Northern Scientific Knowledge and Indigenous Knowledge

Abstract

This chapter features three planning proposals focused on the ideological friction between Northern scientific knowledge and indigenous knowledge. Northern scientific knowledge has enabled and legitimized various territorialization projects since the establishment of the Lao PDR. Over the past decade, the application of such knowledge has diversified and expanded along with Laos’s increasing integration into the socio-economic geography of the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor. Unlike World Bank-funded green-neoliberal development that dominated Laos in the 1990s and 2000s, some China-funded projects are furthering the green neoliberal valuation of ecosystems in monetary terms and these ecosystems’ conservation by means of market dynamics. These ecosystem territories inevitably overlap with the country’s indigenous territories and their natural resource-dependent communities. The three planning proposals featured in this chapter foreground Laos’s remarkable human diversity and local communities’ valuable traditional ecological knowledge and practices. These planning proposals are situated in a diverse range of socio-ecological contexts, namely Nam Ha National Protected Area, a protected forest in Luang Prabang, and agricultural land within the capital Vientiane. Collectively, these proposals focus on agrarian populations influenced by old or new forms of land enclosure, investigating possible scenarios that may lead to more equal power relationships between the scientific and indigenous knowledge regimes.

1 Introduction

Drawing from discourses of the “politics of land-use planning” and “sustainable development paradigm” examined in Chap. 4, this chapter features three strategic planning proposals focused on the ideological and practical frictions between Northern scientific knowledge and indigenous knowledge.

Northern scientific knowledge has enabled and legitimized various territorialization projects since the establishment of the Lao PDR through the environmentally deterministic classification and representation of diverse peoples and their landscapes (Goldman, 2001). These territorialization projects fall into three main paradigms of land governance in Laos. Firstly, nationwide agro-ecological assessments were carried out in the 1970s to identify “land development potential.” Secondly, land zoning, land‐use classification and land reallocation programs since the early 1990s facilitated a “rationalization” of land use in the name of “sustainable development.” Thirdly, a National Land Titling Program was initiated in the late 1990s to identify “unutilized” or “underutilized” land suitable for large-scale concessions driven by the national strategy dubbed “Turning Land into Capital” (Lestrelin et al., 2012).

Over the past decade, the application of Northern scientific knowledge has diversified and expanded along with Laos’s increasing integration into the socio-economic geography of the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor (Figs. 1, 2, 3 and 4).¹ In addition to the construction of large-scale infrastructure projects intended to improve physical connectivity across national borders, novel scientific programs and knowledge exchange networks are being established or strengthened to facilitate transnational research initiatives. Laos, as one of the most ecologically diverse yet least explored centers of biodiversity in Indochina, is becoming a scientific frontier for research into biodiversity and ecosystem services. Unlike World Bank-funded green-neoliberal development that dominated Laos in the 1990s and 2000s, some China-funded projects are furthering the green neoliberal valuation of ecosystems, and their “services” to humans, in monetary terms and these ecosystems’ conservation by means of market dynamics (See, for example, d’Amato et al., 2016; Jiang, 2017; He, 2020).

These ecosystem territories inevitably overlap with the country’s indigenous territories and their natural resource-dependent communities. The population of Laos is overwhelmingly rural, with its “ethnic minorities,” as the Laos government does not use the term indigenous, constituting about 40% of the total population and heavily reliant on mixed subsistence and semi-subsistence agriculture (Hodgdon, 2010). With this in mind, this chapter features three strategic planning proposals: Scientific stewardship: Indigenous and ecosystem territories across the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor; Empowering a labor transition during enclosure and securitization of Luang Prabang’s natural heritage; and Clean versus organic: Strategic agricultural enterprises for Vientiane under rural–urban migration. These three proposals foreground Laos’s remarkable human diversity and local communities’ valuable traditional ecological knowledge and practices. These planning proposals are situated in a diverse range of socio-ecological contexts, namely: northwestern Laos’s Nam Ha National Protected Area; a protected forest outside of Luang Prabang city; and agricultural land within the capital Vientiane. Collectively, they focus on agrarian populations influenced by old or new forms of land enclosure, investigating possible scenarios that may lead to more equal power relationships between the scientific and indigenous knowledge regimes. These projects acknowledge indigenous communities’ synthesized knowledge systems, intimate knowledge of seasonal cycles and ecological processes, and management of bio-cultural diversity as critical national assets supporting social and ecological resilience and advocate for their recognition and safeguarding.

