Power relations in community

resilience and politics of shifting

cultivation in Laos Sabaheta
Ramcilovic-Suominen
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/power-relations-in-community-resilience-and-politics-
of-shifting-cultivation-in-laos-sabaheta-ramcilovic-suominen/
 Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Forest Policy and Economics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol

Power relations in community resilience and politics of shifting cultivation T

in Laos
⁎
Sabaheta Ramcilovic-Suominena, , Juha Kotilainenb
a
Natural Resources Institute Finland, Itäinen pitkäkatu 4 A, 20520 Turku, Finland
b
Department of Geographical and Historical Studies, University of Eastern Finland, Yliopistokatu 7, 80100 Joensuu, Finland

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This article is a contribution to a critical resilience literature that emphasizes the lack of recognition and con-
Shifting cultivation sideration of social and power relations, the complexity of local cultural heterogeneity and aspects of justice in
Power relations current resilience approaches. We base our contribution on an empirical study related to policy and project
Local politics interventions implemented by governmental agencies and international development partners in Laos. The
Resilience
studied interventions are the so-called ‘village livelihood development grants’ that involve giving individual
Livelihoods
Laos
households cash payments to limit shifting cultivation practice and to engage in ‘alternative and more sus-
tainable’ livelihood activities, promoted by a number of state policies and donor funded projects. Promoted
alternative livelihoods include cash crop production, cattle rearing and income generating activities, such as
weaving. Based on our empirical case, we explore the implications of these interventions on local peoples'
livelihoods, food security and access and rights to resources, on the one hand, and offer theoretical implications
to resilience scholarship, on the other hand. We identify analytical elements with respect to social and power
relations and show their relevance for local community members' ability to deal with the imposed external forces
to change, and hence community resilience. We find that horizontal and vertical power relations, exercised
through direct/visible and indirect/hidden ways, significantly influence the socio-ecological outcomes of the in-
terventions, and abilities of individual members of the community to benefit, or bear costs and risks from the
interventions.

1. Introduction forest management, timber legality and climate change mitigation

The livelihoods of rural communities in South-East Asia are under
tremendous pressure. The rush for land and natural resources by foreign
investors, characterised as ‘land grabbing’ (Ahrends et al., 2015;
Barney, 2008, 2016; Schoenberger et al., 2017), and neoliberal, neo-
colonial and extraterritorial modes of governing (Dressler et al., 2015;
Vandergeest and Unno, 2012) have profoundly contributed to agrarian
transformations and community livelihoods. Laos is infamously known
for large-scale multinational agribusinesses and development projects
that take over large portions of land from subsistence small-scale
farming practices (Baird and Barney, 2017; Singh, 2012). Some esti-
mates indicate that 3.5 million ha or 15% of the total area in Laos is
under agri-business concession leases, purchases or agreements
(Ahrends et al., 2015; Baird and Fox, 2015). In addition to the com-
mercialisation of lands and resources, the livelihoods of Laotian
agrarian communities have been affected by international policies and
governance instruments that promote nature conservation, sustainable
(Dressler et al., 2015; Ramcilovic-Suominen et al., 2019). These inter-
ventions have added to the existing adverse social implications, human
rights violations, land depravation and forced resettlement (Gindroz,
2017; Sims, 2017).
Shifting cultivation is one of the land uses and livelihood activities
that has been greatly impacted by both land grabbing (Dwyer, 2007;
Kenney-Lazar, 2013a) and the quest for sustainable forest management,
including those promoting carbon sequestration and combating of il-
legal logging (Dressler et al., 2015; Ramcilovic-Suominen, 2019;
Ramcilovic-Suominen et al., 2019). In Laos, shifting cultivation re-
presents one of the key livelihood and food supporting systems prac-
tised by the rural communities with ethnic minorities (Cramb et al.,
2009; Dressler et al., 2016; Kallio et al., 2019), and its applications
stretch beyond subsistence to commercial cash crops (Kallio et al.,
2019). Shifting cultivation is a farming technique where vegetation,
including forest with mature trees, is cleared for cultivation by burning
before the rainy season, allowing for release of nutrients (Fox et al.,

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: sabaheta.ramcilovik-suominen@luke.fi (S. Ramcilovic-Suominen), juha.kotilainen@uef.fi (J. Kotilainen).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2020.102159
Received 30 October 2019; Received in revised form 28 January 2020; Accepted 23 March 2020
1389-9341/ © 2020 Published by Elsevier B.V.
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
2009, 2014; Mertz et al., 2009). After cultivation of crops, the land is
left to regenerate, depending on bio-physical, cultural and political
factors (Cramb et al., 2009; Fox et al., 2014; Mertz et al., 2009). Shifting
cultivation can be rotational or pioneering (Kenney-Lazar, 2013a,
2013b; Cramb et al., 2009). The first refers to a cycle of shifting across
predefined plots, the latter to cultivation taking place in mature old-
growth forests. In rotational shifting cultivation, the length of rotational
cycles varies between short (less than 5 years), intermediate
(5–10 years) and long (10–25+ years) fallow periods (Fox et al., 2014;
Dressler et al., 2016). It has been suggested that long fallow periods as
traditionally practised have had positive impacts on livelihoods, food
security and cultural traits (Castella et al., 2013; Cramb et al., 2009;
Dressler et al., 2015), ecological systems and biodiversity (Dressler,
2015), and carbon sequestration (Fox et al., 2014). However, govern-
mental and international development agencies and technical assis-
tance staff have perceived shifting cultivation as backward, poverty-
causing, deforesting and land degrading (Kenney-Lazar, 2013a, 2013b;
GoL, 2005). In Laos, governmental policies, legal restrictions of access
to land and forest resources, and promotion of agricultural in-
tensification have resulted in shortening of the fallow periods.
Much research has focused on the policy context of shifting culti-
vation (Kenney-Lazar, 2013a, 2013b; Fox et al., 2009) and its extent
(Cramb et al., 2009; Schmidt-Vogt et al., 2009). Comparatively less
research has analysed the impacts of policy instruments and especially
of international project interventions on shifting cultivation (Broegaard
et al., 2017; Lestrelin et al., 2012; Dressler et al., 2015; Ramcilovic-
Suominen, 2019). We focus on a specific, yet commonly applied forest
project intervention that aims at limiting shifting cultivation and pro-
moting sedentary agriculture and cattle rearing, which are presented as
‘alternative livelihoods’. The studied intervention involves provision of
lump sum of money to households, under the condition that they un-
dertake ‘alternative’ livelihoods schemes and limit their forest and land
uses and especially the pioneering shifting cultivation. This project
interventions is incorporated in numerous village forest projects and is
referred to as ‘village (livelihood) development grants’ (referred to as
grants from now on). We focus on households in the ‘subsistence
communities’ that are to a significant extent dependent on shifting
cultivation for their livelihoods. The empirical question that guides this
study is: How have the villagers dependent on shifting cultivation for
their livelihood been able to cope with the policy and project inter-
ventions aiming to limit this agricultural practice, and how do these
interventions affect their resilience?
In order to examine this question, we draw on a critical reading of
the resilience approach with a particular focus on community resi-
lience. The resilience approach is concerned with the impacts of in-
ternal and external disturbances of natural, ecological, cultural or po-
litical origin on human communities and local and regional economies.
The notion of resilience has faced criticism for its lack of inclusion of
the role of power in creating the conditions for community resilience
(Brown, 2014; Kotilainen, 2018). Nevertheless, with its focus on the
ability of communities to deal with changing conditions, including
environmental, ecological and political shocks (Wilson, 2012), we see
resilience as a useful theoretical framing, but highlight the need to in-
clude deeper reflections on how power relations affect resilience at the
community level. Through reflecting on criticism of resilience thinking,
our aim is to empirically show the relevance of power relations for
community resilience. To this end, we explore the impacts of external
governmental and project interventions, funded by international de-
velopment partners on community livelihoods, food security, and ac-
cess and rights to resources.
2
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
2. Community resilience and the relevance of power relations in
resilience thinking
2.1. Community resilience in the context of Lao subsistence communities
Community resilience is a notion which is focussed on the capacities
of human communities to deal with pressures to change, either by being
able to resist these pressures or by adapting to the new conditions. A
large variety of factors, from natural disasters to anthropogenic social,
political and economic transformations, cause pressure on communities
(Wilson, 2012).
Several different frameworks for understanding community resi-
lience have been formulated (Kotilainen, 2018). Paying attention to the
intentions of individuals in communities, community resilience has
been analysed as an indicator of social sustainability and defined as the
existence, development and engagement of community resources by
community members, to thrive in and successfully deal with an en-
vironment characterised by change, unpredictability and surprise
(Magis, 2010). At the same time, it has been suggested that members of
resilient communities intentionally develop personal and collective
capacities that they engage with to respond to and influence change, to
sustain and renew the community, and to develop new trajectories for
the community's future. Elsewhere, the aim has been on identifying
strengths of a community and the contribution of individuals to com-
munity resilience within a collective process (Berkes and Ross, 2013).
Brown (2016) has introduced the notion of experiential resilience, with
the aim of tracing everyday forms of resilience and understanding how
it feels to be resilient.
Two definitions for resilience have been differentiated with regard
to communities dependent on exploitation of local natural resources:
one is about the time that it takes for a system to recover from a dis-
turbance; the other concerns the amount of disturbance a system can
absorb before transforming to an entirely different system (Adger,
2000). Both definitions stress the ability of a community to remain
unchanged. However, other scholars have stated that the resilience of a
community does not necessarily need to be about its success in re-
maining unchanged; these scholars see resilience as the capability of a
community to change its non-essential elements in order to maintain its
essential elements and functions (Manyena, 2006). This approach re-
sonates with transition theory (Wilson, 2012) which suggests that cer-
tain transformations at the community scale are to be expected and are
beneficial for either the communities or for society more broadly. It has
been emphasized that instead of looking for a bounce-back from an
external shock or disaster, the focus on rural community resilience
should be on proactive human agency in a context of constant change
(Skerratt, 2013). In this article, we understand community resilience as
a notion focused on the capacities of human individuals and commu-
nities to deal with pressures to change by being able to resist, cope with,
or adapt to the changes and new conditions.
Social science criticism towards resilience research is important to
our study (Brown, 2014). It has been argued that there is lack of at-
tention to social and power relations between actors (Cote and
Nightingale, 2012) because issues such as equity, power, justice and
social capital have not been recognised as essential components for
resilience. Further, Weichselgartner and Kelman (2015) have argued
that the resilience approach has underestimated the role of the complex
webs of knowledge, values, cultural meanings and action. According to
this view, a critical approach to resilience would take into account the
specifics of localities and marginality, with a focus on geographical
differentiation, cultural heterogeneity and social plurality, all of which
are related to local practices and knowledge-making. It has also been
argued that resilience as a concept overlooks the roles which larger
scale political-economic transformations have on the capacities of
communities to manage changing conditions (MacKinnon and
Derickson, 2013). Indeed, not all members of a community are in the
same position to create the conditions for their resilience, and there is a
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
need to account for the diverse ways in which communities may deal
with changing conditions (Harrison and Chiroro, 2017).
In our research the external pressure originates from the policy
context, which then shapes management practices and concrete project
interventions that aim at changing the livelihood practices and land use
of villagers engaged in shifting cultivation. New policy and project in-
terventions that have emerged after Laos adopted an open economy
model in 1985 have aimed at more efficient and sustainable natural
resource management and use (Phengsopha, 2011; Smith et al., 2016).
More recently, international forest governance instruments, aimed at
reducing carbon emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
(REDD+), are increasingly shaping governance of forest and land re-
sources in Laos1 (Dressler et al., 2015; Ramcilovic-Suominen, 2019). In
principle, the policy instruments, such as REDD+ aim at ‘sustainable’
use and management of forest resources. But, as implemented in Laos
and other countries through various pilot projects and policy reforms,
they have radically altered and constrained local livelihood practices
(Mustalahti, 2007; Tacconi et al., 2013). The vast majority of these
projects have focused on villagers' forest uses and their farming prac-
tices (Ingalls and Dwyer, 2016; Ramcilovic-Suominen, 2019). These
interventions act as external shocks and pressures for change, which
communities need to deal with, and which may put the community and
individual survival at risk.
In the case of the local subsistence communities in Laos, who rely on
forests and on shifting cultivation as sources of subsistence such as
these where this research is carried out, the food security is perhaps of
most importance. As discussed in further detail later in the paper, food
security expands beyond rice sufficiency and is directly dependent on
the access to forest lands, as it is there where these communities farm,
hunt, fish and collect non-timber forest products (NTFPs) for their daily
nutrition needs. But, the access to forest for these subsistence practices
is constantly reduced as policy and project interventions aim to forest
protection and restoration. In particular, the practice of pioneering
shifting cultivation has been targeted over the course of almost half a
century by governmental policies and, since early 1990s, also by in-
ternational donor funded project interventions (Cramb et al., 2009; Fox
et al., 2009; GoL, 2005; Kenney-Lazar, 2013a, 2013b; Ramcilovic-
Suominen, 2019). As shifting cultivation relates to livelihoods, food
security and access and rights to resources and land, it is central in our
analysis of community resilience.
2.2. Forms of power relations
In reflecting on criticisms to resilience thinking, we wish to discuss
how to incorporate the role of power relations in understandings of
community resilience. Our conceptualization of power is informed by
political ecology, where power is understood as the main driver of so-
cial-ecological outcomes (Bryant, 1998; Svarstad et al., 2018). More
specifically, and related to food security, access and rights, distribution
of risks and benefits, we draw on studies that propose a direct link
between power relation on the one hand and unequal distribution of
rights and benefits. Agrawal (2003), for example, argues that the
burden of coercion and imposition of any formal or informal institution
falls non-proportionally on the less powerful actors and individuals,
1
At the time of the research, the two largest projects facilitating REDD+
policy processes and piloting it on the ground (the World Bank and Finnish
Government funded SUFORD-SU and the German Government funded CliPAD
project) have adopted actions and measures to limit shifting cultivation to
strictly allocated areas restricted in size. Both projects adopt the village liveli-
hood development grants as an intervention to limit shifting cultivation and
promote ‘alternative’ livelihood options. While our research is directly based on
the fieldwork in one of the two project sites, we believe that it is more con-
structive to focus on the intervention of livelihood development grants in
general terms, as a commonly applied intervention in various forestry projects,
rather than to discuss it in the context of a specific project.
3
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
suggesting the relations between power and distribution of risks and
benefits. He states that ‘institutional choices by powerful groups deliber-
ately aim to disadvantage marginal and less powerful groups’ (Agrawal,
2003: 257). This in turn results in exclusion and unequal allocation of
rights and benefits among the groups (see also Hall et al., 2011), sug-
gesting again linkages between power and distributional effects. Ela-
borating further on the role of institutional arrangements that define
access and rights to resources, a number of scholars have argued that
institutional arrangements merely reflect the past and existing power
structures and relationships (Ribot, 2003; Ribot and Peluso, 2003;
Myers and Hansen, 2019; Mosse, 1997). Ribot and Peluso (2003) use-
fully suggest that numerous social relationships may constrain or en-
able access and rights to resources, and point these out as complex and
overlapping ‘bundles of power’. The issues of rights and access involve
two dimensions: the formal legal rights, and the informal local socio-
cultural and socio-political practices and norms that guide the access to
the resources (Ribot, 1998; Ribot and Peluso, 2003). Changes in either
of the two dimensions can put subsistence communities at risk of food
insecurity and other vulnerabilities. However, not all members and/or
societal groups in the community (e.g. men and women, different
ethnic groups, and people with different roles or positions) will be
equally affected. In other words, the distributional effect of these formal
and informal rules will depend on the local politics and power relations
with regards to, and among the different societal groups (Walker,
2012).
Drawing on this literature, we approach power as a dynamic process
of relations between actors. Power relations here are understood as an
omnipresent, fluid social construct that defines interactions among in-
dividual members of certain groups of actors, as well as among the
groups themselves. The policy and institutional structures pressing for
eradication and limitation of shifting cultivation are imposed via formal
administrative and regulative means, and involve an authority with
formal regulative and decision-making power. We approach and frame
these formal and regulative means as a form of power relations and, in
accordance to the levels at which they operate, we refer to them as
vertical power relations. Vertical power relations can be defined as
relations of power exercised by actors external to a community, which
may include government, international development partners, or other
external agency with power to design and impose regulations and rules
on the community from outside and ‘from above’ (Burns et al., 2017;
Giessen et al., 2014, 2016; Rahman et al., 2016). This form of power
relations is for instance exerted by state agencies and via state policies
and laws that aim at social and policy goals, including regulations of
livelihood practices (Giessen et al., 2016). These power relations can
also be exercised via non-state governance instruments, such as inter-
national norms and mixed market-regulation mechanisms (Bernstein
and Cashore, 2012; Burns et al., 2017; Rahman et al., 2016), including
international forest governance mechanisms and projects that pilot
them.
We next outline a second form of power relations, which unlike
vertical power relations is evident within the community itself, as the
communities are heterogeneous social units composed of individuals,
families and households with different societal, economic, gendered or
ethnic background (Krott et al., 2014). Often these backgrounds in and
by themselves may imply a lower or higher, more or less superior status
of certain individuals, households or groups over others (Schusser et al.,
2015). These statuses are shaped by and in turn shape the societal and
power interrelations. We refer to this form of power relations as hor-
izontal power relations. Horizontal power relations include social and
cultural norms and socially constructed habits and practices, but also
more dynamic and evolving relations which are more fluid and com-
plex, responding to change in their environments. Horizontal power
relations are produced and reproduced in the interactions of in-
dividuals, households and groups within the village level, as well as
through interactions of these individuals, households and groups with
external actors and ‘centers of power’ (e.g. policy actors, project staff
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
Fig. 1. Map of Laos with study locations.
and consultants external to the village) (Maryudi et al., 2018). While by
definition the difference between the two is rather clear and straight-
forward, in practice, however, the said power relations and especially
agencies involved may at the same time engage in both types of rela-
tions. We return to this overlap and the analytical complexity the same
may cause, later in the paper where horizontal power relations are
presented.
Vertical and horizontal power relations could be exercised through
4
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
direct or visible and indirect or hidden ways. Here we have been in-
spired by Lukes (2005) and Brisbois et al. (2018) works on power, al-
though we mainly base this distinction on our empirical findings. Di-
rect/visible ways of exercising power refer to more obvious,
straightforward and conscious impositions of authority. This can occur
when an individual agent or group of agents aims to secure dominance
and influence over another individual group of agents, using visible
means of authority and power, such as formal pressure and discipline.
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
Indirect/hidden ways of exercising power are less obvious, complex,
culturally laden forms of dominance that utilize formal and informal,
conscious and unconscious interactions and norms to dominate and
exercise control. While the direct/visible ways of exercising power may
be more common within vertical power relations and the indirect/in-
visible ways more common within the horizontal power relations, both
horizontal and vertical power relations may materialize through direct
and indirect ways. Furthermore, the village authorities' double role as
insiders of the community (living in the villages and abiding by the
rules made at higher level of governments) and at the same time out-
siders (being part of village units, installed by the government) chal-
lenge this straightforward definition and division.
3. Research approach: Methods, study area and context
3.1. Research methods and case study locations
The research methods applied in the empirical study consist of
fieldwork in communities where produce from shifting cultivation has
formed a significant part of daily subsistence. These communities were
targeted by the studied project intervention (village livelihood devel-
opment grants), which consistently with the existing forest policy and
programmes in Laos, aimed to reduce shifting cultivation and conse-
quently protect the forests. A one month field trip in six of such com-
munities in Laos was carried out in 2017. The research sites (six villages
included in this study) were selected by the project staff, who were
clearly motivated to present the success of their project. They selected
those villages where most labour-intensive and economically viable li-
velihood activities were introduced by the project. Their logic for such
selection was that the households in these villages would have less time
for shifting cultivation and also less need, as the promoted livelihood
activity should generate enough income. Therefore people in those
villages were more likely to adopt the ‘alternative livelihood’ promoted
by the project. The alternative livelihood activities promoted by the
project in the studied villages included: paddy rice cultivation in vil-
lages of Maed district of Vientiane, and cultivation of coffee and car-
damom in those in Sanxay district of Attapeau. Once in the villages, the
researchers aimed to interview both respondents who have and have
not received village livelihood development grants. In addition, we
aimed at diversity within the research population, with respondents
with different gender roles, ethnicities and social statuses in the village
(Table 1).
During the field work, a total of 46 semi-structured interviews with
qualitative open-ended questions were carried out. The interview
questions were formulated on the basis of themes as follows: (i) per-
ceptions about the meaning of the forests, and benefits from them; (ii)
shifting cultivation: traditional vs. current practice and drivers of
change; (iii) perceptions about and attitudes towards the project and
interventions addressing the shifting cultivation; (iv) rights and access
to forest and forest resources; and (v) overall dis/satisfaction with the
forest and land use rights and benefits. The interviews were transcribed
and translated into English. The material was analysed using qualitative
content analysis. We looked for statements made in the responses that
added to the themes above we were interested in. We aimed to establish
a difference in the responses according to social differences, expanding
from the above mentioned categories used in selecting the respondents.
In this case, social differences included gender, ethnicity, level of food
security, grant recipient/non-grant-recipient, and social status and role
in the village (village head, member of forest committee, villager
without specific status or role). On this basis, we were able to construct
reactions to the policy and project interventions aiming to substitute
shifting cultivation with other practices. We paid attention to the in-
dividual and communal abilities of the respondents to deal with the
changing conditions imposed by these interventions, as well as the
power relations impacting on these abilities, thereby adding to our
attempted analysis of the role of power relations within community
5
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
resilience.
The fieldwork was carried out in two provinces of Laos (see Fig. 1):
Vientiane province located in Central-Northern Laos, and Attapeu in
Southern Laos. Three villages in Sanxay district of Attapeu were se-
lected, while in Vientiane the three sample villages were located in the
Maed District. Attapeu is predominantly mountainous with a primarily
agrarian economy. Shifting cultivation is widespread in various forms
there, from short to long-period rotations as well as pioneering and
rotational, and is used for both subsistence and commercial cash crop
production (Fox et al., 2009, 2014; Mertz et al., 2009). The province is
affected by vast land concessions especially for rubber plantations op-
erated by Vietnamese companies (Baird and Fox, 2015; Fox and
Castella, 2014), hydropower development and trade in timber and
wildlife (Singh et al., 2006). The province is one of those where gov-
ernmental resettlement policies have affected many villages due to
development projects and land-use concessions, as well as those
brought about by village consolidation to relocate villages from the
highlands to the lowlands, closer to markets (Baird and Shoemaker,
2007; Lestrelin, 2010).
Vientiane province differs in many respects from Attapeu. It is sig-
nificantly larger by area and population. Vientiane province is less
rural, with small-town markets for villagers to sell their produce, which
contributes to a more diverse local economy. Unlike in Attepeu, paddy
or low-land rice cultivation is more common in Vientiane. Yet the rural
population is still dependent on agriculture for subsistence and income.
Pioneering shifting cultivation in particular has decreased in recent
years due to land scarcity, population density and governmental in-
terventions, such as land allocation processes (Lestrelin, 2010). The
short fallow, rotational type of shifting cultivation is practiced on
available land.
3.2. Empirical case: Policy context and project intervention
Policies and laws strictly regulate shifting cultivation in Laos, as
outlined in Table 2. In the early days of independence the newly es-
tablished government of Laos, as in many postcolonial countries, con-
tinued the colonial approach to modernization of agriculture and forest
management, and the approach of state control over land and forests
(Cramb et al., 2009; Fox et al., 2009; Peluso and Vandergeest, 2011;
Ramcilovic-Suominen, 2019). Kenney-Lazar (2013a, 2013b) suggests
that more recently, the perceptions of some governmental officers to-
wards the practice has been changing, showing more tolerance for ro-
tational shifting cultivation. Nonetheless, the formal policies maintain
the aim to limit and eventually eradicate shifting cultivation, especially
pioneering shifting cultivation. Policies on shifting cultivation, which
apply to date in Laos, include but are not limited to: i) outright pro-
hibition of the practice; ii) resettlement of people and whole villages
from uplands to lowlands in the ‘village consolidation’ process; iii)
promotion of sedentary types of agriculture; iv) land-use policies, land
allocation and tenure related disincentives; iv) market expansion and
production of specific cash crops; v) population pressure and in-mi-
gration; vi) negative social perceptions and stigma, linked to low pro-
ductivity, poverty, deforestation and environmental degradation.2
The village livelihood development grants (grants, or livelihood
grants) scheme aims at providing alternative livelihoods as a way of
‘shifting the livelihood activities away from shifting cultivation’, as
described internally among the project staff. The grants form a part of a
larger Village Livelihood Development (grants) project component,
which among other elements typically includes establishment of village
development funds and village-level administrative structures, such as
2
Literature in this field is abundant. Some of the more prominent scholars,
whose work is cited throughout this paper, include in alphabetic order: Baird,
I.G.; Barney, B.; Castella, J-C.; Colfer, C.J.; Cramb, R.A.; Dressler, W.H.; Fox, J.;
Lestrelin, G.; Mertz, O.
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159

