Mindy Huang 1

Mindy Huang
Seima Protection Forest
Seima Protection Forest (SPF), located in the province of Mondulkiri, Cambodia
alongside the eastern border with Vietnam, was originally known as the Seima Biodiversity
Conservation Area (SBCA). The Forestry Administration (FA) in collaboration with the Wildlife
Conservation Society and many other stakeholders came together to create a conservation project
with a holistic approach in mind. In 2009, SBCA was upgraded to SPF, obtaining the highest
level of security provided by Cambodian law (WCS 2009). Through a combination of political
support, law enforcement, strengthening community natural resource management and
developing alternative livelihoods, SPF is a prime example of sustainable development that
works. Though it is acknowledged that it is not perfect, the project has been able to withstand
external threats and is currently working towards sustainable financing mechanisms to continue
the maintenance of long-term conservation of the Forest. SPF highlights the necessity of a
holistic approach based on careful research that recognises threats across multiple scales and
from various sources, combined with long-term commitments from the government, NGO
partners, key donors and the local communities that sustainable development projects are meant
to benefit in order to be successful (Evans et al. 2012).
SPF is Cambodias first protected area designed to conserve forest carbon and protect the
biological wealth of the area, whilst ensuring protection for the livelihoods of local people (WCS
2014). The overall goal of the project is a well-managed forest landscape that supports
increasing wildlife populations and improving livelihoods for the people who currently live
there (Evans et al. 2012:166). The project plan consists of seven components, with four direct
interventions that are supported by monitoring, fundraising, and administration. SPF works at
multiple levels of governance and dialogue is created with the private sector and trans-boundary

Mindy Huang 2
stakeholders. This collaboration was fostered with the hopes of minimizing fragmentation and
mainstreaming site management through national policy and local planning processes (Evans et
al. 2012). Their core interventions are policy support and law enforcement, used in hopes of
directly addressing forest and wildlife crime. Strategies in this objective include employing law
enforcement teams for high priority crimes in the core area, developing informant networks,
encouraging and supporting village patrols, and increasing voluntary compliance through
education and negotiation (Evans et al. 2012). These objectives and strategies are based on the
assumption that although village-level enforcement is important in fostering engagement and
informed consent, direct enforcement of laws by officials is necessary to mitigate threats that
local-level participation cannot confront alone.
Combining national policy and governance with local engagement and capacity building
is crucial to the success of SPF and for sustainable development projects worldwide. This can be
seen in the sub-objectives that heavily focus on creating alternative livelihoods that reduce
deforestation, addressing the second half of SPFs overall goal. The approach to this is multifaceted and includes policy implementationsomething that small, locally based projects often
neglect to or are unable to tackle. It is important to note that this based on a general
understanding that there is no assumption that livelihood development on its own will reduce
pressure (Evans et al. 2012:167) on the Forest. What has made SPF successful and able to be an
ongoing project is its collaborative partnerships at the national and local levels between public
and private sectors. The first step taken in achieving these objectives was to clarify land-use and
resource-use arrangements through the development of village-level land use plans and
management committees. This led to participatory land-use planning (PLUP) and the formation
of Indigenous Community Commissions (ICC), which are the form land-holding bodies for

Mindy Huang 3
communal land titles (Evans et al. 2012:169). Thirteen ICCs have been formally registered,
with villages that do not wish to form ICCs actively participating in voluntary land demarcation,
and testifying for development of new laws for indigenous land registration (WCS 2009). The
traditional collective land ownership systems in place prior to the establishment of SBCA and
SPF left the indigenous communitiesparticularly the Bunong ethnic groupliving in these
areas vulnerable to land grabbing by more powerful and wealthy outsiders or companies.
Obtaining tenure rights for villages is vital to cultivating sustainable resource use while also
strengthening their capacity to protect their resources from external forces (Erni et al. 2012).
Andoung Kraloeng Village was one of three villages in Cambodia to receive a communal land
title. Although the title was received recently in early 2012, it set the precedent for future villages
applying for title as the first of its kind within the Forest area. While obtaining land rights
which are strongly linked to the success of benefit sharing or co-benefit systems for projects such
as REDD+clearly have a long way to go, this progress should not trivialised. Such strategies
work to not only raise awareness within and between local communities on the ground, but also
assist these marginalised communities to bring their experiences to the national level (Erni et al.
2012).
SPFs livelihood development projects focus on agriculture, timber-harvesting, tourism
and adult education (Evans et al. 2012). Currently, multiple villages are acting as pilots for
potential ecotourism ventures that are proving viable for expansion, and the National Forestry
Programme has led to the formation of community forest management groups. The former will
provide communities with a source of income outside of agriculture. While tourism itself is a
susceptible to external demand, diverse livelihood systems make for less vulnerable communities
(Ellis 2000). Villages are establishing clean water supplies, village meeting halls, self-help