Fig. 1

Sun bears rescued from the bear trade in Laos at the newly opened Luang Prabang Wildlife Sanctuary. The facility, which is not open to the public and includes a wildlife hospital, complements a largely tourism-funded sister project near Luang Prabang’s most popular waterfall. Photo by Brian Cheang (March, 2019)

Fig. 2

Laos’s first wildlife sanctuary opened in 2019 in Luang Prabang on the site of a former coffee plantation. The 24+ ha facility rehabilitates animals captured from the illegal wildlife trade, including the largest ever seizure of red pandas from Boten Special Economic Zone on the China-Laos border. Photo by Xiaoxuan Lu (March, 2019)

Fig. 3

In Vientiane, Panyanivej Organic Farm’s director walks towards a new highway that bisects the property, formerly promoting integrated rice-based farming systems before the site’s hydrology was disrupted. Photo by Angel Wong Wing Yin (March, 2019)

Fig. 4

A highway, crossing largely disused farmland, under construction in Vientiane linking the capital’s airport to a planned station on the China-Laos Railway. Panyanivej Organic Farm, a social enterprise formerly part of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC), Laos’s oldest but politically accosted civil society organization focused on sustainable development, is bisected by the highway yet continues operation. Photo by Xiaoxuan Lu (March, 2019)

2 Scientific Stewardship: Indigenous and Ecosystem Territories Across the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor

Given the increasing transnational flow of knowledge and expertise along the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor (CICPEC), an imagined socio-economic geography initiated in 2010 and subsequently incorporated into the Belt and Road Initiative, this project focuses specifically on the interaction between scientific and traditional ecological knowledge and posits possible scenarios that could secure local communities’ customary land rights while enabling their equal participation in the ongoing re-territorialization along CICPEC, particularly in Laos.

The current socio-ecological landscape of the Lao PDR has been shaped by various forms of territorialization projects since the establishment of the country in 1975. Through land-use planning, specific socioenvironmental perspectives and values are and have been projected onto the territory, consequently legitimizing the inclusion of certain forms of activities and the exclusion of others within these plans’ demarcated boundaries (Lestrelin et al., 2012). In addition to earlier forms of territorial enclosure, such as protected areas and economic concessions that have effectively excluded local communities from their customary land, the establishment of experimental plots for scientific research emerged recently, fueled by global research trends in studying ecosystem dynamics and services. Focusing on the Chinese Academy of Science (CAS) and Chinese Academy of Forestry (CAF), two “scientific giants” in the field of ecology rapidly expanding their projects across CICPEC, this proposal reveals the conflicts embedded in their existing projects and provides alternative visions on the creation, operation and management of future scientific projects (Fig. 5).

This proposal first critically analyzes two existing projects, one by CAS in Yunnan and the other by CAF in northern Laos, with particular emphasis on these projects’ participatory components. Although preexisting local uses of forest land (e.g., for hunting and mushroom foraging) are strictly forbidden within CAS’s experimental plot at the Bubeng Field Station in Mengla, Yunnan, local villagers are periodically hired by CAS as consultants given their incomparable ecological knowledge about the site, where subsistence practices had long been carried out, for locating and installing scientific devices such as camera traps (Fig. 6).² For a community forest project at NamKaeNoy Village in Luang Namtha, the zoning plan and planting plan created by CAF, in collaboration with the provincial planning institute, helped attract and secure funding for the project. However, as will all community forest programs, the project’s implementation and effectiveness for conservation are contingent on the participation of the local communities who are expected to perform the majority of the planting and maintenance work, in this case on northern Laos’s challenging terrain (Fig. 7).³

