This paper provides a framework with which to explore the factors affecting farmers' decision-making about technology adoption and land management. The framework is set in the context of an actor-oriented approach which moves away from deterministic or voluntaristic conceptions of social action. Relevant elements of the framework are examined through secondary data and semi-quantitative and qualitative primary data collected in an area of northern Thailand populated by the Lahu hill tribe. It is suggested that the vegetative barriers promoted by the Department of Land Development may not be more labour- or capital-intensive than farmers' existing practices. However, adoption may be minimal because the Lahu do not consider erosion and fertility decline to be significant problems (scientific observations support this finding) and the measures do not significantly improve yields. The paper reflects upon the strengths and limitations of utilizing the actor-oriented approach for understanding decision-making in land management.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArceA.LongN.1992. The dynamics of knowledge. (In LongN.LongA. (ed.). Battlefields of knowledge. London: Routledge, pp. 211–46.)
2.
BarrowC.J.1991. Land degradation: Development and the breakdown of terrestrial environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3.
BlaikieP.1989. Environment and access to resources in Africa. Africa, 59 (1), 18–40.
4.
BourneW.1992. Nam Lang impact survey. Thai-German Highland Development Programme. Internal Paper165.
5.
BudeeW. F.1985. Thailand northern upland agriculture. Thai—Australian and World Bank Development Project. Bangkok: Dept of Land Development.
6.
ChalamwongY.FederG.1986. Land ownership security and land valuation in rural Thailand. World Bank Staff Working Paper790.
7.
ChaturabhawdP.1980. People of the hills. Bangkok: Duang Kamol.
8.
Dept of Land Development. 1995. Socio-economic study of the farmers of the IBSRAM test and demonstration plot, Chiang Mai Site. Chiang Mai: Office of Land Development Region 6.
9.
Dept of Land Development. Forthcoming. The management of sloping lands for sustainable agriculture in Thailand. IBSRAM ASIALANDS network. Proceedings from the annual conference, Laos, September 1996. Bangkok: IBSRAM.
10.
DoveM.R.1985. The agroecological mythology of the Javanese and the political economy of Indonesia. Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, 29 (1), 1–36
11.
DuffS. N.StonehouseD. P.BlackburnD. J.HiltsS. G.1992. A framework for targeting soil conservation policy. Journal of Rural Studies, 8 (4), 399–410.
12.
ForsythT.1995. The mu'ang and the mountain: Perceptions of environmental degradation in upland Thailand. South East Asia Research, 3 (2), 169–91.
13.
FujisakaS.1991. Thirteen reasons why farmers do not adopt innovations intended to improve the sustainability of upland agriculture. (In OnchanT.ArunpooC. (ed.). Evaluation for sustainable land management in the developing world. Bangkok: IBSRAM Proceedings, 12, 2.)
14.
GanjanapanA.1994. The northern Thai land tenure system: Local custom versus national laws. Law and Society Review, 28 (3), 609–22
15.
GiddensA.1984. The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
16.
HarperD.E.El-SwaifyS.A.1988. Sustainable agricultural development in northern Thailand: Conservation as a component of success in assistance projects. (In MoldenhauerW. C.HudsonN. W. (ed.). Conservation farming on steep lands. Ankeny, Iowa: Soil and Water Conservation Society.)
17.
HintonP.1967. Introduction. (In Tribesmen and peasants in north Thailand. Proceedings of the first symposium of the Tribal Research Centre, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Chiang Mai: Tribal Research Centre.)
18.
HirschP.1990. Forests, forest reserve, and forest land in Thailand. Geographical Journal, 156 (2), 166–74.
19.
HudsonN.1991. A study of the reasons for the success and failure of soil conservation projects. FAO Soils Bulletin64.
20.
IFAD1992. Soil and water conservation in sub-Saharan Africa: Towards sustainable production by the rural poor. Amsterdam: IFAD.
21.
JacksonJ.K.1984. Constraints on the introduction of an agro-forestry element into traditional forms of shifting cultivation. (In JacksonJ.K. (ed.). Social, economic and institutional aspects of agro-forestry. United Nations University, 72–74.)
22.
JonesS. J. Unpublished. Deconstructing the degradation debate: A study from the Uluguru Mountains, Tanzania. [Ph.D. thesis, University of East Anglia, 1995.]
23.
KerrJ.M.SanghiN.K.1993. Indigenous soil and water conservation in India's semi-arid tropics. (In Acceptance of soil and water conservation strategies and technologies: Topics in applied resource management in the tropics. Witzenhausen: Deutsches Institut für Tropische und Subtropische Landwirtschaft, 255–90.)
24.
LongN.1992. From paradigm lost to paradigm regained? (In LongN.LongA. (ed.). Battlefields of knowledge. London: Routledge, 16–43.)
25.
LongN.LongA. (ed.). 1992. Battlefields of knowledge. London: Routledge.
26.
LongN.Van der PloegJ. D.1994. Heterogeneity, actor, and structure: Towards a reconstitution of the concept of structure. (In BoothD. (ed.). Rethinking social development: Theory, research, and practice. Harlow, Essex: Longman Scientific and Technical, 62–89.)
