Participatory and integrated research in mountainous regions of Thailand and Vietnam: Approaches and lessons learned

Abstract

Participatory and integrated research approaches employed by a long-term ThaiVietnamese-German collaborative research program, 'The Uplands Program', that address the vicious circles of resource scarcity, environmental degradation and rural poverty in mountainous regions of northern Thailand and northern Vietnam are discussed in this paper. We present two examples from the Thai component of the research program to show how different disciplines and stakeholders need to cooperate at different scales to make meaningful scientific contributions towards sustainable land use and rural development in mountainous regions. The case of resource conservation in the Thai highlands shows that local and scientific knowledge, conventional surveys and participatory modeling can be creatively combined. Integrated research on the potential of integrating fruit trees and associated technologies into mountain farming systems suggests that natural scientists have to work alongside economists and social scientists to avoid harmful effects of purely technology-driven and productivityenhancing approaches. The success of new technologies cannot be measured solely by adoption rates and yield increases, but also needs to take into account their long-term impact on various groups of farmers and the ecological, economic and social trade-offs that they entail. Technical and institutional innovations need to go hand in hand to provide viable livelihood opportunities for smallholder farmers in mountain watersheds. The major lesson learned from the first six years of our research in the mountains of Thailand and Vietnam is that conventional and participatory approaches are not antagonistic; if scientists from various disciplines and research paradigms are open-minded, the combination of both approaches can produce meaningful results that cater for the needs of both the academic community and local stakeholders in mountain environments.

Stakeholder participation in agricultural research projects: a conceptual framework for reflection and decision-making

“…Some scientists may regard local or indigenous knowledge as less relevant for the research process or even as antagonistic to scientific knowledge on the grounds of their presumed methodological and epistemological differences and the contextuality and social embeddedness of local knowledge (Ellen and Harris 2000; for a wider discussion of this debate see Kloppenburg 1991;Agrawal 1995). Yet, an increasing number of scientists see local knowledge as a crucial component in the generation of scientific knowledge, and methods of accessing local knowledge are part and parcel of their research approach (e.g., Pound et al 2003;Neef et al 2006;Rhoades and Nazarea 2006;Schuler et al 2006;Cleveland and Soleri 2007). Methods used to tap local knowledge may include various forms of individual and group interviews, participatory rapid appraisal (PRA) tools, and participant observation.…”

“…Research may also enhance stakeholders' awareness about the positive or negative effects certain practices may have on the ecological services of a watershed or on downstream residents. Finally, a participatory project may enable stakeholders to blend their local knowledge with ''expert'' scientific knowledge in a complementary or even synergetic way (Price 2001;Neef et al 2006;Hoffmann et al 2007;van Asten et al 2009). …”

“…These more conciliatory positions-stripped of the simple ''farmer-first'' ideologies of the past that tended to put participatory research in opposition to conventional research-are also reflected in a proliferation of approaches that combine various forms of stakeholder participation with cutting-edge scientific research. Examples are approaches like participatory plant breeding (PPB) where the newest advances in molecular biology can be combined with farmers' priority setting, evaluation, and adaptation (Weltzien et al 2000;Christinck et al 2005) or participatory land use modeling where innovative multi-agent system (MAS) computer models and their various scenarios are developed, validated, and refined through roleplaying games and other interactive methods (Bousquet et al 2005;Neef et al 2006;Becu et al 2008).…”

Agrosilvopastoral Systems in Northern Thailand and Northern Laos: Minority Peoples’ Knowledge versus Government Policy

“…Under these pressures many swidden and rotational practices have been abandoned in favor of more permanent cultivation [1,2]. This is also the case in the highland areas of northern Thailand and northern Laos, where most rural people were, until relatively recently, practicing swidden cultivation in various forms and with varying impacts on the forest ecosystems.…”

Scrutinizing Factors Impeding Research-Farmer Relationship in the Context of the Agriculture Innovation System

“…With the augmented attention on "sustainable agricultural development", where economic, social and ecological factors need to be well-adjusted, it has been acknowledged that a variety of actors like farmers, consumers, extension workers and researchers are pertinent in the research method in agricultural innovation to bring food security. As a consequence, today "participation in agricultural research is defined as the involvement of all individuals and groups who are directly and indirectly affected by the research activities and its outcomes (Neef et al, 2006).…”