[Back]    [Home Page]

Improving Rural Livelihoods

The NPRS highlights agriculture and rural development as being key priorities in reducing poverty. An emphasis on rural livelihoods places sharp focus upon issues such as land and natural resources, water, agriculture, and transport.

The significance of agriculture for poverty reduction cannot be overstated. 79% of Cambodia’s poor live in families whose livelihood depends upon the agricultural sector. Their lives depend on access both to agricultural land and to common property resources, in particular fisheries and forest products. Sustainable access to these resources is essential for any poverty reduction strategy.

Progress

In 2003, over 1,000 km of rural roads were built, around 700 wells were sunk, and irrigated land coverage increased by about 20,000 ha.   A draft sub-decree on community fisheries was finalised for consideration by the Council of Ministers, and a sub-decree on community forestry was finally approved.

Spending by MAFF remained insufficiently aligned with poverty-reducing priorities.  Agricultural extension continued to account for less than one percent of agricultural recurrent spending.  Animal health and agronomy also accounted for relatively low shares.[1]

Issues

Despite its position in the NPRS as a key area for development, the rural sector remains under-funded. For the RGC to fulfil its aim of increasing rural incomes, some significant shifts in government policy and donor support will need to take place.

The cessation of hostilities and improved roads have hastened the importation of agricultural products that are more competitive than locally grown goods. With the entry of Cambodia to the WTO, there is an even greater need to ensure that farmers are given support and equipped to develop the capacity to cope with free trade.

Increased pressure on land and natural resources adds to the problems faced by small-scale farmers and the landless poor. Although the focus of NPRS remains on pro-poor development, the government appears focussed on providing large-scale agricultural concessions to private companies:

-          Figures provided by MAFF at the beginning of 2003 show that in recent years the COM approved 40 land concessions for agricultural purposes which encompassed 800,000 hectares of land or 4% of Cambodia’s territory.

The development benefits of these concessions are unclear, as large-scale plantations tend to increase vulnerability and conflict over access to land, reduce access to natural resources and produce few jobs for local people.  Income generation tends to be concentrated in already well-off families and companies who are able to invest in larger scale agro-industry.  Further, the commitment of the NPRS to promote agro-industrial plantations has put extra pressure on forests through a reallocation of forest areas to agricultural production.

The NGO community would like instead to recommend an emphasis on expanding extension services to small farmers, support for small-scale user-maintained irrigation facilities, and the adoption of low-input methods of increasing crop production.

The Cambodian government and some members of the donor community have been trumpeting the potential of increased rubber production.  This bullish appraisal of Cambodia’s potential for rubber production seems to have ignored the long-term downward trend in the international market price for rubber, and natural rubber’s substitutability with synthetic rubber.  In contrast, there is little support for traditional resin tapping, even though the international price for dipterocarp oleoresin has risen considerably since the 1970s due to the large-scale deforestation that has occurred over the past few decades in Insular Southeast Asia.  In addition to support for traditional livelihoods, the promotion of resin tapping would assist the preservation of Cambodia’s dipterocarp forests. 

On a positive note, community action to prevent illegal logging, supported by local government officials is very welcome and illustrates the potential for local management of natural resources. Progress has also been made in the establishment of community fisheries. Capacity building at the local level needs to be accelerated in order to ensure that fish stocks are managed in a sustainable way.

Land reform is ongoing, and developments achieved thus far have been welcomed by NGOs. However, the legislative program is far from complete, with various sub-decrees relating to land concessions still needed. Serious problems exist in relation to fertile and well-positioned land being “bought” for speculation by the urban elite. The NGO community has serious concerns about the failure of the development community to recognise the danger inherent in urban elite buying agricultural land, leaving rural people landless and permanently altering the demographics of land ownership. Agencies supporting the land titling process should carefully monitor this development and suggest an appropriate policy response. 

The government has placed much emphasis on administration of the land title system. In relation to land disputes, the establishment of the Cadastral Commission has been noted and cautiously welcomed as an alternative to the previous highly unsatisfactory system. However, those working in the land sector continue to wait to see if the new Commission will be effective in introducing a fair system of dispute settlement. Despite its members being fully trained, the necessary funds have not been provided to the Commission in order that it can meet investigation, transport and administrative costs.

The promulgation of a sub-decree on social concessions is welcomed by NGOs as providing a possible means of distributing land to the landless poor.  Implementation of this sub-decree will require careful monitoring, and may be best applied on the local level through existing participatory land use planning (PLUP) processes.

In relation to environmental management, NGOs welcome the CMDGs targets for environmental sustainability. These targets fill a gap within the NPRS, which fails to deal effectively with environmental issues.

Infrastructure development is also crucial to the improvement of access to markets for agricultural outputs. In particular, rural roads and irrigation need to be prioritised. The NPRS indicates that investment in the rural road system will have a positive impact on rural income and quality of life. The government has made some progress in improving and extending the rural road network and the NGO community welcomes this. At the same time, consideration should be given to the social affects of road building, especially in forested and highlander areas where roads may speed up land grabbing and the destruction of natural resources.

The NPRS appears to place energy development as the highest financial priority in the Action Plan Matrix.  However, in relation to its significance for the rural poor, the provision of electricity is far less important than access to more fundamental factors for improved livelihoods such as health, education and agricultural extension services.

 Recommendations

The NGO community makes the following recommendations:


[1] RGC, Poverty Reduction Strategy Progress Report, draft, December 30, 2003.

  [Top]     [Back]    [Home Page]