Based on insights drawn from these two case studies, this strategic planning proposal constructs a set of alternative scenarios characterized by more inclusive and equal forms of community participation on sites where indigenous and ecosystem territories overlap. Although CAS and CAF have not yet implemented projects collaboratively in Laos, this work speculates on the establishment of joint experimental plots by CAS and CAF, given their common interest in ecosystem services as well as their similar regional geographic interests as revealed in their plans for research site expansion along CICPEC (Fig. 8) (See, for example, APFNet, 2012; Xishuangbanna Tropical Botanical Garden, 2018). Two types of scientific research, one focusing on leaf litter decomposition and the other on medicinal plant species and which involve community forest programs as their key components, are hypothesized in scenarios on sites within the Nam Ha National Protected Area in northern Laos bordering Yunnan (Figs. 9, 10 and 11). In both scenarios, formal land tenure protections may be granted to villagers to increase their incentive for participating in community forest programs. Moreover, the site selection criteria are not only limited to those that help maximize scientific research outputs but also include factors that contribute to the capacity building of villages within or adjacent to the project areas. Furthermore, the viable operation and management of the experimental plots depend equally on the protection and mobilization of indigenous knowledge of local flora and fauna and the introduction and utilization of scientific knowledge that turn collected data into research output to draw the funding that sustains the project (Figs. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22).

The unprecedented scale and speed of transnationalization and re-territorialization along CICPEC initiated by science institutions makes necessary the meaningful inclusion of the knowledge of indigenous populations who have long practiced ecological stewardship of the region. This proposal envisions the emergence of a more complementary scientific stewardship that facilitates a bidirectional dependency and benefit-sharing capable of sustaining local practices, increasing local community sovereignty, facilitating access to education, healthcare and diversified economies, and enforcing or requiring layers of cultural meaning in natural science projects.

The design proposal “Scientific stewardship: Indigenous and ecosystem territories across the China-Indochina Peninsula Economic Corridor” and accompanying illustrations were developed by Michelle Chan Syl Yeng and Sammi Wong Wae Ki during the course Studio Laos: Strategic Landscape Planning for the Greater Mekong.

Fig. 5

Timeline showing the formation of relations between Laos and two Chinese “scientific giants,” namely the Chinese Academy of Science and Chinese Academy of Forestry, within the context of land-use planning and policies in Laos

Fig. 6

At the Bubeng Field Station experimental forest research plot of Chinese Academy of Science in Mengla, Yunnan, local villagers are periodically hired as consultants given their incomparable ecological knowledge about the site for locating and installing scientific devices such as camera traps

Fig. 7

At the NamKaeNoy village community forest in Luang Namtha in northern Laos (an initiative of Chinese Academy of Forestry in collaboration with the Provincial Planning Institute), the community forest’s implementation and conservation effectives are contingent on the participation of the village

Fig. 8

Transnational flow of knowledge and expertise along the Indochina Peninsula. This strategic planning proposal establishes joint experimental plots by the Chinese Academy of Science and Chinese Academy of Forestry, given their common interest in ecosystem services and their similar regional geographic interest as revealed in their plans for research site expansion

Fig. 9

Discourse assembly based on a collection of critical literature on environmental governance and forest management in Laos

Fig. 10

Examples of existing research on ecosystems and carbon flows and ethnobotanical research on medicinal plants, the respective focus of two scenarios explored in this strategic planning proposal

Fig. 11

Visions and components of the proposed landscape design and planning intervention, identified through a comparative analysis of the respective goals and visions of the Chinese Academy of Science and Chinese Academy of Forestry

Fig. 12

Scenario One explores the establishment of joint experimental plots by the Chinese Academy of Science and Chinese Academy of Forestry within Laos’s Nam Ha National Protected Area, where the scientific research on leaf litter decomposition is implemented

Fig. 13

Roles of different agencies and individuals involved in the establishment and management of the experimental forest plots

Fig. 14

Community forestry as a critical component of these new cultural-technological experimental forest plots

Fig. 15

Proposed phasing strategy showing the implementation of experimental forest plots over the next 20 years

Fig. 16

Proposed community forest project conducted in Phase One of experimental forest plot implementation

Fig. 17

Scenario Two explores the establishment of joint experimental forest plots by Chinese Academy of Science and Chinese Academy of Forestry within Laos’s Nam Ha National Protected Area, where the scientific research on medicinal plant species is implemented

