Punggu Jinggau

Investigating Iban livelihoods and land use choices in the era of joint venture development projects
A field work report in Interdisciplinary Land Use and Natural Resource Management (LFKK10246)

Lisbet Christoffersen (qfk506), Anna-Sarah Eyrich (cfq886), Andreas Grm (srq124), Mir Humayun Kabir (spd866), Ida Maria Reiter (sht469), Simon Shamus Riley (cdh746) & Maja Nastasia Juul Toft (kpl587)

Faculty of Life Scicence, University of Copenhagen April 2012

Side 1

Field report in Interdisciplinary Land Use and Natural Resource Management (LFKK10246) English title: Investigating Iban livelihoods and land use choices in the era of joint venture development projects Authors: Lisbet Christoffersen (qfk506), Anna-Sarah Eyrich (cfq886), Andreas Grm (srq124), Mir Humayun Kabir (spd866), Ida Maria Reiter (sht469), Simon Shamus Riley (cdh746) & Maja Nastasia Juul Toft (kpl587) Year: April 2012 Supervisors: Thilde Bech Bruun, Kristine X, Andreas Faculty of Life Science, University of Copenhagen Front pictures: rubber (upper left), pepper (upper middle), cocoa (upper right), Punggu Jinggau Longhouse (bottom); Source: (private pictures)

Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations:

Adat: Systems of customary law traditionally governing the indigenous communities of Borneo Bilik: A household, understood as the basic unit of traditional Iban society (Cramb 1993).

Community: Used in this report to refer collectively to all of the Punngu villages, which share a common ancestry and some land management responsibilities. JKKK: JVP: Village Security and Development Committee Joint-Venture Project; details of this arrangement can be found in Cramb and Ferraro 2010

LCDA: Land Custody and Development Agency, a government-linked corporation established in 1994 with the institution of the Konsep Baru. MLD: NCL: NCR: Ministry for Land Development Native Customary Land Native Customary Rights

NTFP: Non-timber forest products Penghulu: Administrator for a collection of villages; above Tuai Rumah in local political hierarchy SADIA: Sarawak Dayak Iban Association TR: see Tuah Rumah

Tuah Bilik: The head of the household within an Iban bilik. This status comes with distinct roles, privelages and responsibilities within the bilik and the community and is reserved, except where due to widowing or divorse, for the husband/father of the bilik. Tuah Rumah: Headman; traditionally the highest authority within an Iban longhouse and now a legally defined, salaried, village-level elected office. Village: Used in this report to refer to any area under the jurisdiction of a single Tuah Rumah.

Abstract
In response to the increasing global demand, Malaysia continues to expand areas under oil palm production. As this process continues, one important region of further oil palm expansion is the state of Sarawak on Borneo, where government policy is a main driver of this development. The latest model for promoting oil palm is the Joint Venture (JV), targeting land under Native Customary Rights and encouraging native landowners to lease their lands to the state for 60 year periods to be developed in cooperation with private companies. The village of our study, Punggu Jinggau, which is located in Sri Aman district in the state of Sarawak, has twice rejected proposed JV proposals in a trend contrary to surrounding villages. This apparently anomaly guided the objective of this study into the exploration of possible factors surrounding the villagers decision to reject the JVP in the context of internal and external institutions. Inspired by Ellis livelihood framework we identify three important scales local, regional and state level which are needed to understand the context in which livelihood decisions are made. Following an examination of the communitys livelihood strategies, we analyze and discuss the villagers decision to reject JV proposals. Using primarily methods from social science combined with some natural science methods, we found that the main factors surrounding the villagers rejection was the value they place on land and the desire to pass it on to their children. We note that these children may, due to improved educational opportunities and urban migration, in turn pursue new livelihood strategies. However we find external influences, particularly from the state, may increasingly limit the villagers control over the land use decision-making process.

Acknowledgements
First of all we want to express our gratitude to the villagers of Punggu Jinggau and their headman Tuah Rumah Entau ak Entai, for their hospitality and for providing us not only with important data but also an unforgettable experience and an unique opportunity to be introduced to Iban culture.

Secondly we want to thank our lecturers Thilde Bech Bruun, Kristine Juul and Andreas Egelund Christensen for support and guidance throughout the whole SLUSE course. Also we want to express our gratitude to our Malaysian resource persons with special thanks to Dr. Wong, who assisted us during our whole stay in Malaysia, even after the official field work.