village development units and committees, to manage the fund and security and access and rights to resources. In the next sub-sections we
grants. The starting point is the so-called participatory village develop- elaborate on the implications of each of these factors.
ment planning. This is a process in which project and governmental staff
together with village authorities and the project staff carry out baseline
4.1.1. Shifting cultivation and food security before and after policy and
studies to identify potential alternative livelihood activities and the key
project interventions
drivers of deforestation and forest degradation. As the aim of the de-
As far as the technology and techniques of shifting cultivation are
velopment grant component is to provide other forms of livelihoods and
concerned, the activities have remained largely unchanged compared to
reduce shifting cultivation, the villages targeted by the project are by
‘the past’.3 The practice consisted of and still entails the following steps:
default those that practice small-scale, subsistence shifting cultivation.
cutting trees (different heights of stem for cutting were observed in
The next step is allocation of land use areas for alternative livelihood
different villages); burning these trees and collecting the leftovers for
activities, and the final step is development of the proposal for liveli-
firewood and fencing; clearing the land; planting rice; cutting weeds;
hood grants, including specification of the alternative livelihood ac-
harvesting; milling the rice; and consuming the rice. However, what has
tivity and the technical and financial support to be received. These
changed significantly is the length of the fallow period. In the past, long
proposals are then considered and approved by the District Agricultural
fallow periods were commonly adopted: respondents referred to
and Forestry Office. In the six villages studied, the funding for the vil-
8–15 years, with the majority stating between 10 and 15 years, de-
lage livelihood development grants was set at 4000 USD per partici-
pending on soil fertility. No significant variations were observed and
pating village. This fund was then split among a number of selected
the respondents from all villages explained that pioneering shifting
households in each village. The number of benefiting households and
cultivation was widespread in the past.
the de-facto beneficiaries are selected by the said authorities and people
We didn't come back to the same place. We moved forward because
in a position to make these local decisions at the village level. In the six
there was a lot of land. During that time the government did not yet
villages studied, the household share ranged from 365,000 LAK (43,5
strictly control shifting cultivation. (Male/V2/Khmu).
USD) to 2,500,000 LAK (299 USD), depending on the number of ben-
In the past, my parents conducted shifting cultivation by moving
eficiaries in the village, but also the targeted livelihood activity. The
forward as no one prohibited that. There were a lot of forests so people
grants are given as loans to participating households and are expected
just moved to a new place every year (Female/V3/Lao Loum).
to be paid back to the village development fund after one to two years
In the past the activity offered not only rice but a variety of foods
so that the same loan can be given to other households in the village.
and fodder because other plants and food crops were planted in be-
tween or around the rice, including cassava, yam, cardamom, water-
4. Results: Vertical and horizontal power relations
melon, Chinese cabbage, corn, beans, sweet potatoes, pumpkin and
melon. Villagers also collected wild vegetables and mushrooms that
The result section presents our empirical findings, based on field-
typically grow in such an agricultural system. After burning, firewood
work and interviews. References to other literature are sparsely used
and fencing material were collected, and since cultivation was being
and serve to support the findings.
undertaken in mature forests, villagers could collect wood for house
construction as well. Many respondents told that they also collected
4.1. Vertical power relations
fodder and feed for their cattle, so shifting cultivation constituted an
entire livelihood and food supporting system for the household. In the
The governmental policy interventions, as interventions by a higher
villages in Attapeu, the respondents said that in the past they were self-
authority organized as governmental agencies across central, provincial
sufficient for food and did not have to engage in other livelihood ac-
and district administrative levels, can be seen as a form of vertical
tivities, as they traded their produce for items such as sugar, salt, silk
power relations. These policies direct, enable and constrain community
and clothes. At a time of increased mobility due to the war, there was
rights to use and to access land and the forest resources surrounding a
no systematic return to the previously cultivated areas and the agri-
village. These power relations, operating through formal means of
cultural spots were selected depending on the age of vegetation.
governmental legal documents and ministerial decrees, aim at preser-
Unlike in the past when people practiced shifting cultivation where
ving the forests surrounding the villages from overuse by the villagers.
it was most convenient for them to do so (i.e. in old growth forest with
This in turn affects villagers' ability to maintain food sufficiency and
fertile soil), today the policy and project interventions limit the practice
livelihoods, especially if alternatives such as agrarian land and com-
to strictly delineated and allocated plots of land for the purpose. The
mercial labour opportunities are not available. In a similar manner as
land allocated for shifting cultivation is usually in young forests and/or
governmental policy interventions (i.e. as an externally imposed in-
degraded forestlands. The size and the location of the area is defined in
tervention), yet using different pathways of influence, the project in-
the process of participatory land-use planning and land allocation
terventions too represent a form of vertical power relations. While
(PLUPLA) (MAF and NMLA, 2009). The villagers are allocated three
governmental policies offer a direction and guidance, project inter-
hectares per family, which in turn means that they need to plant every
ventions are action oriented, and used as mechanisms that support the
second or third year, and in some cases on a yearly basis, depending on
implementation of policies. It is important to highlight the linkages
their needs.
between policy and project interventions, as well as the tight co-
Presently many people are planting rice at the same place, only
operation between governmental agencies and ‘external’ consultants
some people who have many plots of land available may swop between,
and experts. In Lao forestry sector, it is a handful of individuals who
but others do at the same place (Male/V3/NA).
provide policy support and technical assistance for implementation of
This leads to soil degradation because nutrients are consumed and
both governmental policies and internationally funded development
the soil is not left to regenerate its fertility. This in turns leads to poor
projects.
harvests, increased need for labour and need for chemical treatments to
The studied policy and project interventions have a dominating role
fight the weeds that are a problem in the short fallow rotational lots.
on villagers' livelihoods, food security and access to resources.
Contrary to the past, today the villagers need to engage in many dif-
However, these vertical power relations are subject of modification at
ferent activities to sustain themselves. As a result, shifting cultivation
the village level, which happens in accordance with the horizontal
has significantly decreased, especially in the villages in Vientiane
power relations, where actors internal to the communities position
themselves according to their roles. Vertical power relations applied in
a direct/visible way have had a profound influence on the way in which 3
‘The past’ was expressed, with phrases such as: ‘when my father and grand-
shifting cultivation is practiced and on the villagers' livelihoods, food father carried out this activity’, or ‘some 20–30 years ago’.