Mindy Huang 4
savings groups and adult literacy programs, while improved farming practices have led to
improved food security and direct cash benefits (Evans et al. 2012). A large part of SPFs success
at both the local and national level can be attributed to the willingness to try innovative
techniques. SPFs community-based natural resource management includes a system of identity
cards, where certain areas of the forest are only accessible to traditional users (Evans et al. 2012).
This allows for improved monitoring and also reduces the likelihood of illegal activities, both
from external actors and the community residents themselves. The forest entry card system is
particularly vital to peripheral areas outside of the core protection area of the forest and closer to
national roads. It is in the periphery that large-scale economic development programs are being
implemented, leading to increased populations and the growing national and regional economics
driving up demand for timber, wild animals and farm products (Evans et al. 2012). Because in
these cases, SPF was not able to prevent road upgrades, their project strategies focused heavily
on mitigation. Land tenure has allowed villages within SPF boundaries to fend off risks of
seizure by large land concessions or mines, and has also made it harder for migrants to find land
within the reserve. While the threat of population growth still exists, it appears that the rate
would have been much higher without the project (Evans et al. 2012).
Analysing the broader implications of SPF requires a careful discussion of SPF in the
context of Ian Scoones Sustainable Livelihoods framework and his four areas of critique that
encompass sustainable development debates: knowledge, dynamics, scale and politics (Scoones
2009). SPFs strategies have worked to target all four areas; however, weaknesses can still be
found in each despite the number of successes over the years. Community-based approaches may
work in the context of the Forest, but without further engagement with the central government, it
is unlikely that such a model can be replicated at a larger scale in Cambodia. This can be seen,

Mindy Huang 5
for example, in the discussion of improved law enforcement. The core area of the Forest is
thoroughly protected, but patrols that extend to the periphery are much harder to maintain
without further investment in monitoring and a reliable system of data collection. At the same
time, an exchange of expert and local knowledge is necessary so as to avoid development,
policies or approaches that clash with tradition, culture, and local customs (Robertson 2012).
SPF has attempted to bridge this gap through the use of PLUP and the creation of ICCs, training
locals and increasing their capacities to make informed decisions while fostering participatory
action based on traditional structures that already exist, such as demarcating land. These
strategies, including obtaining legal land titles, are attempting to ease the tension between formal
and informal systems (Robertson 2012). The hesitation and doubt that still remains among some
communities regarding social, economic and political benefits of participating in REDD+ (Erni
et al. 2012), however, are evidence of existing gaps and unmet needs.
In looking at scale, it is also pertinent to discuss politics and long-term dynamics.
Successful sustainable development requires addressing the divide between small-scale,
community-based projects and large-scale projects being implemented at the national or even
international level. As seen in the case of SPF, infrastructure (particularly roads) development
just outside of SPF boundaries was undermining the success of SPF projects at the periphery.
While the core area has seen large improvements, areas and communities located near roads are
seeing the greatest threats from external factors. This can be linked to the strong necessity for
conservation areas to justify their importance economically and in the grand scheme of things.
Such conditions lead to trade-offs so that political support increases, but such trade-offs can
jeopardise the long-term potential of these areas. In order for SPF and other similar projects to
achieve continued success, there needs to be mainstreaming of conservation in development