We highly appreciate the assistance from our three interpreters, Raine Melissa Riman, Luisa Duya ak Setia and Napoleon Muda ak Jubin, without whom we would not have been able to complete the project. A special thanks to Raine Melissa Riman who was available whenever needed, both during and after the actual fieldwork had been conducted, and willingly shared her comprehensive knowledge.

Finally we thank all of our Malaysian counterparts for a rewarding and enjoyable time together.

At last the authors will keep in mind the tears of Punggu Jinggau forever.

University of Copenhagen, Faculty of Life Sciences, April 4, 2012

Lisbet Christoffersen (qfk506)

Anna-Sarah Eyrich (cfq886)

Andreas Grm (srq124)

Mir Humayun Kabir (spd866)

Ida Maria Reiter (sht469)

Simon Shamus Riley (cdh746)

Maja Nastasia Juul Toft (kpl587)

iii

Table of Content
1. Introduction (All)...............................................................................................................ix 1.2. Punggu Jinggau ..........................................................................................................ix 1.3. Ellis livelihood framework as conceptual framework ..................................................x 1.3. Objectives and Research Questions............................................................................xi 1.3.1. Objective .............................................................................................................xi 1.3.2. Research questions..............................................................................................xi 1.3.3. Approach to Objective........................................................................................xii 2.1. Preliminary Considerations........................................................................................xii 2.1.1. Observer Effects and Positioning in the Field ......................................................xii 2.1.2. Interpreter Effects ..............................................................................................xii 2.1.3. Triangulation and Data Quality .......................................................................... xiii 2.2. Methods .................................................................................................................. xiii 2.2.1. Household Survey - March 9th to 10th ................................................................. xiii 2.2.2. Participatory Rapid/Rural Appraisal Techniques (PRA) ....................................... xiii 2.2.3. Semi-Structured Interviews: .............................................................................. xiv 2.2.4. Natural Science Methods....................................................................................xv 2.2.7. Participant observation and informal interviews............................................... xvii 2.2.8. Secondary Data Collection ................................................................................ xvii 2.3. Critical Evaluation ................................................................................................... xvii 3. Livelihoods.................................................................................................................... xviii 3.1. Land Geography, soils and water (Andreas, Simon, Kabir).................................... xviii 3.1.1. Soil .................................................................................................................... xix 3.1.2. Water................................................................................................................ xxi 3.2. Infrastructure (Anna, Lisbet)..................................................................................... xxi 3.2.1. Transportation................................................................................................... xxi 3.2.2. Sanitation, utilities and communication............................................................ xxii 3.3. Cash crops (Anna, Andreas, Simon, Kabir) .............................................................. xxiii 3.4. Subsistence activities (Kabir, Simon, Anna)............................................................. xxvi

3.5. Other sources of income (Ida) ............................................................................... xxvii 3.6. The younger generation, education, and rural urban considerations (Anna, Ida) .... xxix 3.7. Livelihoods in the wider context (All)....................................................................... xxx 4.1. Community structure ............................................................................................. xxxi 4.1.1 The biliks .......................................................................................................... xxxi 4.1.2 The Village.......................................................................................................xxxiii 4.2. Selection and responsibilities of the Tuai Rumah...................................................xxxiv 4.3. The Punggu community......................................................................................... xxxv 4.4. Loss of sovereignty................................................................................................xxxvi 5. Government institutions and policies (Maja, Lisbet, Simon) .........................................xxxvi 5.1. Land Tenure system in Sarawak............................................................................xxxvii 5.1.1. Native Customary Land (NCL) and Native Customary Rights (NCR).................xxxvii 5.1.2. NCR New Initiative........................................................................................xxxviii 5.2. Development plans for Sarawak and Sri Aman area.............................................xxxviii 5.2.1. New Concept and Joint Venture Project (JVP) ......................................................xl 5.2.2. Perception of development .................................................................................xl 5.3. Institutions involved in the agricultural development of Sri Aman, Sarawak ..............xli Besides being Chief Minister, Taib is also Minister of Finance as well as Minister of Resource Planning and Environment. As already described, Taibs entry has been decisive for the significant changes of land use and natural resource management in Sarawak. ......................................................................xli 5.4. Situation of Punggu Jinggau and Punggu Area ......................................................... xliii 6. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... xliii Reference ........................................................................................................................... xlv Community Map subsequent schematic map of Punggu region......................................lii Wealth Ranking Criteria ....................................................................................................lii Income and expenditure calendar....................................................................................liii Income and expenditure calendar....................................................................................liv Diagram on stakeholders interaction ...............................................................................liv First interview with Headman 04.03.2012........................................................................lvi Second interview with headman .................................................................................... lviii Agricultural Department, Sri Aman ...................................................................................lx

Resident Officer, Sri Aman ...............................................................................................lxi Land and Survey Department......................................................................................... lxiii Primary school SK Munggu Beringin................................................................................ lxv Keyinformant Mr. Trang ak Amir, bilik 6 .......................................................................... lxv Sarawak Dayak Iban Assiciation (SADIA)......................................................................... lxvi Mail communication with SADIA, March 30, 2012......................................................... lxvii Soil sampling results .................................................................................................... lxviii Background Bilek Data Bilek Number: _______ ............................................................. lxxiv INCOME SOURCES......................................................................................................... lxxv Land Management...........................................................................................................lxxvii Joint Venture Contract/Project ....................................................................................lxxvii New NCR Initiative .......................................................................................................lxxvii 1.1. Punggu Jinggau A brief introduction ...................................................................... 81 1.2. Conceptual framework............................................................................................. 82 1.3. Objectives and Research questions .......................................................................... 83 1.3.2. Research questions............................................................................................ 83 1.4. Background .............................................................................................................. 84 1.4.1. Research question 1 Livelihood strategies....................................................... 84 1.4.2. Research question 2 Institutional Policies ....................................................... 84 1.4.3. Research question 3 Community land distribution .......................................... 85 2.1. Positioning in the field.............................................................................................. 85 2.2. Methods .................................................................................................................. 86 2.2.1. Livelihoods ........................................................................................................ 86 2.2.2. Institutional Policies .......................................................................................... 87 2.2.3. Distribution of land............................................................................................ 87 4.1 Timeline .................................................................................................................... 93 4.2. Household survey and ranking exercise.................................................................... 94 4.3. Soil sampling ............................................................................................................ 97 4.4. Semi-structured interviews: ..................................................................................... 99 4.4.1. Structured interview with Bilek members: ......................................................... 99

4.4.2. Headman Interview ......................................................................................... 101 4.2.3. Governmental Institutions............................................................................... 103 4.2.4. Interview with an NGO-representative ............................................................ 105 4.2.5. Interview with urban migrants regarding land distribution and oil palms......... 106 4.3. Participatory Rural Appraisal .................................................................................. 108 4.3.1. Seasonal calendar............................................................................................ 108 4.3.2. Livelihood Focus Group Key Discussion Points............................................... 110

vii

List of figures
Figure 1: Satellite image of Punggu Area from Google Earth (image date 2007). Figure 2: Livelihood Platform, adopted from Ellis (2001) Figure 3: Map of land-use and transportation networks within the Punggu region Figure 4: Map of soil types in the Punggu region Figure 5: Senggang plant in the rubber field Figure 6: Total bilk income Figure 7: Layout of the biliks in Pumgu Jinggau Figure 8: Iban political hierarchy diagram

List of tables:
Table 1: The routes of the six transect walks in the Punggu area Table 2: Water Sampling Site Selection Table 3: Differences and diversities in livelihood strategies

List of text boxes:

Box 1: Cash crop: rubber Box 2: Cash crop: pepper Box 3: Cash crop: cocoa Box 4: Cash crop: oil palm Box 5: Roll of the headman Box 6: Reasons villagers rejected the oil palm Box 7: The creation of the NCR in 1958