Fig. 18

Phasing strategy showing the implementation of experimental forest plots over the next 10 years

Fig. 19

Negotiation at various levels and scales are required prior to proposal implementation

Fig. 20

According to the Lao government’s classification of pharmaceutical species, the planting scheme of medicinal species is developed and refined by sampling those species that are ecologically fit for the Nam Ha National Protected Area

Fig. 21

Community forestry as a critical component of these new cultural-technological experimental forest plots

Fig. 22

The viable operation and management of these experimental forest plots depend equally on the protection and mobilization of indigenous knowledge of local flora and fauna and the introduction and utilization of scientific knowledge that transform collected data into research output that draws funding for sustaining the project

3 Empowering a Labor Transition During Enclosure and Securitization of Luang Prabang’s Natural Heritage

In response to the rapid expansion of various forms of commodification and enclosure of natural heritage in Luang Prabang, this proposal foregrounds issues related to the integration of local populations into the wage-labor economy and explores an alternative model of conservation and development that empowers, with emancipatory and social-choice principles, a labor transition with socioecological benefits. The study and proposal area encompasses villages in close proximity to the Luang Prabang Wildlife Sanctuary (LPWLS) and situated between the planned Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone (LPSEZ) and a 34,000-ha protected forest.

This proposal first critically reflects on the existing models of development enclaves (e.g., special economic zones, industrial zones) and conservation forests (e.g., protected areas, protected forests) in Laos to underscore Luang Prabang’s position as one that not only possesses the country’s largest SEZs under planning⁴ but also as one of Laos’s wildlife trade hotspots–a critical site for combatting wildlife trafficking (Figs. 23 and 24) (Davis & Glikman, 2020). Occupying 4,850 ha of land with a concession lease duration of 99 years and located immediately adjacent to the buffer zone of UNESCO’s Luang Prabang World Heritage Site property, the LPSEZ is expected to start construction after the completion of the China-Laos Railway in 2021. Despite its promises to generate job opportunities for local people, the SEZ is following similar models of urban development and enclosure that dispossess the local population while simultaneously integrating them with few alternatives into wage-labor markets. In addition, the LPSEZ along with the opening of the China-Laos Railway are expected to exacerbate pressures on local conservation practices. For example, the operators of the LPWLS, which is located three kilometers to the south of the LPSEZ’s “S3” zone, are concerned with the limited capacity of their facilities to handle the impacts of rapid development in the region. Established in 2017 as Laos’s first wildlife sanctuary and hospital, the 6.6-ha LPWLS houses over 55 rescued sun bears and moon bears as of 2019 and is considering releasing rehabilitated bears into the wild for conservation due to the foreseeable growth of wildlife poaching and trafficking induced by improved transnational connectivity and, correspondingly, the increasing seizures and pressures on the sanctuary’s physical capacity.⁵

To tackle these challenges, this proposal identifies the nearby 34,000-ha protected forest, which is fundamentally a “paper park” due to its lack of on-the-ground management, as a potential site for carrying out a bear-releasing scheme. Unfortunately, such a scheme will likely be hindered by an existing contested relationship with adjacent communities who actively use bear parts for traditional medicine (Fig. 25) (Sukanan & Anthony, 2019). Similar to other protected areas in Laos, the establishment of this protected forest must contend with the exclusion of customary land uses, such as dry-rice cultivation and forest foraging (Goldman, 2005; Lestrelin et al., 2012). Even until today, the boundary between the control use zone and the total protection zone of the protected forest is disputed. Acknowledging these challenges, this proposal offers a bear-releasing scheme as an opportunity to reconfigure the relationship between the LPWLS, protected forest and local communities. This reconfiguration has two main objectives. First, the labor demand associated with forest protection for bear conservation offers local communities alternatives to working for the LPSEZ, particularly under an ongoing labor transition across the region. Second, conserving the protected forest for bear releasing challenges the existing narrowly scoped forest protection model characterized by a top-down, overly securitized approach and advocates an alternative conservation model in Laos that is nature-sensitive and equitable.