6
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
province. In V1 and V2 the practice has almost been eradicated, while
in other villages it has been significantly decreased. Factors leading to
changes in and decline of the practice include: (i) government restric-
tions and education, (ii) forest conservation, (iii) the project interven-
tion of the livelihood grants and promotion of forest conservation.
Common responses given as reasons for reducing shifting cultivation
are illustrated by these statements:
Shifting cultivation is done in young forests because the thick forest
is nearly finished and what is left is conserved by the government
(Male/V4/Taliang).
We have three pieces of lands allocated to us by the government and
this project and we plant Job's tears [an alternative livelihood activity
introduced by the project] for two subsequent years (Female/V3/Lao
Loum).
I don't know the details. What I know is that villagers who commit
against the laws will be called for reeducating and if they continue
doing wrong they will be fined. Villagers can do shifting cultivation not
more than 1 ha/family/year (Male/V1/Taliang).
Concerning the food security in the context of these changes, we
found that in all the villages, with the exception of V3 (Vientiane)
where half of the respondents reported they were food sufficient, all or
the vast majority of respondents told that they cannot rely on shifting
cultivation any longer to produce enough food. The villagers claimed
that despite the additional livelihood activities, they find themselves
short of food for at least three months a year. In all the six villages, the
respondents said that they had to work ‘twice as hard’ compared to
earlier, and undertake a variety of subsistence and commercial activ-
ities and still struggled with daily subsistence. This is because, as in-
dicated by the respondents, the soil quality has deteriorated in the last
years, due to short rotations, which result from the land use planning
and allocation policy, put in practice before or during the project in-
terventions, where villagers are allocated limited amount of plots for
shifting cultivation (usually three plots of 1 ha, depending on the
availability of production forest in the village). So they are forced to
plant every, or every second year, instead of leaving the land to rest and
soil nutrients to recover. Villagers in all villages and from all ethnic
groups claimed that soil quality has deteriorated and that growing rice
in the same plot annually or bi-annually turns fertile land into grass-
lands, nor suitable for rice cultivation:
We did shifting cultivation in only one plot for the last years, as we
do not have more land. Now the land became grassland and the soil is
not good for replanting the rice anymore. (Female/V1/Talieng).
This obviously influence food security. Concerning food security,
before the studied policy and project interventions, in three villages
(V1, V3, V5) the vast majority of respondents said that shifting culti-
vation was a reliable food-security practice which had provided enough
food for them and their families throughout the year before the various
policy and project interventions started. Similarly, in V4 and V6 (in
Attapeu) half of the respondents reported that food produced by
shifting cultivation alone was enough in the past (before strengthened
policy control and project interventions), while the other half disagreed
and claimed that it has also been difficult to be food sufficient in the
past. It was only in V2 (Vientiane) where all respondents claimed that
shifting cultivation was not a reliable activity, highlighting the natural
disasters and security issues, such as birds eating the harvest or, due to
the war, the enemy burning the rice fields during the war or villagers
needing to flee their home before the harvest was ready.
4.1.2. Rights and access to resources – Before and after the interventions
The project interventions adopted the governmental policy to carry
out the Participatory Land Use Planning and Land use Allocation
(PLUPLA) (see Lestrelin, 2009, 2010 for details). The Land Use Planning
(LUP) constitutes one of the major governmental forest and land use
policies related to rural development, natural resources and forest
management, and PLUPLA one of its main tools to eradicate shifting
cultivation. PLUPLA refers to the actual land allocation process, where
7
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
each household is limited to three plots and the fallow periods on those
plots to three years. These limitations effectively reduce viability of
shifting cultivation, as soil fertility fails in the process (Fox and Castella,
2013).
In short, PLUPLA determines the boundaries of land, classified as
agricultural land and forest land, which is further subdivided as pro-
tection, production and conservation forests. Various restrictions to vil-
lagers' livelihood practices in these different categories apply.
Importantly agricultural practices are forbidden in all forest land. As
observed in our villages, in the village production or village use forest
(VUF), harvesting timber was permitted for domestic use only, and only
in a limited amount prescribed by the district forestry office. Extracting
timber for commercial use was prohibited. Practicing livelihood activ-
ities, such as land cultivation, fish keeping and livestock raising was
allowed in village agricultural lands. Respondents understood these two
categories as overlapping with similar use rights, where they were al-
lowed to cut trees with a permit, and to farm, collect forest products,
hunt wild animals, and do rotational shifting cultivation in allocated
plots. Village conservation forest is forest land intended primarily for
conservation of biodiversity and other environmental values.
Conservation forests were further categorized into two types depending
on the level of protection: strict-conservation zones, where villagers were
not allowed to carry out any activities; controlled-use zones, where
limited practice of activities, such as collection of non-timber forest
products for personal use, was allowed. Similarly to the rules in village
conservation areas, activities that cause soil erosion were prohibited in
the village protection forests. This includes tree harvesting or crop cul-
tivation, while collecting forest products for personal use was allowed.
These limitations and exclusionary rules, however, backfired due to
illegal forest activities, because the areas allocated as ‘village produc-
tion forests’ in the majority of cases were severely degraded.
Respondents in all villages, especially in the three villages of Vientiane,
said that there were no mature trees in the village production or use
forests where they are allowed to cut trees. This in turn increases the
occurrence of illegal forest activities, as deduced from this quotation:
The village production forests have no trees left; if villagers want to
build a house, they have to buy wood or illegally cut it from con-
servation areas where there is forest. (Male/V1/Khmu).
The various versions of land use planning, since its first experi-
mentations in the 1990s have led to a drastic reduction of agricultural
land. According to Aubertin (2003), cited in Lestrelin (2009), one third
of Laos has been classified as ‘protection’ or ‘conservation’ forests, and
around 90% of area considered by the land use plans, has been classi-
fied as ‘forested land’. This pressure on agricultural activities force the
farmer to abandon shifting cultivation and engage in market oriented
production using intensifying agricultural methods. PLUPLA, as a form
of a vertical power relation, meant less rights and more limitations for
all villagers. However, these rules were greatly reshaped at the village
level. The general tendency is for the externally imposed rules to be
molded by, and in accordance with the existing informal or customary
structures and rules, such as social norms and pre-existing traditional
rules – a phenomena called ‘institutional bricolage’ (Cleaver, 2012). In
addition, however, in our study we observed that the process of in-
stitutional bricolage is a social and power-laden process, where the
extent to which community members have a say and chance to parti-
cipate depend on a number of locally defined social categories. The
ability of community members to shape these vertical and externally
imposed rules at the village level, depended on socially constructed
categories and backgrounds of community members, such as their so-
cial and political position and status in the village (village head vs.
‘regular villager’), gender, ethnicity, and economic wellbeing. These are
the same characteristics or social categories that defined the ability of
individual villagers to respond to and cope with, or adapt to, any
changes brought by in the village. We attribute this ability to alter the
forms of vertical power relations to the so-called horizontal power re-
lations, practiced in direct/visible and indirect/invisible ways.
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159

Table 1
Respondent profiles in numbers.
Province& District Village Number of resp. Ethnicity Gender Introduced livelihood activity

Vientiane province, Maed district V1 6 Lao Loum:2 M:4 Paddy cultivation

Khmu: 2 NA:2 F:2
V2 5 Khmu: 5 M:5 Paddy cultivation
V3 11 Lao M:5 F:5 Paddy cultivation
Loum:6 NA: 1
Lao:4
NA: 1
Attapeau province, Sanxay district V4 8 Talieng: 7 M:2 Coffee and cardamom
NA:1 F:2
NA:4
V5 8 Alak: 6 M: 3 Coffee and cardamom
NA: 2 F:1
NA: 4
V6 8 Taliang: 5 M:4 Coffee and cardamom
NA: 3 NA:4

4.2. Horizontal power relations
The process of implementing governmental policies and project
interventions on the ground is a delicate process where relations and
positions of actors at various scales and levels of administration in-
teract, but also where heterogeneity and plurality at the community
level comes into play. In this process, power asymmetries at the village
level are reinforced, and in some cases new power relations generated,
as new members of village forest, land and fund committees are (s)
elected. The power relations shape and are in turn shaped by specific
social practices, habits, ideas and contestations, which as socio-political
forces operate in a certain political and geographic space, called com-
munity.
The community members are active agents changing and adapting
the imposed interventions according to local realities and power rela-
tions. At the village level, the formal rules imposed by the govern-
mental agencies from different levels and the project intervention were
taken as flexible guiding principles, the interpretations and the eventual
adaptations of which varied, not between villages but more intriguingly
from an individual person to another within villages. The eventual
practices, the de-facto rights, and their distributional effects across the
societal groups and members of the community, ultimately depended
on the degree and ways in which they were adopted and integrated into
the mosaic of the existing ‘informal’ rules and practices of various origin
(e.g. remnants of ‘indigenous’ or traditional legal systems). The power
to shape these rules locally, as well as their distributional effects
strongly depended on the specific social, cultural and gender back-
ground. Members of the village authorities, forest village committees,
ethnic majority groups and male community members were in more
favourable positions to influence the rules and interventions, and to
benefit from them.
At this point, it is important to highlight the different roles com-
munity members, such as the village authorities, but also villagers with
direct roles in implementing the project (take part in forest manage-
ment activities) play. They are insiders of the community (living in the
villages and abiding by the rules made at higher level of governments),
but can also be seen as supporters of outsiders' interventions, that they
help implement in the villages. This complicates the introduced
straightforward analytical division and differentiation between in-
ternal/external and formal/informal actors producing and reproducing
various forms of power relations. While the definition and division
between vertical versus horizontal relations is a helpful analytical tool,

Table 2
Review of governmental policies and programmes aimed at eliminating and/or stabilising shifting cultivation.a
Policies and programmes (year of adaptation) Policy scope and aims

Shifting Cultivation Stabilization and Arranging Permanent Occupations
Program (1989)
Village Land Use Planning and Land Allocation Program (1993)
Rural Development Program, or Focal Site Strategy (1996)
Directive No 09/PB on Establishment of Villages and Village Cluster
Development (2004)
The Four Goals and Thirteen Measures for Agriculture and Forestry
Development (4/13) (2006, in support of 8th Party Congress)
Plan for Substituting Rice Based Shifting Cultivation Practices, 2006–2010.
(2006)
Ministerial Instruction for the Complete Eradication of Slash and Burn
Cultivation (2010)
Strategy for Agricultural Development (2010)
Participatory Land Use Planning and Land Allocation (PLUPLA) Manual
(2010)
The Seventh Five-Year National Socio-Economic Development Plan,
2011–2015 (2011)
Eliminate shifting cultivation, by focusing on agriculture and livestock, environmental protection,
forest and land allocation, permanent agriculture, etc.
Allocate forest and agricultural land for villager use, stabilize and reduce shifting cultivation,
promote permanent agriculture.
Concentrate on focal development areas to create small towns, promote food security, commercial
agriculture, eliminate shifting cultivation and strengthen foreign cooperation and development
support.
Engage the political grass roots committee to implement the policy of eliminating shifting
cultivation, improve rural development, address poverty and establish village cluster boundaries,
village cluster development plans.
The four central sector goals: 1. Improvement of livelihood and food security; 2. Modernised
agricultural commodification; 3. Stabilization of shifting cultivation; 4. Sustainable forest
management.
Change shifting cultivation occupations to more permanent occupations, increase family income,
increase forest cover and improve forest conditions.
Inform and guide provincial governments about shifting cultivation and how to achieve its
eradication. Introduce the concept of “villages free of slash-and-burn cultivation” as an aim and a
vision to work for.
To stop slash-and-burn cultivation, aiming at total eradication of the practice.
The goal of step-by-step and full eradication of shifting cultivation is stated in various proposed
stages (e.g. stage number 2, 5, 8).
Resettling displaced people by developing new agricultural lands and living facilities for them on a
permanent basis, completely halting and reversing deforestation and stopping shifting cultivation
is given as target for 2015 (p. 111).

a
The table is based on the policy and project document review. The policy review is guided by Kenney-Lazar (2013a, 2013b) policy review on the same topic.

