NTFPs on Nakai Plate.. - TABI

5- According to a survey over 100 of 191 individual households, family economies derived
41% of their income from NTFP’s, 32% from livestock sales and 28% from other sources in
1996. They spent 65% of their income on buying rice in 1996. These data differ from the
outcome of the ranking exercise. Group discussions may underestimate the income from
livestock. At any rate NTFP’s are by far the most important source of income in all villages.
6- In a normal year like 1996, of all 191 families living in the 5 villages together, 108
families or 57 % have a positive net income, and 83 families or 43 % had a negative income
or rice shortage. Unprecedented floods destroyed most rice crops in the wet season of 1996,
therefore most families must spend their entire income on buying rice in 1997. Many families
will not be able to find enough money to satisfy their needs in rice, even though they will sell
more livestock and increase their collection of NTFP’s.
7- Income from NTFP’s is higher among wealthy families than among poor families.
However, in poor families NTFP’s are often the only source of income, as they do not have
access to other options such as livestock raising, salaries or trading (see table A).
Table A: Average family income for 1996 among all 191 families in 5 villages on the
Nakai Plateau, divided into four income groups.
Income group Richest Medium Poor Poorest TOTAL
No families 48 60 41 42 191
NTFP's 99,740 107,555 60,461 70,487 82,926
Livestock 152,220 41,500 73,462 3,900 64,914
Off-farm 164,000 23,667 37,667 4,000 56,199
GROSSVALUE 415,960 172,722 171,590 78,387 204,038
Rice* -10,939 -30,936 -232,712 -294,634 -133,519
NET VALUE 405,021 141,786 -60,273 -246,464 70,519
*) Amount of money needed to buy rice (negative values) or surplus rice sold (positive values), based on a
calculation of surpluses after family consumption, calculated as 300 kg/head/year.
This finding has important implications for the planning of all income generating and social
activities in the resettlement scheme. Poor families are the most vulnerable when access to
NTFP’s is going to be reduced by the inundation of the former collection areas by the
reservoir. Development agencies working with these families may want to develop special
measures to counterbalance such losses.
8- From the survey, kisi resin comes forward as the most important NTFP for income
generation, going up from 28% of NTFP based family income in 1996 to 56% of average
family income in 1997 (see table B). Curiously rattan shoots have come up to second place in
1997, replacing bong bark which has been greatly reduced. Rattan canes have all but
disappeared, cardamom remains stable. Most of these products are sold through Takhek, the
Provincial capital, except for rattan canes which are mainly exported to Vietnam via Laksao.
9- Villagers estimate that 60 % of NTFP’s are collected from streams, ponds, paddy fields,
grass fields, and fallow fields, which are not strictly forest areas. These areas are likely to be
mostly situated within the inundation zone. Only 25 % was said to be derived from evergreen
forest and mountains. Only 16 % of all NTFP’s are said to be derived from the proposed
resettlement area, called “pa kok” by villagers. It is also remarkable that little difference in
opinion was found between groups of men and women on this issue.