In this proposal, local communities from five nearby villages become key players in the implementation of the LPWLS’s future bear-releasing scheme at the protected forest (Figs. 26 and 27). Three strategies centered on community engagement are proposed, namely (1) reforestation for buffer zone establishment and bear habitat restoration, (2) patrolling and site-based conservation activities, and (3) ecotourism and related low-impact tourism activities. Levels of community engagement are quantified through the detailed calculation of dynamic labor demand at the LPSEZ and protected forest in relation to seasonality in near and long terms (Figs. 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 and 34). Five scenarios are outlined using these strategies, where each scenario is characterized by different speeds and scales of strategy implementation and consequent bear-releasing capacity (Figs. 35, 36 and 37). In addition to promoting more voluntary, equal forms of labor transition, detailed design interventions such as planting schemes and phasing schemes tackle issues such as human-wildlife conflicts, risks and potential for bear release, and ethical use of state-of-the-art technologies in conservation. Stressing ethical and critical use of such technologies is important given the increasing militarization of such technologies in conservation practices around the world (Adams, 2019).

Ultimately, this proposal strengthens local communities’ sense of meaningful involvement and responsibility in conservation while protecting and motivating their rich knowledge of the local landscape. This is incredibly important given ongoing, rapidly advancing neoliberal modes of nature commodification and securitization. The value of Luang Prabang’s natural heritage must be planned and defined in excess of the economy-driven SEZ or the ecology-driven protected forest.

The design proposal “Empowering a labor transition during enclosure and securitization of Luang Prabang’s natural heritage” and accompanying illustrations were developed by Rachel Ma On Ki and Haven Lee Chi Hang during the course Studio Laos: Strategic Landscape Planning for the Greater Mekong.

Fig. 23

Encroachment of Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone on a 34,000-ha protected forest outside Luang Prabang town and the limited capacity of Luang Prabang Wildlife Sanctuary to handle new rescued wildlife from the increasing illegal trade

Fig. 24

Regional forces and impacts on a 34,000-ha protected forest outside Luang Prabang town. Luang Prabang possesses one of the country’s largest special economic zones, and it has become one of Laos’s wildlife trade hotspots and a crucial site for combatting wildlife trafficking

Fig. 25

This strategic planning proposal focuses on five villages located in areas adjacent to the Luang Prabang Wildlife Sanctuary and situated between the planned Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone and a 34,000-ha protected forest

Fig. 26

Comparison of labor demand and financial incentives between Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone and the proposed agroforestry and conservation management scheme for the protected forest

Fig. 27

Reforestation for buffer zone establishment and bear habitat restoration at a 34,000-ha protected forest outside Luang Prabang, which has been selected as a potential site for a bear-releasing scheme

Fig. 28

The successful implementation of the proposed bear-releasing scheme in the protected forest depends strongly on collaboration with local communities and their support for the initiative

Fig. 29

Planting scheme and implementation scenarios of pilot site reforestation

Fig. 30

Bear territory and seasonal migration patterns. Luang Prabang’s protected forest is degraded and needs to be reforested in order to establish a buffer zone and restore bear habitat

Fig. 31

Procedures and challenges of rehabilitation and reintroduction of captive-reared bears

Fig. 32

The successful implementation of the bear-releasing scheme at Luang Prabang’s protected forest depends strongly on the participation and patrolling effort of individuals from the local villages

Fig. 33

Patrol route planning and strategic, ethical application of artificial intelligence technology in conservation, which is important given the increasing militarization of such technologies in conservation practices around the world

Fig. 34

Three patrol schemes are outlined corresponding to the availability of labor, degree of artificial intelligence utilization, and demand of ecotourism activities at Luang Prabang’s protected forest

Fig. 35

Five scenarios are outlined to empower a labor transition with socioecological benefits. Each scenario is characterized by different speeds and scales of strategy implementation and consequent bear-releasing capacity at Luang Prabang’s protected forest

Fig. 36

In Scenario One (top), 55% of the working population will participate in the scheme, and 15,000 ha of the forest will be regenerated in 50 years. In Scenario Three (middle), only 30% of the working population is assumed to willingly participate in the scheme, and 5,000 ha of the forest will be regenerated in 50 years. In Scenario Five (bottom), most of the villagers may eventually decide to work in the Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone, and none of the working population will participate in the community involvement program for forest regeneration

Fig. 37

In the first five to 10 years of proposal implementation, Scenario One is likely to happen given the uncertainty of the construction and opening of the Luang Prabang Special Economic Zone (SEZ). After the first decade of project implementation, Scenario Three is likely to happen, and local communities are expected to participate in the planting and patrolling schemes while seeking seasonal employment opportunities at the SEZ. Ultimately, this project introduces flexible strategies that enhance the communities’ freedom of choice

4 Clean Versus Organic: Strategic Agricultural Enterprises for Vientiane Under Rural–Urban Migration

This proposal advocates the establishment of new agricultural enterprises in Vientiane, Laos’s national capital, which is undergoing rapid rural–urban transformation and situated at the receiving end of nationwide rural–urban migration of the past two decades. Specifically, this proposal promotes sustainable agricultural practices that are “clean” rather than “organic” within the specific socioeconomic context of Laos (Fig. 38).

The increasingly mainstream organic agricultural practice, which emerged due to the growth of ethical consumerism in developed countries, may not be a suitable model for Laos.⁶ Organic agriculture criticizes negative socio-environmental impacts of industrial agriculture and advocates reciprocity and justice (Clarke, 2008). Nevertheless, this practice is tightly associated with capitalist agriculture and often excludes alternative agricultural practices that are otherwise socially, ethically, and environmentally responsible but that remain outside the government certification system, largely for political-economic reasons (Moberg, 2014; Schreer & Padmanabhan, 2019). In Laos, institutional infrastructure supporting organic agriculture has been established since the early 2000s, with a state certification body formed in 2005 (UNCTAD, 2012). In contrast to organic agriculture, this strategic planning proposal promotes clean agriculture based on the following two premises. First, acknowledging that farmers possess irreplaceable and incomparable knowledge about their land and practices, clean agriculture is built on trust and peer-group assessment as an alternative to government certification. Second, understanding that most land in rapidly urbanizing Vientiane has been polluted to various degrees, clean agriculture promotes the improvement of degraded land via agricultural practices rather than mandating organically certified products grown on pollutant-free land (Figs. 39, 40 and 41).

This proposal pays tribute to and draws inspiration from the practice of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC), an indigenous, all-Lao organization founded in 1996 to promote “education for sustainable development” (PADETC, 2012). Through detailed analysis of two of PADETC’s development learning centers and networks in Vientiane, namely Panyanivej Eco-Rice Fish Farm and Suanmailao Eco-Forest Learning Center, this proposal recognizes both the value of PADETC’s participatory operational frameworks and the ever-intensifying challenges to advocate for sustainable development in Laos. These challenges include the recently constructed highway, which links the Wattay International Airport and Vientiane station of the China-Laos Railway and that bisected Panyanivej Farm and destroyed its primary irrigation source, and the Saysettha Special Economic Zone (SEZ), which expropriated the Suanmailao Eco-Forest within its development zone (Figs. 42 and 43). In addition to the fact that the expansion of development projects has physically impaired and spatially constrained the much-needed programs and facilities of these social enterprises, Vientiane faces increasing social issues related to the influx of young rural–urban migrants from diverse regions of the country who are in search of better employment opportunities.⁷

Given all of these challenges, this proposal foregrounds the importance of securing agricultural land for sustainable practices in rapidly urbanizing Vientiane, on the one hand, and preserving indigenous agricultural and environmental knowledge for rural–urban migrants on the other. While domestic NGOs such as PADETC and other social enterprises try to expand their influence by establishing education centers in various parts of the country, this proposal takes a reversed approach by motivating young migrants in Vientiane to participate in agricultural knowledge production and exchange programs. Specifically, this proposal takes advantage of young migrants’ transitional periods, which average between three and 12 months starting from their arrival in the city and securing of employment, offering short-term job opportunities and accommodation.