8
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
caution should be applied to cases where internal/external and formal/
informal actors and interventions overlap, which is fairly often. Each
case will differ from the other. In the case of the studied villages, while
the village heads and authorities are elected by the villagers and not by
the state, as Stuart-Fox (2005:21) writes, the list of preferred candidates
is drawn by district offices, making the village heads to a lesser extent
representatives of the villagers. Nonetheless, while having more role to
play compared to villagers without any formal role, the village heads
and authorities are still composed of the local villagers and in that way
differ from fully external authorities who impose rules and regulations
limiting the access and rights of the villagers.
In all villages, the majority of respondents shared the general un-
derstanding that cutting of larger, economically valuable trees across all
forest categories, including in production forests, is prohibited.
However, the purpose and the quantity of timber harvest for which a
written permit was required varied from 3 to 6 m3 per annum. Further,
a number of other activities, such as firewood and collection of wild
edible plants and hunting of game, even if formally prohibited in con-
servation forest areas, were tolerated by the villagers and village au-
thorities. Adaptation to and interpretation of formal legal rules also
varied concerning activities such as hunting, fishing and shifting cul-
tivation. Generally people in all villages knew that these activities were
strictly regulated within the project intervention, not only in terms of
area but also in terms of other parameters such as quantity, season (e.g.
breeding versus non-breeding season), types of a specific activity (e.g.
rotational versus pioneering shifting cultivation), type of a specific
product collected (e.g. fish species), and methods of fishing and hunting
(e.g. use of poison and electric devices was prohibited). But details
concerning locations, quota, seasons and species were largely pre-
defined by informal rules. The result is that the formal rules only par-
tially defined access and de-facto rights to resources. No significant
differences between the villages were observed. The differences were
more related to the respondents' social, cultural and political positions
and status in the village.
Individuals' socio-political position as village heads, village autho-
rities, village forest committees or ordinary villagers, as well as their
gender, ethnicity and economic prosperity, were the most prominent
factors influencing the extent and gravity of the intervention on them.
In all six villages, the members of the village authorities and the
members of forest village organizations administering funds, male re-
spondents and ethnic Lao and better integrated ethnic minorities, were
in a better position to influence the project intervention and to shape
the de-facto rules. They also showed more support for the activities,
while female respondents, elderly people and members of less culturally
integrated ethnic minority groups tended to say that they do not know
much about the interventions, but have to follow the rules dictated by
the village authorities.
Apart from social status, political engagement greatly shaped the
abilities to impact the intervention. Connections with district and pro-
vincial officials and the project staff were especially beneficial. This
translated into the power of those with these connections to make de-
cisions concerning the recipients of the grants and their administration.
Furthermore, access to information concerning the changing rules in
place, as well as the physical and legal availability of forests and other
resources, such as non-timber forest products (NTFPs), were also ex-
tremely relevant. The village authorities and members of the village
organizations in all villages enjoyed a better access to the remaining
resources and reported less urgent food security issues, and higher sa-
tisfaction with the intervention.
The village authorities and members committees in all the villages
were male. Females and ethnic minorities in the villages were largely
excluded from meetings and decision-making processes, and these
groups claimed that all the rules had been made by the village autho-
rities, who in turn claimed that they made the decisions about benefits
with the consent of all villagers. Village authorities also claimed that
poverty was a key criteria they followed when distributing grants, while
9
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
other respondents – both recipients and non-recipients – said that many
better-off households secured grants, while some poorer households did
not. Female respondents and respondents from ethnic minorities, in the
few cases when they expressed their opinion mainly in unrecorded in-
terviews and informal discussions prior to, or at the end of the formal
interview, complained about injustices related to uneven access to in-
formation and village decision-making. A female teacher in a village in
Vientiane province explained:
I do not say this aloud, but the forest officials make decisions about
forests on their own. Now that the project is here, they only talk with their
own people, but nobody asks me or my neighbour, the woman across the
street, about how we are going to use and manage the forest and who is going
to get benefits. (fieldwork notes).
Asked who are ‘their own people’, she explained that these are the
village head, village authorities and forest committees and that they
made joint decisions about who receives the grants and for which ac-
tivities. Some respondents in the three villages in Vientiane province
complained that the poorer families should be the recipients, but in-
stead the village authorities selected the richer families to receive the
grants, who in turn used them for other purposes than intended. This
again improved their economic situation because they opened small
businesses, such as village shops or poultry farms. During the fieldwork,
through informal discussions with forest officials, research and project
staff, it was revealed that especially in the villages of Attapeu, the vil-
lage authorities were afraid that the poorer families were not able to
return the grants, which in effect operated as a loan, and therefore
avoided giving grants to them.
In all the villages, there were some respondents who were not able
to return the loan in time, due to sickness or other unplanned circum-
stances. While in Vientiane this ratio was rather small (1–3 recipients
per village), in the villages of Attapeu many recipients could not return
the grant, despite the agreement with district forestry office. In some
cases, the villagers explained that they could not return the grant and
borrowed from the fund to return the grant, then ended up owing
money to the village fund. In Attapeu, many said that they could not
return the grant because their family members got sick and they needed
to spend the money on medical expenses. It is likely that due to these
issues the authorities indeed did select recipients who would return the
grant, which in turn caused inequalities and resentment in the villages.
The project intervention in various ways altered the local social
realities and power relations in the villages. This alteration specifically
occurred by: giving certain individuals and groups (i.e. village autho-
rities and members of village forest units and committees) more re-
sponsibility and saying in how village forests are managed, by engaging
them in paid forest management activities, and/or by involving them in
meetings with district and provincial officers – all of which were used in
all villages. As a whole these activities affected economic, as well as
political relations in the villages.
5. Conclusions: The role of power relations in community
resilience
We have shown the importance of political and socio-cultural con-
texts across different levels, and vertical and horizontal power relations,
exercised via direct and indirect ways in the individual's ability to cope
with, adopt and adapt to pressures for change. The vertical power re-
lations largely exercised through direct and visible impositions by ex-
ternal authorities shape the wider political contexts, which in turn
shape resilience at individual and community levels. These power re-
lations tended to cause challenges and pressures for change that had
similar implications for all members of the community. Horizontal
power relations on the other hand greatly affected the ability of in-
dividuals and communities to shape these rules locally and deal with
the changes brought by them, and therefore the community members'
preposition to benefit or bear costs from these rules and changes. This
resonates with critical viewpoints on resilience that have emphasized
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
the importance of the politico-economic context, social capital, and
social and power relations for the capacities of communities to manage
changing conditions (Cote and Nightingale, 2012; MacKinnon and
Derickson, 2013; Weichselgartner and Kelman, 2015). It also indicates
the need to consider unequal distribution of risks and benefits, which
relates to justice (Walker, 2012; Schlosberg, 2007). In this context, our
article defines the tasks of defining the analytical elements of power
relations (types of power relations and ways of exercising them) and
illustrating their relevance empirically. This adds to the scholarship on
power and actors in community forestry elsewhere (Krott et al., 2014,
Schusser et al., 2015) as well as power relations in multi-level gov-
ernance settings, more generally (Maryudi and Sahide, 2017). In ad-
dition, this paper has engaged with less elaborated complex cultural
and societal heterogeneities and pluralities and how they affect the
abilities of communities to deal with pressures to change.
With regards to the empirical case, the relevant factors influencing
the conditions for resilience have included socio-political positions,
such as village heads, village authorities, village forest committees and
forest units; but also gender, ethnicity and economic wellbeing.
Members of village authorities, males and the ethnic majority were
more involved with the interventions and enjoyed better connections
with district and provincial officers and project staff, which in turn led
to more power in deciding who received grants and for which activities.
These groups also had better access to information about rules and
resources available, which prepositioned them for better access to re-
maining resources. In general these groups were more food sufficient,
had better accommodated the introduced livelihood activities and were
more satisfied with the interventions. All these in turn translate into
these village members appearing as more resilient compared to other
villagers, ethnic minorities, women and poorer members of the com-
munity. Being resilient here means that they were, first, better prepared
for the changing conditions with regards to their livelihoods, and,
second and related, they were better equipped to act as the transfor-
mations came about.
The empirical findings echo other studies that suggest strong rela-
tions between power and access and rights to resources (Agrawal, 2003;
Ribot and Peluso, 2003). The existing village authorities, members of
village forest units and the village development fund committees were
granted new decision-making powers within the intervention. They
could decide how the villagers were to utilize the land and for which
livelihood activities. While this may merely be seen as evidence that
institutional arrangements defining access and rights procreate the
status quo of past and existing power structures and relationships
(Giessen et al., 2016), we propose that the access and right per se’
further cause dynamics and shifts in the existing power relations. In
order to grasp the impacts of power relations on socio-ecological out-
comes of an intervention or force of change, it is crucial to integrate the
various forms of power relations in the analysis of resilience. The risks,
benefits and costs are disproportionally distributed among individuals
and sections of society, depending on their social status, position in the
village, ethnicity and gender. To gain insights related to distribution of
risks and benefits that further define potential for resilience, it is crucial
to consider the horizontal and vertical power relations and the hidden
and visible ways in which they operate.
Authors statement
All authors approved the content of the manuscript.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest with this work.
10
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by the Academy of Finland (grant number
285984). We are thankful to all respondents who took part in the in-
terviews. Acknowledgements and thanks are to the project staff for their
help and support during the research. Thank you to the research as-
sistants Chanthone Keosopha and Channy Xamonty for their help with
data collection, and to Southa Chanthalangsy for the Lao-English
translation of the interview transcripts. Finally, many thanks to Nick
Quist Nathaniels for help with the English language and to Noora Rämö
and Timo Kumpula for preparing the map of Laos.
References
Adger, N.W., 2000. Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Prog. Hum. Geogr.
24 (3), 347–364.
Agrawal, A., 2003. Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context, methods,
and politics. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 32, 243–262.
Ahrends, A., Hollingsworth, P.M., Ziegler, A.D., Fox, J.M., Chen, H., Su, Y., Xu, J., 2015.
Current trends of rubber plantation expansion may threaten biodiversity and liveli-
hoods. Glob. Environ. Chang. 34, 48–58.
Aubertin, C., 2003. La forêt laotienne redessinée par les politiques environnementales.
Bois et Forêts des Tropiques 278 (4), 39–50.
Baird, I.G., Barney, K., 2017. The political ecology of cross-sectoral cumulative impacts:
modern landscapes, large hydropower dams and industrial tree plantations in Laos
and Cambodia. J. Peasant Stud. 44 (4), 769–795.
Baird, I.G., Fox, J., 2015. How land concessions affect places elsewhere: Telecoupling,
political ecology, and large-scale plantations in southern Laos and northeastern
Cambodia. Land 4 (2), 436–453.
Baird, I.G., Shoemaker, B., 2007. Unsettling experiences: internal resettlement and in-
ternational aid agencies in Laos. Dev. Chang. 38, 865–888.
Barney, K., 2008. China and the production of forestlands in Laos: A political ecology of
transnational enclosure pp. 91-107. In: Nevins, J., Peluso, N.L. (Eds.), Taking
Southeast Asia to Market: Commodities, Nature, and People in the Neoliberal Age.
Cornell University Press.
Barney, K., 2016. Environmental neoliberalism in Southeast Asia. In: Hirsch, P. (Ed.),
Handbook of the Environment in Southeast Asia. New York: Routledge. 2016. pp.
99–114.
Berkes, F., Ross, H., 2013. Community resilience: toward an integrated approach. Soc.
Nat. Resour. 26 (1), 5–20.
Bernstein, S., Cashore, B., 2012. Complex global governance and domestic policies: four
pathways of influence. Int. Aff. 88 (3), 585–604.
Brisbois, M.C., Morris, M., de Löe, R., 2018. Augmenting the IAD framework to reveal
power in collaborative governance – An illustrative application to resource industry
dominated processes. World Dev. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.
02.017.
Broegaard, R.B., Vongvisouk, T., Mertz, O., 2017. Contradictory land use plans and po-
licies in Laos: tenure security and the threat of exclusion. World Dev. 89, 170–189.
Brown, K., 2014. Global environmental change I: a social turn for resilience? Prog. Hum.
Geogr. 38 (1), 107–117.
Brown, K., 2016. Resilience, Development and Global Change. Routledge, London.
Bryant, R., 1998. Power, knowledge and political ecology in the third world: a review.
Prog. Phys. Geogr. 22 (1), 79–94.
Burns, S.L., Krott, M., Sayadyan, H., Giessen, L., 2017. The World Bank Improving
Environmental and Natural Resource Policies: Power, Deregulation, and Privatization
in (Post-Soviet) Armenia. World Development 92, 215–224. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.worlddev.2016.12.030.
Castella, J.C., Lestrelin, G., Hett, C., Bourgoin, J., Fitriana, J.R., Heinimann, A., Pfund, J.-
L., 2013. Effects of landscape segregation on livelihood vulnerability. Hum. Ecol. 1
(41), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-012-9538-8. Springer.
Cleaver, F., 2012. Development through Bricolage: Rethinking Institutions for Natural
Resource Management. Routledge, London.
Cote, M., Nightingale, A.J., 2012. Resilience thinking meets social theory: situating social
change in socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36 (4),
475–489.
Cramb, R.A., Pierce Colfer, C.J., Dressler, W., Laungaramsri, P., Le, Q.T., Mulyoutami, E.,
Peluso, N.L., Wadley, R.L., 2009. Swidden transformations and rural livelihoods in
Southeast Asia. Hum. Ecol. 37 (3), 323–346 2009.
Dressler, W.H., Mahanty, S., Clendenning, J., To, P., 2015. Rearticulating governance
through carbon in the Lao PDR? Environ. Plan. C 33 (5), 1265–1283.
Dressler, W.H., Wilson, D., Clendenning, J., Cramb, R., Keenan, R., Mahanty, S., Bruun,
T.B., Mertz, O., Lasco, R.D., 2016. The impact of swidden decline on livelihoods and
ecosystem services in Southeast Asia: a review of the evidence from 1990 to 2015.
Ambio. 2016, 1–20.
Dwyer, M., 2007. Turning land into capital. A Review of recent research on land con-
cessions for investment in the Lao PDR. Part, 1.
Fox, J., Castella, J.-C., 2013. Expansion of rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) in mainland
Southeast Asia: what are the prospects for smallholders? J. Peasant Stud. 40 (1),
155–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2012.750605.
Fox, J., Castella, J.-C., 2014. Swidden, rubber and carbon: can REDD+ work for people
and the environment in montane mainland Southeast Asia? Glob. Environ. Chang. 29
S. Ramcilovic-Suominen and J. Kotilainen
(2014), 318–326.
Fox, J., Fujita, Y., Ngidang, D., Peluso, N.L., Potter, L., Sakuntaladewi, N., Sturgeon, J.,
Thomas, D., 2009. Policies, political-economy, and Swidden in Southeast Asia. Hum.
Ecol. 37, 305–322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9240-7.
Fox, J., Castella, J.-C., Ziegler, A.D., 2014. Swidden, rubber and carbon: can REDD work
for people and the environment in montane mainland Southeast Asia? Glob. Environ.
Chang. 29, 318–326 2014.
Giessen, L., Krott, M., Möllmann, T., 2014. Increasing representation of states by utili-
tarian as compared to environmental bureaucracies in international forest and for-
est–environmental policy negotiations. Forest Policy and Economics 38, 97–104.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.08.008.
Giessen, L., Sarker., P.K., Rahman, S., 2016. International and Domestic Sustainable
Forest Management Policies: Distributive Effects on Power among State Agencies in
Bangladesh. Sustainability 8, 335. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8040335.
Gindroz, A.-S., 2017. Laos the Silent Repression. In: A Testimony written after being
Expelled, 146p.
GOL (Government of Laos), 2005. Forest Strategy to the Year 2020 of the Lao PDR. No.
229/PM. Prime Minister‘s Office, Vientiane, Laos.
Hall, D., Hirsch, P., Murray Li, T., 2011. Powers of exclusion. In: Land Dilemmas in
Southeast Asia.
Harrison, E., Chiroro, C., 2017. Differentiated legitimacy, differentiated resilience: be-
yond the natural in ‘natural disasters’. J. Peasant Stud. 44 (5), 1022–1042. https://
doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2016.1193011.
Ingalls, M., Dwyer, M., 2016. Missing the Forest for the Trees? Navigating the Trade-Offs
between Mitigation and Adaptation under REDD Climatic Change (2016). 136. pp.
353–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-016-1612-6.
Kallio, M.H., Hogarth, N.J., Moeliono, M., Brockhaus, M., Cole, R., Bong, I.W., Wong,
G.J., 2019. The colour of maize: visions of green growth and farmers perceptions in
northern Laos. Land Use Policy 80, 185–194.
Kenney-Lazar, M., 2013a. Dispossession, semi-proletarianization, and enclosure: primi-
tive accumulation and the land grab in Laos. In: Paper Presented at the International
Conference on Global Land Grabbing. Available at (accessed January, 2019), .
https://www.future-agricultures.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf-archive/Miles
%20Kenney-Lazar.pdf.
Kenney-Lazar, M., 2013b. Shifting cultivation in Laos: transitions in policy and perspec-
tive. In: Report. Sector Working Group-Agriculture and Rural Development (SWG-
ARD). 2013.
Kotilainen, J., 2018. Resilience of resource communities: Perspectives and challenges. In:
Marsden, Terry (Ed.), Sage Handbook of Nature. 1 Sage Publications, London.
Krott, M., Bader, A., Schusser, C., Devkota, R., Maryudi, A., GiessenAurenhammer, L.H.,
2014. Actor-centred power: The driving force in decentralised community based
forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics 49, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.forpol.2013.04.012.
Lestrelin, G., 2009. Changing lives, changing nature(s): socio-environmental transitions in
the uplands of the Lao PDR. In: Durham Theses. Durham University Available at
Durham E-Theses Online. http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/894/.
Lestrelin, G., 2010. Land degradation in the Lao PDR: discourses and policy. Land Use
Policy 27 (2), 424–439.
Lestrelin, G., Castella, J.-C., Bourgoin, J., 2012. Territorialising sustainable development:
the politics of land-use planning in Laos. J. Contemp. Asia 42 (4), 581–602.
Lukes, S., 2005. Power: A Radical View. Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire and New York.
MacKinnon, D., Derickson, D.K., 2013. From resilience to resourcefulness: a critique of
resilience policy and activism. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 37 (2), 253–270.
MAF (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry), NLMA (National Land Management
Authority), 2009. Manual on Participatory Agriculture and Forest Land Use Planning
at Village and Village Cluster Levels. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and
National Land Management Authority, Vientiane.
Magis, K., 2010. Community resilience: an indicator of social sustainability. Soc. Nat.
Resour. 23 (5), 401–416.
Manyena, S.B., 2006. The concept of resilience revisited. Disasters 30 (4), 434–450.
Maryudi, A., Nurrochmat, D.R., Giessen, L., 2018. Research trend: Forest policy and
governance – Future analyses in multiple social science disciplines. Forest Policy and
Economics 91, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2018.02.007.
Maryudi, A., Sahide, M.A.K., 2017. Research trend: Power analyses in polycentric and
multi-level forest governance. Forest Policy and Economics 81, 65–68. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.forpol.2017.05.003.
Mertz, O., Padoch, C., Fox, J., Cramb, R., Leisz, S.J., Lam, N.G., Vien, T.D., 2009. 2009.
Swidden change in Southeast Asia: understanding causes and consequences. Hum.
11
Forest Policy and Economics 115 (2020) 102159
Ecol. 37 (3), 259–264.
Mosse, D., 1997. The symbolic making of a common property resource: history, ecology
and locality in a tank-irrigated landscape in South India. Dev. Chang. 28, 467–504.
Mustalahti, I., 2007. Participatory forestry in the crossroads in Laos and Vietnam. Two
participatory forestry case studies. In: Vihemäki, H. (Ed.), Contextualising Natural
Resource Management in the South. Institute of Development Studies, University of
Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland, pp. 193–236.
Myers, R., Hansen, C.P., 2019. Revisiting a Theory of Access: A review. Society & Natural
Resourceshttps://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2018.1560522.
Peluso, N.L., Vandergeest, P., 2011. Political ecologies of war and forests: counter-
insurgencies and the making of national natures. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 101 (3),
587–608.
Phengsopha, K., 2011. Effects of Downstream Timber Processing Policy on Markets and
Trade in Laos. PhD Dissertation. Department of Forest and Ecosystem Science.
Faculty of Land and Environment. The University of Melbourne.
Rahman, S., Sadath, N., 2016. Foreign donors driving policy change in recipient coun-
tries: Three decades of development aid towards community-based forest policy in
Bangladesh. Forest Policy and Economics 68, 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
forpol.2016.03.013.
Ramcilovic-Suominen, S., 2019. REDD+ as a tool for state territorialization: managing
forests and people in Laos. J. Polit. Ecol 26 (1), 264–281.
Ramcilovic-Suominen, S., Lovric, M., Mustalahti, I., 2019. Mapping policy actor networks
and their interests in the FLEGT voluntary partnership agreement in Lao PDR. World
Dev. 118, 128–148.
Ribot, J., 1998. Theorizing Access: Forest Profits along Senegal's Charcoal Commodity
Chain. In: Development and Change, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-7660.00080.
Ribot, J., 2003. Democratic decentralisation of natural resources: institutional choice and
discretionary power transfers in sub-Saharan Africa. Public Adm. Dev. 23, 53–65.
Ribot, J., Peluso, N.L., 2003. A theory of access. Rural. Sociol. 68 (2), 153–181.
Schlosberg, D., 2007. Defining Environmental Justice. Oxford University Press.
Schmidt-Vogt, D., Leisz, S.J., Mertz, O., Heinimann, A., Thiha, T., Messerli, P., Epprecht,
M., et al., 2009. An assessment of trends in the extent of Swidden in Southeast Asia.
Hum. Ecol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10745-009-9239-0.
Schoenberger, L., Hall, D., Vandergeest, P., 2017. What happened when the land grab
came to Southeast Asia? J. Peasant Stud. https://doi.org/10.1080/03066150.2017.
1331433.
Schusser, C., Krott, M., Movuh, M.C.Y., Logmani, J., DevkotaMaryudi, RRA., Salla, M.,
Bach, N.D., 2015. Powerful stakeholders as drivers of community forestry — Results
of an international study. Forest Policy and Economics 58, 92–101. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.forpol.2015.05.011.
Sims, K., 2017. More growth, less freedom? Charting development pathways in Lao PDR.
Chapter 7. In: Howe, B. (Ed.), National Security, Statecentricity, and Governance in
East Asia. Security, Development and Human Rights in East Asia. https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-319-58974-9_7.
Singh, S., 2012. Natural Potency and Political Power: Forests and State Authority in
Contemporary Laos. 2012. University of Hawaii press, Honolulu, pp. 192.
Singh, S., Boonratana, R., Bezuijen, M., Phonvisay, A., 2006. Trade in Natural Resources
in Attapeu Province, Lao PDR: An Assessment of the Wildlife Trade. TRAFFIC/MWBP
(Mekong Wetlands Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Use Programme),
Vientiane.
Skerratt, S., 2013. Enhancing the analysis of rural community resilience: evidence from
community land ownership. J. Rural. Stud. 31 (1), 36–46.
Smith, H., Barney, K., Byron, N., Simo, A. Van Der Meer, Phimmavong, S., Keenan, R.,
Vongkhamsao, V., 2016. 2016. Tree Plantations in Lao PDR: Policy Framework and
Review. Project report. 2016:85.
Stuart-Fox, M., 2005. Politics and Reform in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic.
Working Paper No.126. Asia Research Centre.
Svarstad, H., Benjaminsen, T.A., Overå, R., 2018. J. Politic. Ecol Power Tfv. Article
forthcoming.
Tacconi, L., Mahanty, S., Suich, H., 2013. The livelihood impacts of payments for en-
vironmental services and implications for REDD. Soc. Nat. Resour. 26 (6), 733–744.
Vandergeest, P., Unno, A., 2012. A new extraterritoriality? Aquaculture certification,
sovereignty, and empire. Polit. Geogr. 31 (6), 358–367.
Walker, G., 2012. Environmental Justice: Concepts. Routledge, Evidence and Politics.
Weichselgartner, J., Kelman, I., 2015. Geographies of resilience: challenges and oppor-
tunities of a descriptive concept. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 39 (3), 249–267.
Wilson, G.A., 2012. Community Resilience and Environmental Transitions. Routledge,
London.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 · · · ·

There saw she wade

In the heavy streams
Men—foul perjurers,
And murderers.

· · · ·

Brothers slay brothers:

Sisters’ children
Shed each other’s blood.
Hard is the world;
Sensual sin grows huge.
There are sword-ages, axe-ages,
Earth-cleaving cold;
Storm-ages, murder-ages,
Till the world falls dead,
And men no longer spare
Or pity one another.

· · · ·

Mimer’s sons play,

But the world is kindled
By the ancient
Gjallarhorn.
Loud blows Heimdall,
His sound is in the air:
Odin talks
With the head of Mimer.

Quivers then Yggdrasil,

The strong-rooted ash:
Rustles the old tree
When Jötun gives way.
All things tremble
In the realms of Hel,
Till Surtur’s son
Swallows up Odin.

Garmer he shouts
By the Gnipa-hall
The band must burst
And the wolf fly.

Hrymer drives eastward,

Bears his shield before him;
 Jormungand welters
In giant fierceness.
The waves thunder;
The eagles scream;
Death rends the corpses
And Nagelfar gives way.

Köl hies eastward;

Come must Muspel’s
Folk to the sea.
Loke rows afar;
All the children of madness
Follow the wolf,
Bileist’s brother
Journeyeth with them.

Surtur fares southward.

With flickering flames
From his sword
God’s sun flashes.
Break the stone mountains;
The weird women flee,
Men throng Hel’s dread roads,
And Heaven is rent.”

Then Surtur flings fire over the world.

“The sun grows dark.
Earth sinks in the sea.
From heaven vanish
The lustrous stars.
High from the flames
Rolls the reek;
High play the fires
’Gainst heaven itself.

· · · ·

Up, sees she come

Yet once more,
The earth from the sea,
Gloriously green.

· · · ·

Then comes the Mighty One

To the great Judgment—
The great above all—
 He who guides all things.
Judgments he utters;
Strifes he appeaseth;
Laws He ordaineth
To flourish for ever.

· · · ·

In Gimlé the lofty

There shall the hosts
Of the virtuous dwell,
And through all ages
Taste of deep gladness.”

FROM THE “SÓLAR LJÓD”

The “Sólar Ljód”—“Sol” or “Sun-song”—was composed by Sæmund himself,
the collector of the Edda, and a Christian priest, ages before the time of
Dante.
“By the Nornors’ seat
Nine days I sate,
Then to horse was lifted.
The sun of the giant race
Gleamed sadly
Out of heaven’s weeping clouds.

Without and within

Seemed I to journey
Through the seven worlds
Above and below.
Better path I sought
Than there was to find.

And now to be told is

What first I beheld
In the home of torture.
Scorched birds were flying—
Wretched souls in myriads,
Thick as mosquito legions.

Flying saw I
Hope’s dragons
And fall in drear waste places.
They shook their wings
Till to me seemed that
Heaven and earth were rent.

The stag of the sun

Southward saw I journey.
His feet stood
On earth, but his huge antlers
Traversed the heavens above him.

Northward saw I ride

The sons of the races;
Seven they were together.
From the full horn they drank
The purest mead
From wells of heavenly strength.

The winds stood still,

The waters ceased to flow.
Then heard I a dread cry.
There for their husbands
False vengeful women
Ground earth for food.

Bloody stones
Those women dark
Dragged sorrowfully,
Their gory hearts
Hung from their breasts
Weighed with heavy weights.

Many men
Along the burning ways
Sore wounded saw I go.
Their visages
Seemed deeply dyed
With blood in murder shed.

Many men
Saw I amongst the dead
Without one hope of grace.
Pagan stars there stood
Over their heads
All scored with cruel runes.

Men saw I too

Who enviously had scowled
Upon the good of others.
Bloody runes
Were on their breasts
Ploughed out by hands of men.

Men saw I there

All full of woe,
All mazed in wondering.
This do they win
Who to eternal loss
Love this world only.

Men saw I too

Who sought always to snatch
From others their possessions.
In throngs they were,
And to the miser’s hell
Bore groaning loads of lead.

Men saw I next

Who many had bereaved
Of life and goods,
And through the hearts of these
For ever fiercely ran
Strong venom snakes.

Men too I saw

Who never would observe
Sabbaths and holy days.
Their unblessed hands
Fast rivetted together
With ever burning stones.

Men too I saw

Who with huge brag and boast
On earth did vaunt themselves.
Here their clothes
Were vilely squalid
And with fire enwrapt.

Men saw I too

Who with their slanderous breath
Had blasted others.
Hel’s ravens
Remorselessly their eyes
Tore from their heads.

But all the horrors

Thou canst not know
Which Hel’s condemned endure.
Sweet sins
There bitterly are punished,
False pleasures reap true pain.

· · · ·

Men did I see

Who the Lord’s laws
Had followed stanchly.
Purest light
For ever growing clearer
Passed brightly o’er their heads.

Men did I see

Who with unwearied zeal
Did seek the good of others.
Angels read
The holy books
Upon their radiant heads.

Men did I see

Who with sharp fasts
Their bodies had subdued;
God’s holy hosts
Before them all bow’d down
And paid them highest homage.

Men did I see

Who had their mothers
Piously cherished,
And their place of rest
Amid heaven’s beams
Shone gloriously.

Holy maids there were

Who their pure souls
Had kept unsoiled by sin,
And souls of those
Who their rebellious flesh
Did ever sternly quail.

Lofty chariots saw I

Travel through heaven
Having access to God;
And they were filled with those
Who causelessly
Had on the earth been slain.
 Father Almighty!
Illustrious Son!
And Holy Spirit of Heaven.
Thee do I implore,
Who didst make all things,
To keep us from all sin!”

Sæmund concludes this remarkable poem with these strophes:

“This song
Which I have taught thee
Thou shalt sing unto the living.
The Sun’s song,
Which in its solemn theme
Hath little that is feigned.

Here do we part,
But part again to meet
On the Great Day of men.
Oh, my Lord!
Give the dead rest,
Comfort to those who live!

Wonderful wisdom,
To thee in dream is sung,
’Tis truth which thou hast seen!
And no man is so wise
Of all who are created
As, ere this, to have heard
One word of this Sun’s Song!”

