wood forest products in the list of priorities for forest development;

VII. create an awareness of community forestry and the significance of the problem it seeks to address;

VIII. demonstrate the cost/benefit of community development programmes as the mechanism for distribution of benefits to facilitate adoption of the programme by the people.

Community Forestry Instruction (1995)

To address an urgent need for the establishment, with the cooperation of the people, of new forests as well as the replacement of degraded forests, the Forest Department issued in 1995 a "Community Forestry Instruction" (CFI). The provisions set out in the Community Forestry Instruction are to be formalised through an amendment of the Forest Law and the promulgation of Forest Rules or Community Forestry Rules.

The CFI contains the following definition of community forestry: "community forestry means:

I. afforestation of areas where there is not sufficient fuelwood and other forest products for community use;

II. planting of trees and exploiting of forest products to obtain food supplies, consumer products and incomes".

The CFI states that community forests as well as village-owned firewood plantations may be established with the permission of the Government on Reserve Forest land, Protected Forest land, and land at the disposal of the state. Community forests may also be established with permission of the owner(s) on privately owned land or land owned by government organisations and non-governmental organisations.

The CFI further specifies that each household should be allotted not more than five acres, and that permission for the use of land for community forestry by the user group shall initially be for a period of 30 years. The user group is obliged to prepare a management plan according to the format given in an appendix of the CFI. After handover the executive committee of the user group must submit once a year a monitoring report through the Township Forest Officer to the Assistant Director of the Forest Department. A format for this report is also appended to the CFI.

Draft Community Forestry Rules

Based on the CFI draft Community Forestry Rules were prepared. FAO's Legal Office supported the process with an assessment of the existing legal framework and recommendations for change. In October 1995 a two-day workshop on "Community Forestry Rules and Forestry Extension" was held in Yangon.¹ The recommendations of the Working Group on Community Forestry Rules included, inter alia, using the CFI as the basis for drafting Community Forestry Rules, expanding the legal scope of community forestry to include the possibility of community management of natural forests, and amending the Forest Law by including a third category of forest, "Community Forest", in addition to Reserve Forest and Protected Public Forest.²

¹ Among the workshop participants was Mr. J. Lindsay, Legal Officer, FAO-Rome.

² Following the workshop, Mr. Lindsay prepared draft Community Forestry Rules. To date, the Government has not approved Community Forestry Rules. The Forest Department informed the SPPD-mission that it is not likely that Community Forestry Rules will be adopted in the near future, instead it was thought more likely that the Forest Law will be amended by introducing community forestry.

The Forest Department

The Forest Department (FD) is the designated government agency for community forestry. There is no separate unit or division within the Forest Department to deal with community forestry. At present community forestry is under Extension and Watershed Management.

The approval procedures for community forestry differ according to the type of forest to be transferred for community management. The Forest Department is the designated government agency to handover Reserve and Protected Public Forest to communities. In the case of "Unprotected Public Forest" (also called unclassified forests), the Forest Department must obtain the concurrence of the Land Record Department and the Township Peace and Development Council. The Land Record Department's concurrence is required to verify that the proposed community forest does not conflict with any other current or proposed landuse. Also, a recommendation from the Township Peace and Development Council is needed to proceed with the handover of the community forest.

For the community the procedure is the same for all types of forestland. In the Dry Zone, a pre-application is first made to the Township Forest Officer. After the tentative go ahead, field activities may start, e.g. establishing a plantation. The application for community forestry, including a management plan, follows the required approvals at the township level being forwarded to the concerned district forest officer.

Legal Issues

In terms of Myanmar forest policies and policy instruments the past decade has brought several noteworthy developments. First, the new (1992) Forest Law replaced a Law dating back to 1902. Following UNCED, the Government, through the Ministry of Forestry, issued in 1995 a Myanmar Forest Policy Statement with six imperatives including protection, sustainability, basic needs, efficiency, participation, and public awareness. Also in 1995, the Forest Department approved a Community Forestry Instruction to facilitate the transfer of forestland to community management.

All three instruments, the Forest Law, the Policy Statement and the CFI, are significant steps in the modernisation of forest management in Myanmar, but bolder steps are needed to truly reform forest conservation and management in Myanmar. As for community forestry it will be essential that community forestry be formally recognised through the Forest Law and Forest Rules (or separate Community Forestry Rules). Community forestry will need to be defined in the Forest Law and the suggestion to create a third category of forest land in addition to Reserve Forest and Protected Public Forest to be called Community Forest should be seriously considered. It remains to be seen how the present community forest user rights will hold in the long run. Experience elsewhere shows that tenure (user right) security is an important incentive for users to invest in the development of (degraded) community forestlands.

The three FAO-executed projects are involved in policy matters in two ways. First, by providing extension to communities on government policies related to community forestry. Second, through assisting the user group in preparing an application for community forestry (including a management plan). Although both aspects, i.e. information concerning rules governing community forestry and a community forestry certificate, may empower the community, the question remains as to whether this is sufficient to convince the user group members that as custodians of the forest they will ultimately become the prime beneficiaries.

With few exceptions, most communities are not familiar with existing Government policies concerning community forestry. At some stage the basic principles of community forestry are explained by the projects and discussed with the targetted communities, but on the whole the user group members did not appear to be familiar with the prevailing policies. Part of the problem is that the policies themselves are not always communicated to the field level. For example there does not seem to be a written rule that the Township Peace and Development Council should approve the handover of community forests on unclassified forest land, but all projects have included the Township Peace and Development Council in their approval procedures. Apart from being unaware of government policies related to community forestry, many user group members did not show much confidence in community forestry policies and the enforcement of these policies in the future. Most community forestry groups had strong doubts about their ability to protect their community forest after the end of the project and once the value of the forest had increased.

The availability of extension materials based on policies related to community forestry is lacking at field level in all the three projects. This is not meant to criticize the projects in any way, because the implementation of community forestry is still in an initial phase. Eventually, and sooner rather than later, this important requirement which is part of the process of the empowerment of communities must be dealt with. Before preparing extension materials the projects should exchange their experiences and consolidate and document their procedures for community forestry. A national workshop on community forestry might be an appropriate way forward in this respect.