Agricultural land along the Houay Makhiao River connecting the former That Luang Marsh and the Mekong River is identified as a hypothetical site to set up a network of community-based platforms promoting knowledge exchange and “clean” agricultural practices (Figs. 44, 45 and 46). With the That Luang Marsh, once Vientiane’s largest wetland (Gerrard, 2005, p. 5), recently subsumed into That Luang Lake SEZ, this proposal also functions as a strategy to resist further urban expansion along the Houay Makhiao River by transforming the land into a crucial piece of agricultural and educational infrastructure with both local and national significance. Three categories of existing livelihood dependency (i.e., high, medium, and low) on the Houay Makhiao River are identified and three out of the seven villages along the river are selected as sites for scenario-building (Figs. 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 and 55). An operational matrix is suggested that pairs up particular sets of agricultural practices and knowledge with these sites as characterized by levels of land degradation, water pollution and land and water availability.

Recognition the social and ecological impacts from the unprecedented speed and scale of rural–urban transformation in Laos, this proposal promotes a Lao-specific sustainable model that improves food security, knowledge resilience and socio-environmental justice.

The design proposal “Clean versus organic: Strategic agricultural enterprises for Vientiane under rural–urban migration” and accompanying illustrations were developed by Cynthia Chan Sze Wai, Micky Lo Sheung Miu, and Theo Sham Chi Chung during the course Studio Laos: Strategic Landscape Planning for the Greater Mekong.

Fig. 38

Comparison of trust-based clean agriculture and certificate-based organic agriculture models. Given the specific socioeconomic context of Laos, this proposal promotes clean agriculture that acknowledges the farmers’ irreplaceable and incomparable knowledge about their land and practices and promotes the improvement of degraded land through agricultural activities

Fig. 39

Rural–urban migrants newly arrived at Vientiane, Laos’s national capital, carry region-specific indigenous knowledge, including agricultural, forestry, livestock, handicraft and architectural

Fig. 40

Hydrological system of Vientiane in 1995 (top) and 2010 (bottom). Rapid urbanization leads to changes in the quantity, type and spatial patterns of land use and radically transforms the hydrological system of Vientiane Prefecture

Fig. 41

Hydrological system of Vientiane in 2020. Enclosure and urbanization processes, particularly the establishment of five special economic zones in Vientiane over the past decade, have significantly decreased the availability of agricultural land and the viability of smallholder agricultural practices

Fig. 42

Case Study One: Panyanivej Learning Centre of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC). The recently constructed highway linking the Wattay International Airport and the Vientiane station of the China-Laos Railway has bisected Panyanivej Farm and destroyed its primary irrigation source

Fig. 43

Case Study Two: Suanmailao Eco-Forest Learning Center of the Participatory Development Training Centre (PADETC). The Saysettha Special Economic Zone has completely expropriated the Suanmailao Eco-Forest within its boundary

Fig. 44

Proposed sites for the establishment of agricultural enterprises in Vientiane. With the That Luang Marsh (Vientiane’s largest wetland) recently subsumed within the That Luang Lake Special Economic Zone, strategic proposal sites have been selected to further counter the urban expansion along Houay Makhiao River by transforming the land into crucial sites of agricultural and educational infrastructure

Fig. 45

Comparison of past and current sections of That Luang Marsh and Houay Makhiao River, highlighting major events since 1995 that have transformed the land use and hydrological condition in the basin

Fig. 46

Comparison of water needs of four major cash crops suitable for the site

Fig. 47

Site plan of Ban Xamkhe village and proposed development model A: eco-agriculture

Fig. 48

Development phases of proposed eco-agriculture introduced to Ban Xamhe village

Fig. 49

Illustrative view of eco fish-rice farm at Ban Xamhe village

Fig. 50

Site plan of Ban Nano village and proposed development model B: conservation agriculture

Fig. 51

Development phases of proposed conservation agriculture introduced to Ban Nano village

Fig. 52

Illustrative view of conservation farm at Ban Nano village

Fig. 53

Site plan of Ban Makhiao village and proposed development model C: self-sufficient agriculture

Fig. 54

Development phases of proposed self-sufficient agriculture introduced to Ban Makhiao village

Fig. 55

Illustrative view of self-sufficient farm at Ban Makhiao village