FROM THE POEMS RELATING TO SIGURD &

BRYNHILD.
From the heroic poems relating to Sigurd and Brynhild—the originals from
which the German “Niebelungen-lied” is taken—the following passage is
extracted. In it Gudrun, in conversation with Thjodreck, describes her youth
before the murder of Sigurd: “A maid was I amongst maidens; my mother
reared me lovely in bower. Well loved I my brothers, till me Gjuké apportioned
with gold, with gold apportioned and gave me to Sigurd. So raised himself,
Sigurd, over the sons of Gjuké, as the green lily above the grass grows; or the
high-antlered stag, above other beasts; or the fire-red gold above the silver
grey. My brothers were incensed that I should have a husband more illustrious
than any. Sleep they could not, nor decide on anything, before they Sigurd had
caused to perish. Grangé (Sigurd’s steed) galloped to the Ting (assembly of the
people), wild was his neighing, but Sigurd himself was not there. All the horses
were covered with sweat, and with blood of the contenders.
“Weeping I went to speak to Grané, the blood sprinkled; of his master I asked
him; then hung down Grané mournfully his head, for the creature knew that
his lord was not living. Long did I wander, long was I confused in mind before
of the Prince I could ask after my King.”
The “Hávamál”—“Odin’s High Song”—displays a shrewd insight into human
nature, and contains many maxims, both of a moral and social kind, which one
would scarcely expect to find embodied in the heathen ethics of an ancient
Scandinavian Scald. The whole poem is here presented to the reader.

HÁVAMÁL.
I.

“In every corner

Carefully look thou
Ere forth thou goest;
For insecure
Is the house when an enemy
Sitteth therein.

II.

Hail him who giveth!

Enters a guest.
Where shall he be seated?
Yet, ill shall fare he
Who seeks his welfare
In other men’s houses.

III.

Fire will be needful

For him who enters
With his knees frozen.
Of meat and clothing
Stands he in need
Who journeys o’er mountains.
 IV.

Water is needful,
A towel and kindness
For this guest’s welcome;
Kind inclinations
Let him experience;
Answer his questions.

V.

Good sense is needful

To the far traveller;
Each place seems home to him.
He is a laughing-stock
Who, knowing nothing,
Sits mid the wise.

VI.

With the deep thinker

Speak thou but little;
But guard well thy temper;
When the noble and silent
Come to thy dwelling,
Least errs the cautious.

VII.

Good sense is needful

To the far traveller;
Least errs the cautious;
For a friend trustier
Than good understanding
Findeth man never.

VIII.

A cautious guest
When he comes to his hostel
Speaketh but little;
With his ears he listeneth;
With his eyes he looketh;
Thus the wise learneth.

IX.

Happy is he
Who for himself winneth
Honour and friends.
All is uncertain,
Which a man holdeth
In the heart of another.

X.

Happy is he
Who prudent guidance
From himself winneth;
For evil counsel
Man oft receiveth
From the breast of another.

XI.

No better burden
Bears a man on his journey
Than mickle wisdom.
Better is she than gold
Where he is a stranger;
In need she is a helper.

XII.

No better burden
Bears a man on his journey
Than mickle wisdom.
No worse provision
Takes a man on his journey
Than frequent drunkenness.

XIII.

Ale is not so good

As people have boasted
For the children of men.
For less and still less,
As more he drinketh,
Knows man himself.

XIV.

The hern of forgetfulness

Sits on the drunkard,
And steals the man’s senses.
By the bird’s pinions,
Fettered I lay,
In Gunlada’s dwelling.

XV.

Drunken I lay,
Lay thoroughly drunken,
With Fjalar the wise.
This is the best of drink,
That every one afterwards
Comes to his senses.

XVI.

Be silent and diligent,

Son of a Prince,
And daring in combat;
Cheerful and generous,
Let every man be,
Till death approaches.

XVII.

A foolish man fancies

He shall live for ever
If he shuns combat.
But old age will give
To him no quarter,
Although the spear may.

XVIII.

The fool stares about

When he goes on a visit,
Talks nonsense or slumbers.
All goes well
When he can drink,
For then the man speaks his mind.

XIX.

He, he only
Who has far travelled,
Has far and wide travelled,
Knoweth every
Temper of man,
If he himself is wise.
 XX.

If cups thou lackest

Yet drink thou by measure:
Speak what is seemly or be still.
No one will charge thee
With evil, if early
Thou goest to slumber.

XXI.

The gluttonous man,

Though he may not know it,
Eats his life’s sorrow:
Lust of drink, often
Makes the fool, foolish
When he comes mid the prudent.

XXII.

The flocks they have knowledge

When to turn homeward
And leave the green pastures;
But he who is foolish
Knoweth no measure,
No bounds to his craving.

XXIII.

An evil man
And a carping temper
Jeer at all things.
He knows not;
He ought to know,
That himself is not faultless.

XXIV.

A foolish man
Lies awake the night through
And resolves on many things.
Thus is he weary
When the day cometh;
The old care remaineth.

XXV.

A foolish man
Thinks all are friendly
Who meet him with smiles;
But few he findeth
Who will aid his cause,
When to the Ting he cometh.

XXVI.

A foolish man
Thinks all are friendly
Who meet him with smiles.
Nor knows he the difference
Though they laugh him to scorn
When he sits ’mong the knowing ones.

XXVII.

A foolish man
Thinks he knows everything
While he needs not the knowledge.
But he knows not
How to make answer
When he is questioned.

XXVIII.

A foolish man,
When he comes into company
Had better keep silence.
No one remarketh
How little he knows
Till he begins talking.

XXIX.

He appears wise
Who can ask questions
And give replies.
Ever conceal then
The failings of others,
The children of men.

XXX.

Who cannot keep silence

Uttereth many
A word without purport.
The tongue of the garrulous,
Which keepeth back nothing,
Talks its own mischief.

XXXI.

Hold in derision
No one, although he
Come as a stranger.
Many a one, when he has had
Rest and dry clothing,
Thou mayest find to be wise.

XXXII.

He seemeth wise
Who in speech triumphs
O’er mocking guests.
The talkative man
Knows not at the table
If he talks with his enemies.

XXXIII.

Many are friendly

One to another;
Yet storm ariseth.
Strife will arise
For ever, if one guest
Affronteth another.

XXXIV.

Thou mayst dine early

Unless thou art going
Unto the banquet.
Sits he and flatters;
Hungry he seemeth,
Yet few things he learneth.

XXXV.

Long is the journey

To a deceitful friend
Though he dwell near thee.
But, direct lies the path
To a friend faithful,
Though he dwelleth afar off.
 XXXVI.

Do not too frequently

Unto the same place
Go as a guest.
Sweet becomes sour
When a man often sits
At other men’s tables.

XXXVII.

One good house is there

Though it be humble:
Each man is master at home.
Though a man own but
Two goats and a straw-rick,
’Tis better than begging.

XXXVIII.

One good house is there

Though it be humble:
Each man is master at home.
The man’s heart bleedeth
At every mealtime
Who his food beggeth.

XXXIX.

Without his weapon

Goes no man
A-foot in the field.
For it is unsafe
Out on the by-paths
When weapons are needful.

XL.

Never found I so generous,

So hospitable a man
As to be above taking gifts.
Nor one of his money
So little regardful
But that it vexed him to lend.

XLI.

He who has laid up

Treasures of wealth
Finds want hard to bear.
Adversity often uses
What was meant for prosperity,
For many things are contrary to expectation.

XLII.

With weapons and garments,

As best may be fitting
Give thou thy friends pleasure.
By gifts interchanged
Is friendship made surest;
If the heart proffers them.

XLIII.

Let a man towards his friend,

Ever be friendly,
And with gifts make return for gifts.
With thy cheerful friend
Be thou cheerful;
With thy guileful friend on thy guard.

XLIV.

Let a man towards his friend

Ever be friendly;
Towards him and his friend.
But with an enemy’s friend
Can no man
Be friendly.

XLV.

If thou hast a friend

Whom thou canst confide in
And wouldst have joy of his friendship,
Then, mingle thy thoughts with his,
Give gifts freely,
And often be with him.

XLVI.

If thou hast another,

Whom thou hast no faith in
Yet wouldst have joy of his friendship,
Thou must speak smoothly;
Thou must think warily,
And with cunning pay back his guile.

XLVII.

Yet one word

About him thou mistrusteth
And in whom thou hast no reliance.
Thou must speak mildly,
More so than thou meanest;
Paying back like with like.

XLVIII.

Young was I formerly;

Then alone went I,
Taking wrong ways.
Rich seemed I to myself
When I found a companion;
For man is man’s pleasure.

XLIX.

The noble, the gentle

Live happiest,
And seldom meet sorrow.
But the foolish man,
He is suspicious,
And a niggard grieves to give.

L.

I hung my garments
On the two wooden men
Who stand on the wall.
Heroes they seemed to be
When they were clothed!
The unclad are despised.

LI.

The tree withereth

Which stands in the court-yard
Without shelter of bark or of leaf.
So is a man
Destitute of friends.
Why should he still live on?
 LII.

Even as fire,
Burns peace between enemies,
For the space of five days.
But on the seventh
It is extinguished,
And the less is their friendship.

LIII.

Only a little
Will a man give;
He often gets praise for a little.
With half a loaf
And a full bottle
I won a companion.

LIV.

Small are the sand-grains,

Small are the water-drops:
Small human thoughts:
Yet are not these
Each of them equal.
Every century bears but one man.

LV.

Good understanding
Ought all to possess,—
But not too much wisdom.
Those human beings
Whose lives are the brightest,
Know much and know it well.

LVI.

Good understanding
Ought all to possess,
But not too much knowledge.
For the heart of a wise man
Seldom is gladdened
By knowledge of all things.

LVII.

Good understanding
Ought all to possess,
But not too much knowledge.
Let no one beforehand
Inquire his own fortune.
The gladdest heart knoweth it not.

LVIII.

Brand with brand burneth

Till it is burned out:
Fire is kindled by fire.
A man among men
Is known by his speech;
A fool by his arrogance.

LIX.

Betimes must he rise

Who another man’s life
And goods will obtain.
The sleeping wolf
Seldom gets bones.
No sluggard wins battle.

LX.

Betimes must he rise

And look after his people
Who has but few workmen.
Much he neglecteth
Who sleeps in the morning.
On the master’s presence depends half the profit.

LXI.

Like to dried faggots,

And hoarded up birch bark,
Are the thoughts of a man,
The substance of firewood
May last, it is true,
A year and a day.

LXII.

Cleanly and decent,

Ride men to the Ting
Although unadorned.
For his shoes and apparel
Nobody blushes,
Nor yet for his horse, though none of the best.

LXIII.

Question and answer

Is a clever thing,
And so it is reckoned.
To one person trust thyself,
Not to a second.
The world knows what is known unto three.

LXIV.

Bewilderedly gazes
On the wild sea, the eagle,
When he reaches the strand.
So is it with the man
Who in a crowd standeth
When he has but few friends there.

LXV.

Every wise man

And prudent, his power will use
With moderation.
For he will find
When he comes ’mong the brave
That none can do all things.

LXVI.

Let every man

Be prudent and circumspect
And cautious in friendship.
Often that word
Which we trust to another
Very dear costs us.

LXVII.

Greatly too early

Came I to some places;
Too late to others.
Here the feast was over;
There unprepared.
Seldom opportunely comes an unwelcome guest.