Skip to main content

Rehabilitation of degraded forests in Thailand: policy and practice


Thailand has suffered from severe deforestation during the last century. Forest cover has declined drastically both in terms of area and quality, mostly due to the expansion of human activities. Much of the deforested area has been used for agricultural purposes, but much has also been left in a degraded condition. In late 1980s, the forest declined to a point where the nation decided that the remaining forest should be kept for conservation rather than further exploitation. Consequently, forest policy has shifted its focus from exploitation to sustainable management and protection. Thailand has set a goal of increasing its forest area to 40% of the total land area, while at present, forests occupy around 28.9% of the land. With the intention to retain most of the remaining forest as protected areas and, at the same time, achieve the goal set, several reforestation and rehabilitation initiatives have been implemented, especially on those lands in a degraded condition. This paper focuses on the significant issues affecting both the policy and practice of forest rehabilitation. Given that the large number of people whose livelihood depends on the forests for subsistence and other purposes normally has been excluded from the decision-making process in forest management, most important among these issues are the integration of the socio-economic and environmental needs into rehabilitation initiatives together with the active participation of local communities in the rehabilitation program. Case studies of reforestation and rehabilitation initiatives are also discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.


  • Blakesley D, Elliott S (undated) Thailand, restoration of seasonally dry tropical forest using the framework species method. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC), UK

  • Elliott S, Blakesley D, Anusarnsunthorn V (eds) (1998) Forest for the future: Growing and planting native trees for restoring forest ecosystems. Forest Restoration Research Unit, Chiang Mai University

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1998) Asia-Pacific forestry towards 2010. Report of the Asia-Pacific forestry sector outlook study. Forestry Policy and Planning Division, Rome; Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (1999) FAO Forestry Profile—Thailand. FAO, Bangkok

  • Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) (2005) State of the World’s Forest. FAO, Rome

  • Gilmore DA, Nguyen VS, Xiong T (2000) Rehabilitation of degraded forest ecosystems in Cambodia, Lao PDR, Thailand and Vietnam: an overview. IUCN, Thailand

  • Kanjan C, Kaewchote J (2004) Communities for watershed protection—Mae Khan, Thailand. In: Poffenberger and Smith-Hanssen (eds) Community forest management trends in South East Asia. Asia Forest Network, Bohol

  • Lamb D (1999) Overcoming tropical forest degradation: whether to plant many species or just many seedlings. Report from the workshop on Forest Rehabilitation Policy and Practice in Thailand 24–25 November, 1999, Bangkok

  • Makarabhirom P (1998) A study on contract tree farming in Thailand. PhD dissertation, The University of Tsukuba with the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science

  • Maneekul R, Traynor CH, Jintana V, Wichawutipong J (2002) The community forest establishment process: a case study of Tho Saman Village, Song Watershed, Phrae Province, Northern Thailand. In: Joint Interdisciplinary Research Project #1: Song Watershed. TUCED-SLUSE, Thailand

  • Markopoulos DM (2003) The role of standards-based approaches in community forestry development: findings from two case studies in Southeast Asia. RECOFTC Working Paper 2/2003, Bangkok

  • Mingsarn K, Pednekar SS, Christensen SR, Aksornwong K, Rala AB (1995) Natural resource management in Mainland SE Asia. Thailand Development Research Institute

  • Niskanen A (1998) Financial and economic profitability of reforestation in Thailand. Forest Ecol Manage 104:57–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagdee A (2006) Thailand’s community forests: current status and contributions to sustainable development. In: Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Development conference (TISD2006). Faculty of Engineering, Khon Kaen University, Thailand, 25–26 January 2006

  • Prabhu R, Colfer C, Shepherd G (1998) Criteria and indicators for sustainable forest management: new findings from CIFOR’s Forest Management Unit Level Research. Rural Development Forestry Network Paper 23a

  • Pragtong K, Thomas DE (1990) Evolving management systems in Thailand. In: Poffenberger M (eds) Keepers of the forest: land management alternatives in Southeast Asia. Kumarian Press, West Hartford, pp 167–186

    Google Scholar 

  • Royal Forest Department (RFD) (2004) Forestry statistics of Thailand. RFD, Information Office, Bangkok

  • Royal Forest Department (RFD) (2005) National report to the fifth session of the United Nations Forum on Forests, Bangkok

  • Shimamoto M, Ubukata F, Seki Y (2004) Forest sustainability and the free trade of forest products: cases from Southeast Asia. Ecol Econ 50:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ubukata F, Jamroenpruksa M (1997) Socioeconomic analysis of farmer’s motivation for tree planting in farmland: a case study in Hua Na Kham village, northeastern Thailand. Thai J For 16:151–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Uthaiwan S (1995) Caring for the forest: Research in a changing world. At the XX World Congress for International Union of Forest Research Organizations

Download references


This research was supported by the 21st Century Center of Excellence (COE) Program, Social Capacity Development for Environmental Management and International Cooperation at Hiroshima University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alice Sharp.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sharp, A., Nakagoshi, N. Rehabilitation of degraded forests in Thailand: policy and practice. Landscape Ecol Eng 2, 139–146 (2006).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: