Thanks for your comments Jennifer. I wasn’t intending to use the one para from the report to support the argument that Laos should move away from agriculture (and note that my argument was about the relative size of the agricultural sector, not its absolute size). My aim was to use the short quote as a jumping off point to encourage some broader discussion about development directions for Laos. My broader point is that overcoming poverty (and food insecurity) will ultimately require the strong development of non-agricultural sectors of the economy. How can this be achieved? Do “mega projects” help move Laos in this direction?
I do not think this is similar to the Cambodia/Thai dispute where Hun Sen used national pride for his election campaign. What we’re seeing in Indonesia is more organic (coming for certain segments of society) and culture, like race and religion is very potent and defies logic.
I do hope it comes to an amicable solution. The Malaysian Foreign Minister is now in Indonesia – but not making any headway.
from my comment Aschimovv?? I’m not arguing for or against hydropower in general. I just concur with the scientific experts that Don Sahong is particularly troublesome as it is proposed in a major artery of the Mekong and the relatively small amount of electricity it will produce does not warrant massive consequences it is likely to have on those living on the Mekong. This is not due to resettlement. In fact, for Don Sahong I believe the resettlement itself will be minimal.
My statements were in response to Andrew’s claim that raised GDP will lead Laos out of poverty and this somehow warrants non-agricultural industry such as hydropower over food supply?. My critisism of his position is based on a careful reading of the World Food Programs 2007 household survey study which discusses the extraordinarily high rates of undernutrition in Laos, and the household profiles of those at highest risk of food insecurity. Fact: those who have access to wild food products are less likely to be food insecure & therefore more likely to have increased dietary intake of micronutrients (and also rice). Threats to these resources are briefly touched on in the report and one of the suggestions is to increase managed access to non-timber forest products & wild fish.
Andrew picked one paragraph of the 180 page or so report and tried to suggest it supports the an argument to move the country away from the production of agriculture. And this is somehow linked to the construction of a dam? And Don Sahong specifically? This I found a very illogical broadsweeping statement.
Gregore – it seems that politicians in both Malaysia and Indonesia have stoked up the culture war as a handy distraction to the real challenges that both countries face.
But I agree with you that it it ridiculous for the two countries to argue over what is a shared heritage.
Well I distill from above comment that every dam causes resettlement, the question is which resettlement ratio is acceptable? Is it okay if for every resettled family 10 thai households can access green water dam energy?
“A standard development position would be that poverty and food insecurity is best addressed by facilitating the movement of people and resources out of low productivity agricultural pursuits and into other forms of economic activity. Laos is moving in this direction – according to the World Bank the percentage of GDP derived from agriculture was 61 percent in 1990 and 42 percent in 2007. Over a similar period the rate of poverty is reported to have declined from 45 percent to 33 percent.”
Your statement does not support the WFP study findings you are citing. Indeed those at highest risk of food insecurity are unskilled labourers (especially those not engaged in agricultural labour) and also farmers with no access to forest products and wild fish. These were also the groups hardest hit by the 10% inflations of food prices during the recent food crisis as they are more susceptible to market shocks. Unskilled labourers because they rely on markets as their primary source of food consumption, and farmers with no access to forest products and wild fish because these products are often sold to obtain rice during seasonal rice shortages.
The study further states that large scale foreign investment schemes (and identifies hydropower specifically) need to be re-thought in light of the pressure they place on wild food sources. Access to these food sources are shown in the study to be directly correlated with food security. They are also the major source of micronutrients.
The WFP also states that (despite growth in GDP) levels of malnutrition have NOT improved over the past 10 years.
From the look of things there is good reason for the scientific experts who are contesting Don Sahong Dam specifically to do so. Where is the electricity going? What effect will it have on those downstream of the proposed site? What attempts are made to mitigate impacts on local people? are these sufficient? These are the questions I would be asking.
The WFP obviously does not address questions related to hydropower specifically but if anything it does suggest that hydropower projects need to be thought out in terms of the impact they have on food security. And if you will read the full WFP study I think you’ll see that it does give more weight to Keith’s argument.
A dark side of hereditary monarchy is the poisonous relationship that often develops between courtiers surrounding the king and those who seek future advancement by attaching themselves to his heir. Lord Hervey’s highly amusing memoirs show that George II’s courtiers were partly responsible for the bad name of his heir, Prince Frederick. Prince Vajiralongkorn’s reputation is likely to have suffered at the hands of the same experts who are orchestrating the campaign of hatred against Thaksin. I’m not saying that both them don’t have serious faults, but I’m suggesting that we should consider the likely contribution of the King’s particular hangers-on. To preserve their own power by persuading the King against what may have been his own inclination to abdicate, they are likely to have found it necessary to hammer away in private at the Crown Prince’s reputation, and to ensure that gossip and salacious material spreads to the public domain.
Chris: So why comment at all if you are just going to provide dinky comments that have been made hundreds of times before? You save some energy and time. Not sure about money.
“Pure genius, given all those jockeying for position”
Is that related to this story from the time leading up to the 2006 coup:
“In horse racing they have the stable and the owner of the stable owns the horse. The jockey comes and rides the horse during the race, but the jockey does not own the horse. It’s very easy”
I reckon its about time the jockey and the owner learned some new tricks!
Chris-please kindly shut up! Us democratic freedom loving humans are sick of relativists like you: supporting the violent repression and human rights violations that this country commits in the name of its right-wing culture and tradition like magic sacred obscenely rich who deserve a fate worse than XXXX
Its not only China- , indeed the reported contract winners are the Russians for both Burma and Bangladesh’s nuclear ambition . However, supplier is just one side of the story. The demand side is propelled by the sense of national insecurity as David has pointed out.
There is now the domino effect. I guess you will see about 70-100 countries are already openly or not so openly on this route due to post 9/11 shift of world order catapulted by Bin Laden and Bush Administration.
At issue is equality. The public mass would like their votes to be respected. With the cost-benefit reasoning, they voted for Thaksin because he had introduced income distribution which raised their standard of living. In a democratic society, we respect each individual vote. A person regardless of his/her ethnicity, race, religion, language are born equal. We must respect those who voted for Thaksin. Those who voted for Thaksin see him as an agent of change. Someone who brought job opportunities and health care to the public mass. Thaksin came from the provincial countryside of Chiangmai, that background has formed his values and worldviews, he hasn’t forgotten where he’s from. He relates to them well and ordinary people is mature to choose their own representatives.
There is no one without flawed. Killing another person is considered wrong, yet in Thailand it cannot be discussed. Thai society is currently unfair, good persons like Da Torpedo and Suwicha Takor are put in jail. There is no institutions where ordinary person could voice their grievances. The country runs on double standard. Majority of Thai people did not choose Abhisit. Abhisit’s character troubles both the elites and the public mass. After the voting episode about the appointment of the Police Chief, no one trusts Abhisit any longer. Abhisit now has not only legitimacy issue, he has integrity issue as well. The country needs change.
I think before you ask the red shirts away from Thaksin, how about asking yourself to move away from him first, is your critics aim at the coup or is it Thaskin or you couldn’t make out the difference..???
The number one issue all Thais – need to watch out for is the rise of fascism in Western countries. In eastern and western Europe, and in North America. Russia especially.
This is now getting very strong – and will certainly target Thais
for Thailand’s unfair banning foreign ownership, while the Thai elite buys up OUR land.
The current recession has made Western fascism stronger.
I suggest codify the LM laws more – i.e. making them more explicit : please give us farang a clear list of what is permissable, and what is not.
It’s now very difficult exactly what we can say and what we can not. Please – Thais – remember we are farang, and only have a poor, limited understanding of your very complex culture. We do not mean to offend.
At this very delicate and dangerous time, I don’t think we should be indulging in petty squabbles over book boosting.
Too few Thais read !!.
McCargo’s good books are among many – not least very good books by Thai authors, of which too few are translated into English.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Even more Thai ephemera
This is fascinating. Can we have a sample of text from one of them? Why did he kill his father? Why did she kill her lover? Was there a connection?
Mega projects and Lao transitions
Thanks for your comments Jennifer. I wasn’t intending to use the one para from the report to support the argument that Laos should move away from agriculture (and note that my argument was about the relative size of the agricultural sector, not its absolute size). My aim was to use the short quote as a jumping off point to encourage some broader discussion about development directions for Laos. My broader point is that overcoming poverty (and food insecurity) will ultimately require the strong development of non-agricultural sectors of the economy. How can this be achieved? Do “mega projects” help move Laos in this direction?
ASEAN fragility and Indonesia-Malaysia tensions
Hi Ben,
I don’t think SBY (or the Indonesian Government) is responsible for this.
According to Farish Noor, this culture issue is linked to the nature of past Indonesian political style. Read his views here: http://www.othermalaysia.org/2009/09/18/the-implications-of-growing-indonesian-assertiveness-on-asean/
I do not think this is similar to the Cambodia/Thai dispute where Hun Sen used national pride for his election campaign. What we’re seeing in Indonesia is more organic (coming for certain segments of society) and culture, like race and religion is very potent and defies logic.
I do hope it comes to an amicable solution. The Malaysian Foreign Minister is now in Indonesia – but not making any headway.
Even more Thai ephemera
Does Lam tat still exist? Do you know of any English literature on Lam tat?
Mega projects and Lao transitions
from my comment Aschimovv?? I’m not arguing for or against hydropower in general. I just concur with the scientific experts that Don Sahong is particularly troublesome as it is proposed in a major artery of the Mekong and the relatively small amount of electricity it will produce does not warrant massive consequences it is likely to have on those living on the Mekong. This is not due to resettlement. In fact, for Don Sahong I believe the resettlement itself will be minimal.
My statements were in response to Andrew’s claim that raised GDP will lead Laos out of poverty and this somehow warrants non-agricultural industry such as hydropower over food supply?. My critisism of his position is based on a careful reading of the World Food Programs 2007 household survey study which discusses the extraordinarily high rates of undernutrition in Laos, and the household profiles of those at highest risk of food insecurity. Fact: those who have access to wild food products are less likely to be food insecure & therefore more likely to have increased dietary intake of micronutrients (and also rice). Threats to these resources are briefly touched on in the report and one of the suggestions is to increase managed access to non-timber forest products & wild fish.
Andrew picked one paragraph of the 180 page or so report and tried to suggest it supports the an argument to move the country away from the production of agriculture. And this is somehow linked to the construction of a dam? And Don Sahong specifically? This I found a very illogical broadsweeping statement.
ASEAN fragility and Indonesia-Malaysia tensions
Gregore – it seems that politicians in both Malaysia and Indonesia have stoked up the culture war as a handy distraction to the real challenges that both countries face.
But I agree with you that it it ridiculous for the two countries to argue over what is a shared heritage.
Mega projects and Lao transitions
Well I distill from above comment that every dam causes resettlement, the question is which resettlement ratio is acceptable? Is it okay if for every resettled family 10 thai households can access green water dam energy?
Mega projects and Lao transitions
You quote:
“A standard development position would be that poverty and food insecurity is best addressed by facilitating the movement of people and resources out of low productivity agricultural pursuits and into other forms of economic activity. Laos is moving in this direction – according to the World Bank the percentage of GDP derived from agriculture was 61 percent in 1990 and 42 percent in 2007. Over a similar period the rate of poverty is reported to have declined from 45 percent to 33 percent.”
Your statement does not support the WFP study findings you are citing. Indeed those at highest risk of food insecurity are unskilled labourers (especially those not engaged in agricultural labour) and also farmers with no access to forest products and wild fish. These were also the groups hardest hit by the 10% inflations of food prices during the recent food crisis as they are more susceptible to market shocks. Unskilled labourers because they rely on markets as their primary source of food consumption, and farmers with no access to forest products and wild fish because these products are often sold to obtain rice during seasonal rice shortages.
The study further states that large scale foreign investment schemes (and identifies hydropower specifically) need to be re-thought in light of the pressure they place on wild food sources. Access to these food sources are shown in the study to be directly correlated with food security. They are also the major source of micronutrients.
The WFP also states that (despite growth in GDP) levels of malnutrition have NOT improved over the past 10 years.
From the look of things there is good reason for the scientific experts who are contesting Don Sahong Dam specifically to do so. Where is the electricity going? What effect will it have on those downstream of the proposed site? What attempts are made to mitigate impacts on local people? are these sufficient? These are the questions I would be asking.
The WFP obviously does not address questions related to hydropower specifically but if anything it does suggest that hydropower projects need to be thought out in terms of the impact they have on food security. And if you will read the full WFP study I think you’ll see that it does give more weight to Keith’s argument.
Where’s Vajiralongkorn?