27.
MoermanM.MillerP.L.1989. Changes in a village's relations with its environment. (In Culture and environment in Thailand: A symposium of the Siam Society. Bangkok: Siam Society, 303–26.)
28.
NorgardR.B.1981. Sociosystems and ecosystem coevolution in the Amazon. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 8, 238–54.
29.
OnchanT. (ed.). 1990. A land policy study. Thailand Development Research Institute Foundation. Research Monograph3.
30.
OnchanT.ArunpooC. (ed.). 1991. Evaluation for sustainable land management in the developing world. Bangkok: IBSRAM Proceedings, 12, 2.
31.
OstromE.1990. Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
PaningbatanE.1995. The ASIALAND management of sloping lands network: Soil erosion under different soil conservation practices. (In International workshop on conservation farming for sloping uplands in Southeast Asia: Challenges, opportunities and prospects. Bangkok: IBSRAM, 109–26. (IBSRAM Proceedings, 14.))
33.
RashidM.D.1975. Karen swiddening techniques. (In WalkerA.R. (ed.). Farmers in the hills: Ethnographic notes on the upland people of North Thailand. Penang: School of Comparative Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 101–07.)
34.
RiggJ.1991. Grass-roots development in rural Thailand: A lost cause?World Development, 19 (2–3), 199–211.
35.
RuaysoongnernS. and Patanothai. 1991. Farmers‘ perceptions and the adoption of sustainable land management technologies — Thailand's experience. (In OchanTArunpooC. (ed.).)
36.
SabhasriS.1996. Future trends in government policy for the Highlands. (In TurkelboomF.van Look-RothschildK.van KeerK. (ed.). Highland farming: Soil and the future? Proceedings Soil Fertility Conservation Project, December21–22, 1995, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Chiang Mai: Maejo University, 1–3.)
37.
SajjapongseA.SyersJ. K.1995. Tangible outcomes and impacts from the ASIALANDS management of sloping lands network. (In International workshop on conservation farming for sloping uplands in Southeast Asia: Challenges, opportunities and prospects. Bangkok: IBSRAM, 3–14. IBSRAM Proceedings 14.)
38.
SalzerW. Unpublished. Eco-economic study of agricultural extension recommendations for shifting cultivators in northern Thailand. [Ph.D.thesis, Universität Hoenheim, Germany, 1993.]
39.
SeetisarnM.1995. Shifting agriculture in northern Thailand: Present practices and problems. (In Montane mainland Southeast Asia in transition. Symposium at Chiang Mai University, November 12–16, 1995. Chiang Mai: Chiang Mai University, 17–30.)
40.
SombatpanitS.SangsingkeoS.PalasuwanN.SaengvichienS.1993. Soil conservation and farmers' acceptance in Thailand. (In Acceptance of soil and water conservation strategies and technologies: Topics in applied resource management in the tropics. Witzenhausen: Deutsches Institut für Tropische und Subtropische Landwirtschaft, 307–40.)
41.
StockingM.1993. Soil and water conservation for poor farmers: Designing acceptable technologies for rainfed conditions in Eastern India. (In Acceptance of soil and water conservation strategies and technologies: Topics in applied resource management in the tropics. Witzenhausen: Deutsches Institut für Tropische und Subtropische Landwirtschaft, 291–305.)
42.
SuwannartG.1996. Tragedy of the commons revisited: The case of the North Thai Highlands. (In TurkelboomF.van Look-RothschildK.van KeerK. (ed.). Highland farming: Soil and the future? Proceedings Soil Fertility Conservation Project, December 21–22, 1995, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Chiang Mai: Maejo University, 46–54.)
43.
Tribal Research Institute. 1970. Lahu. Chiang Mai: Tribal Research Institute, Chiang Mai University. (Ethnographic Study Series. Minority Groups in Thailand.)
44.
TurkelboomF.van KeerK.OngprasertS.SutigoolabudP.PelletierJ.1996. The changing landscape of the northern Thai hills: Adaptive strategies to increasing land pressure. (In TurkelboomF.van Look-RothschildK.van KeerK. (ed.). Highland farming: Soil and the future? Proceedings Soil Fertility Conservation Project, December 21–22, 1995, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Chiang Mai: Maejo University, 23–45.)
45.
WalkerA.R.1975. The Lahu people: An introduction. (In WalkerA.R. (ed.). Farmers in the hills: Ethnographic notes on the upland people of north Thailand. Penang: School of Comparative Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 108–26.)
46.
WongsprasertS.1977. The sociocultural and ecological determinants of the Lahu population structure. (In Collective work on hilltribes. South East Asian Population Research Awards Program, Research Report 14.)
47.
WongsprasertS.1989. Opiate of the people? A case study of Lahu opium addicts. (In McKinnonJ.VienneB. (ed.). Hill tribes today: Problems in change. Bangkok and Paris: White Lotus-ORSTOM, 159–72.)
