Swidden Transformations and Rural Livelihoods in Southeast Asia

• DOI: 10.1007/s10745-009-9241-6
• Publication Date: 2009-05-27T09:28:25Z
• Authors: R. A. Cramb; Carol J. Pierce C...; Wolfram Dressler; Pinkaew Laungaramsri; Quang Trang Le; Elok Mulyoutami; Nancy L. Peluso; Reed L. Wadley
• Keywords: 910; livelihoods; 01 natural sciences; 12. Responsible consumption; Livelihood strategies; C1; agricultural development; 11. Sustainability; 0105 earth and related environmental sciences; 2. Zero hunger; Agrarian change; 160804 Rural Sociology; Uplands; 919999 Economic Framework not elsewhere classified; upland areas; 1. No poverty; 1601 Anthropology; 160499 Human Geography not elsewhere classified; Food security; food security; Resource tenure; 15. Life on land; Agency; governance; 970116 Expanding Knowledge through Studies of Human Society

This paper explores the major interactions between the transformation of swidden farming and the pursuit of rural livelihoods in the uplands of Southeast Asia. The paper draws on selected literature, workshop reflections, and six case studies to describe the causal processes and livelihood consequences of swidden change. Household-level livelihood responses have included both the intensification and ‘dis-intensification’ of swidden land-use, the insertion of cash crops, the redeployment of household labour, and the taking on of broader (often non-rural) livelihood aspirations and strategies. At the community level there have been emerging institutional arrangements for management of land and forests, and varying degrees of participation in or resistance to government schemes and programs. Swidden change has led to the loss and also the reassertion, realignment, and redefinition of cultures and identities, with important implications for access to resources. The impacts of these changes have been varied. Cash crops have often improved livelihoods but complete specialisation for the market increases vulnerability. Thus swidden can still provide an important safety net in the face of market fluctuations. Improved access to markets and social provision of education and health care have mostly improved the welfare of previously isolated groups. However, growing differences within and between communities in the course of swidden transformations can leave some groups marginalized and worse off. These processes of differentiation can be accentuated by heavy-handed state interventions based on swidden stereotypes. Nevertheless, communities have not passively accepted these pressures and have mobilized to protect their livelihood assets and strategies. Thus swidden farmers are not resisting appropriate and supportive forms of development. They are adopting new practices and engaging with markets, but in many situations swidden is still important to their livelihood strategies, providing resilience in the face of turbulent change. Active involvement of local people is essential in planning, implementing, monitoring and evaluating development and conservation programs in swidden lands. Positive market incentives and supportive government policies are better than standardised, top-down directives.