A dark side of hereditary monarchy is the poisonous relationship that often develops between courtiers surrounding the king and those who seek future advancement by attaching themselves to his heir. Lord Hervey’s highly amusing memoirs show that George II’s courtiers were partly responsible for the bad name of his heir, Prince Frederick. Prince Vajiralongkorn’s reputation is likely to have suffered at the hands of the same experts who are orchestrating the campaign of hatred against Thaksin. I’m not saying that both them don’t have serious faults, but I’m suggesting that we should consider the likely contribution of the King’s particular hangers-on. To preserve their own power by persuading the King against what may have been his own inclination to abdicate, they are likely to have found it necessary to hammer away in private at the Crown Prince’s reputation, and to ensure that gossip and salacious material spreads to the public domain.
A popular queen
It would be remiss of anyone in lock-step with Thai culture not to uncritically applaud the superficial.
17 August 2009: petition day
Chris: So why comment at all if you are just going to provide dinky comments that have been made hundreds of times before? You save some energy and time. Not sure about money.
Where’s Vajiralongkorn?
Chris, I know you are lazy, but how do you know he is doing his best? And what is bigoted in the above?
17 August 2009: petition day
“Pure genius, given all those jockeying for position”
Is that related to this story from the time leading up to the 2006 coup:
“In horse racing they have the stable and the owner of the stable owns the horse. The jockey comes and rides the horse during the race, but the jockey does not own the horse. It’s very easy”
I reckon its about time the jockey and the owner learned some new tricks!
Where’s Vajiralongkorn?
Chris-please kindly shut up! Us democratic freedom loving humans are sick of relativists like you: supporting the violent repression and human rights violations that this country commits in the name of its right-wing culture and tradition like magic sacred obscenely rich who deserve a fate worse than XXXX
tata cara pilih Pasaran Judi Sbobet88 Online yg Menguntungkan
Its not only China- , indeed the reported contract winners are the Russians for both Burma and Bangladesh’s nuclear ambition . However, supplier is just one side of the story. The demand side is propelled by the sense of national insecurity as David has pointed out.
There is now the domino effect. I guess you will see about 70-100 countries are already openly or not so openly on this route due to post 9/11 shift of world order catapulted by Bin Laden and Bush Administration.
Three years on …
At issue is equality. The public mass would like their votes to be respected. With the cost-benefit reasoning, they voted for Thaksin because he had introduced income distribution which raised their standard of living. In a democratic society, we respect each individual vote. A person regardless of his/her ethnicity, race, religion, language are born equal. We must respect those who voted for Thaksin. Those who voted for Thaksin see him as an agent of change. Someone who brought job opportunities and health care to the public mass. Thaksin came from the provincial countryside of Chiangmai, that background has formed his values and worldviews, he hasn’t forgotten where he’s from. He relates to them well and ordinary people is mature to choose their own representatives.
There is no one without flawed. Killing another person is considered wrong, yet in Thailand it cannot be discussed. Thai society is currently unfair, good persons like Da Torpedo and Suwicha Takor are put in jail. There is no institutions where ordinary person could voice their grievances. The country runs on double standard. Majority of Thai people did not choose Abhisit. Abhisit’s character troubles both the elites and the public mass. After the voting episode about the appointment of the Police Chief, no one trusts Abhisit any longer. Abhisit now has not only legitimacy issue, he has integrity issue as well. The country needs change.
Three years on …
Mariner,
I think before you ask the red shirts away from Thaksin, how about asking yourself to move away from him first, is your critics aim at the coup or is it Thaskin or you couldn’t make out the difference..???
Lèse-majesté damages the monarchy and freedom
The number one issue all Thais – need to watch out for is the rise of fascism in Western countries. In eastern and western Europe, and in North America. Russia especially.
This is now getting very strong – and will certainly target Thais
for Thailand’s unfair banning foreign ownership, while the Thai elite buys up OUR land.
The current recession has made Western fascism stronger.
Lèse-majesté damages the monarchy and freedom
I suggest codify the LM laws more – i.e. making them more explicit : please give us farang a clear list of what is permissable, and what is not.
It’s now very difficult exactly what we can say and what we can not. Please – Thais – remember we are farang, and only have a poor, limited understanding of your very complex culture. We do not mean to offend.
Three years on …
At this very delicate and dangerous time, I don’t think we should be indulging in petty squabbles over book boosting.
Too few Thais read !!.
McCargo’s good books are among many – not least very good books by Thai authors, of which too few are translated into English.