Mindy Huang 6
planning. This is particularly important as REDD+ is being implemented in SPF. The national
government cannot lose sight of social sustainability and assume that benefit sharing will occur
naturally by focusing narrowly on carbon emissions and income from carbon credits.
While SPF is by no means a perfect project, it is a highly triumphant one. These
conservation efforts have led to the transformation of a former logging concession into one of the
most successful protected areas in the region (WCS 2009). The process of applying for collective
land titles not only increases land security for local villages, but also provides a framework for
strengthening the technical capacity and social cohesion of these communities. The most vital
step towards success now is obtaining sustainable financing mechanisms for long-term viability
through REDD+ implementation while further building on formal rights for local communities to
receive direct and indirect benefits. Projects that focus heavily on mainly local-scale or purely
large-scale interventions without addressing issues of governance or institutional and political
barriers are likely to fail through a lack of awareness. By working within the formal system to
obtain legal rights over land, SPF has been able to alter perceptions of control and build local
capacity so that communities can internalise issues of sustainability. Mainstreaming conservation
management in development planning and creating concrete policies using a transparent process
at all levels is necessary to avoid imposing on existing structural contexts. Recognising that
threats can exist from various sources and on multiple scales is vital; a lack of community
involvement is just as likely to impede on development efforts as the building of a national road
by a conservation site. SPF has been viewed as a strong model for conservation (and sustainable
development in the broader scheme) due to its holistic approach based on careful research, the
sharing of knowledge, and willing, long-term participation and commitment across political
scales and various sectors to work towards a common vision.

Mindy Huang 7
References
Evans, Tom D., OKelly, Hannah J., Soriyun, Men, Hor, Nut Meng, Phaktra, Pet,
Pheakdey, Sorn and Pollard, Edward H.B. 2012. Seima Protection Forest. Pp. 157-186
in Evidence-based Conservation: Lessons from the Lower Mekong, edited by Sunderland,
Terry C.H, Sayer, Jeffrey and Hong, Minh-Ha. New York, NY: Routledge.
Ellis, Frank. 2000. The Determinants of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Developing
Countries. Journal of Agricultural Economics 51(2):289-302.
Erni, Christian, Sherpa, Pasang Dolma, Ven, Nok, Hean, Bunhieng, Truong, Luong Thi,
Maharjan, Shree Kumar, Rana, Eak Bahadur, Sherpa, Lakpa Nuri and Carling, Joan.
2012. Briefing paper on REDD+, Rights and Indigenous Peoples: Lessons from REDD+
Initiatives in Asia. Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact (AIPP) and International Work Group
for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA). Chiang Mai, Thailand: AIPP Printing Press Co., Ltd.
Retrieved October 14, 2014 (http://www.iwgia.org/iwgia_files_publications_files/
0655_Doha_briefing_Final_Artork.pdf).
Robertson, Melanie. 2012. Sustainable Cities Local solutions in the global south. Warwickshire,
UK: Practical Action Publishing.
Scoones, Ian. 2009. Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant
Studies 36(1):171-196.
Wildlife Conservation Society. 2009. Best of the Wild: Wildlife Conservation Society and
the Seima Protection Forest. Wildlife Conservation Society. Retrieved October 14, 2014
(http://www.wcs.org/aboutus/~/media/Files/prospectuses/seimaProspectus.pdf).
Wildlife Conservation Society. 2014. Southern Mondulkiri, Cambodia. Retrieved October 14,
2014 (http://www.wcs.org/saving-wild-places/asia/southern-mondulkiri-cambodia.aspx).

Mindy Huang 8
Mindy, this paper is fantastic. It is thoroughly researched, clearly
argued, and engages in a nuanced way with debates of the course. It is
particularly hard to pull this off (in only 6 pages) on a project such as this one
that is so multi-faceted, but you do so beautifully. Very, very nicely done!
(For the record, I virtually NEVER give perfect scores on essays, but I am this
time!)
A.
Corina McKendry, Oct 24 at 8:56am