Olivier Joffre from WorldFish presents on hydropower development in Lao PDR (Mekong Basin) and how that is affecting local livelihoods and adaptation. Find out more about what WLE/CPWF is doing in the Mekong: http://bit.ly/SzaOGi

1. Hydropower development
and local livelihood adaptation:
a longitudinal case study in Lao PDR
Olivier Joffre and Yumiko Kura
Resilience 2014, Montpellier 8th Mai 2014

2. Water Resource Development in the
Lower Mekong Basin
• Trans-boundary river system over the
territories of six countries: Myanmar,
Cambodia, China (Yunnan Province), Lao
PDR, Thailand, and Vietnam
• Rapid increase in hydropower dams: at least
110 existing or planned, 22 operational or
under construction in Lao PDR alone.
• Negative impacts predicted on the world’s
largest wild freshwater fishery
(2.1 million metric tons/year, 5 times the
production of entire West Europe)
• About 40 million rural people (2/3 of
population in LMB) derive livelihood
benefits from capture fisheries

3. 3
T-H Extension
Project
NG Reservoir
and
resettlement
villages
Case Study in Lao PDR –
Upstream Site • 180 Households from 4
villages upstream of the dam
were resettled to a single site
near the new reservoir

4. Objectives of the Case Study
• To understand how local communities use the river water, river
ecosystems and later reservoir ecosystem
• To assess the economic importance of the river and reservoir for
local livelihood and income
• To compare water use patterns and economic values before and
after the resettlement

5. FGDs and
Stakeholder
Consultation
Upstream
HH survey in
4 villages
Before
Resettlement
100 HH
April 2011 Sept. 2012
Upstream
HH survey in 4
villages
After Resettlement
100 HH
Validation
Workshop
May 2013Feb 2011
Resettlement
of 180 HH
Longitudinal Survey 2011-2013
Upstream
HH survey in 4
villages
> 2 Year After
Resettlement
December 2013

7. % Households Considering Nam Gnouang River/Reservoir as “Important” or “Very Important”
For
Before
Resettlement
After
Resettlement
YEAR 1
After
Resettlement
YEAR 2
Alternatives at Resettlement
Site (provided by the power
company)
Drinking 44 - - Public and private wells
Bathing 74 - 11 Public and private wells
Washing 76 - 11 Public and private wells
Irrigation (e.g. river
bank garden)
36 - 1
Homestead garden irrigated
with water from wells
Fishing 98 99 75 Reservoir
Livestock watering 55 25 26 Reservoir, wells
Transportation 91 4 66 Road access
Transporting goods 16 - - Road access
Micro-hydropower 25 - - Public power grid
Village events and
festivals (e.g. wedding)
68 - 61 Public and private wells
Rituals (e.g. funeral) 32 - 4 Public and private wells
Use of Nam Gnouang Reservoir is less diverse compared
to the use of Nam Gnouang River before resettlement

8. Water supply
significantly improved
River
54%
Spring
44%
Tap
2%
Dry Season
River
36%
Spring
50%
Rain and
river
5%
Rain and
spring
7%
Tap
2%
Rain Season
Before Resettlement
After Resettlement
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
Waterconsumption(l/day/HH)
Water Consumption per
Household
Dry
season
Rainy
season

9. Significant reduction and shift
in income portfolio
-
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
35.00
40.00
Before After 1 Year After 2 Year
Income(MKip/year/HH)
Change of Household Income
Remittances
Livestock
Non/Off-farm
TFP/NTFP
Fisheries
Agriculture
Compensation
from company
- Food
-Agriculture
inputs
- Cash
Compensa
tion from
company
Year 1
Average household income fell by
approximately 72%, primarily due to the
significant reduction in agriculture-
related income, not yet fully re-
established
Fisheries became the biggest contributor
to household income, due to reduction in
income from agriculture
Year 2
Overall income recovered– reaching 50%
of the income before resettlement.
Agriculture income is the most important
Income from fisheries fell compare to
Year 1, and less households were
engaged in fishing
Non-farm wages, remittances and
trading large livestock generated higher
share of income
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Before resettlement After 1 Year After 2 Year
Income(M.Kip/HH/year)
River / Reservoir-based household income
Non Farm
Irrigated
Agriculture
Forestry
Fisheries

10. Fisheries important during
transition, but declining• Year 1 - 71% of resettled households
reported increase in fishing
activities, while 11% reported reduction
in fishing activity after resettlement
• Fish catch is distributed more evenly
throughout the year, no seasonal peaks
• Average household fish catch
decreased significantly between Year 1
and Year 2
• Some households have quit fishing:
- 100% of households engaged in
fishing before resettlement
- 95% in Year 1 after resettlement
- only 75% in Year 2
0
50
100
150
200
250
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Kg
Average monthly fish catch
per household
Before After 1 Year After 2 Year

11. Households strategies
for adaptation
• Location and distance are important factors
determining household strategy
• After 1 year, some households negotiated
house swaps to stay closer to original
upland rice fields
• Households located closer to the reservoir
invested more in fishing while households
farther away stopped fishing and focused on
NTFP and agriculture
• Large livestock decreased by 50% due to
lack of grazing land near the resettlement
site but households whose original grazing
land is closer were able to keep more
animals
• With better road access, more households
are involved in non-farm wage labor and
trading
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
MillionKip/HH/year
Change in River Related Income
Portfolio -
Before & 1 year After Resettlement
Non Farm
Irrigated
Agriculture
Forestry
Fisheries
CLOSE MEDIUM FAR

12. Conclusions
• Domestic water access has dramatically
improved and made more time available for
income generation through other activities
• During the transition period, resettled
households rely more on natural resources -
important to ensure their access to fisheries
resources and forests
• Reservoir fisheries need to be sustained as it
has become the most important local use of
the reservoir and the main source of income
for some households
• Need to consider the differences within the
resettlement village in terms of access to
reservoir, forest and grazing land while
designing resettlement villages

13. Thank you!
o.joffre@cgiar.org
y.kura@cgiar.org