1. Introduction (All)
Since achieving independence in 1957, Malaysia has experienced rapid population and economic growth coupled with an expansion of market infrastructure (Fox et al. 2009). Malaysia, which heavily depends on income from its natural resources, has emerged over recent decades as a world leader in oil palm production. In response to the increasing global demand Malaysia has continued to expand areas under oil palm (Yusof & Bhattasali 2008; Basiron 2002). The two states of Sabah and Sarawak, on Borneo, have been and still are designated areas for further oil palm developments. In Sarawak alone the area under oil palm has expanded from 55,000 hectares in 1990 to 900,000 hectares in 2010 and the Sarawaks goal is two million hectares by 2020. This is now being achieved primarily by encouraging private sector involvement and directly targeting Native Customary land (NCR) land under New Concept, Konsep Baru, implemented in 1994 (Cooke 2006; Chin 2011). However some plantations are private or governmental establishments and do not include local people as shareholders (Cramb 2011). The standard model for development under Konsep Baru is Joint Venture Projects (JVP), where native landowners are encouraged to transfer their lands to the state for 60 years to be developed in cooperation with private companies (Sarawak Government 2010). For an initiative to be carried out, a contiguous area of at least 5,000 hectares is required (Cramb 2011). This means land must be aggregated from smallholder rural communities for management under a single agent and deed and can thus complicate land tenure systems where distribution of land is on a smaller scale (Ngidang 2002). For the Iban, the largest indigenous group in Sarawak, these state-driven developments have resulted in changes to traditional land use and cultivation practices and created conflicts among the stakeholders (Cramb 2011). With the JV model, changes are also occurring with regards to property rights and land ownership; a change that seems significant with regards to the future livelihoods of the Iban (Padoch et al. 2007; Fox et al. 2009).

1.2. Punggu Jinggau

The village of our study is Punggu Jinggau, located in southwestern Sarawak, approximately two kilometers from the Indonesian border and near the rivers Sungai Ensiap and Sungai Lebai. It is situated close to the main road connecting Kuching and Sri Aman. It consists of 19 households and 114 inhabitants and is surrounded by secondary forest that villagers use to collect timber for construction, non-timber forest products (NTFP), and hunting. Most of the villagers have paddy fields and rubber, pepper and/or cocoa as cash crops.

ix

There are seven Punggu villages located in the area and they are all descendants of the original Punggu village. The Punggu community has moved its longhouse location numerous times since 1900. The current location was established in 1972 (see Appendix E). During World War II, the Punggu community cultivated land in Kalimantan, Indonesia, but were chased away by Indonesian officers when Sarawak joined Malaysia in 1963. Villages in regions around Punggu have adopted or applied for JVPs. A neighboring oil palm plantation is visible on a Google Earth images from 2007 (Figure 1). Twice, in 2005 and 2008, the community of Punggu rejected oil palm proposals from the Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA).

Figure 0. Satellite image of Punggu Area from Google Earth (image date 2007). There is a major clearing approximately 1.5km North East of the longhouse which is Bait Ulus oil palm plantation.

1.3. Ellis livelihood framework as conceptual framework

The decision to reject oil palm JVPs might represent an optimal allocation of assets within the local and regional context of Punggu Jinggau. Despite pressure from the state and private industries to adopt a JVP as a development scheme and the fact that many nearby villages already accepted such schemes, Punggu Jinggau rejected the idea, thereby indicating that they might have viable alternatives.

The dynamics leading Punggu Jinggau to reject the proposed JVP is being guided in this report through Ellis livelihoods framework (Figure 2), which defines livelihoods as the assets (natural, physical, human, financial and social capital), the activities, and the access to these (mediated by institutions and social relations) that together determine the living gained by the individual or household, p.10 (Ellis 2001). In that way Ellis framework enables us to examine livelihood strategies of Punggu Jinggau from different perspectives and scales.

Livelihood platform

Access by Social relations

Context Trends

Resulting in

Composed of NR-based activities

Effects on Livelihood security

Assets: the 5 capitals

Institutions Shocks Organizations

Livelihood strategies Non-NR based activities Environmental sustainability

Figure 2: Livelihood Platform, adopted from Ellis (2001)

Ellis livelihood framework differs from comparable frameworks due to its academic basis, which we use as an operational tool. The framework reminds the researcher of the significance of assets. Moreover, it highlights the importance of examining social relations, institutions and organizations as well as contextual categories such as trends and shocks. From this perspective, we have found it necessary not only to examine the village level but the regional and state levels as well.om

1.3. Objectives and Research Questions

Given that Punggu Jinggau has opted not to participate in a JVP - despite pressure from external stakeholders while several surrounding communities have joined, indicates that Punggu Jinggau is an interesting village in which to examine the implications of the JVPs and livelihood alternatives to oil palm.

1.3.1. Objective
Taking the livelihood strategies of the inhabitants of Punggu Jinggau as our point of departure, we aim to explore the factors surrounding the decision to reject the proposed oil palm JVPs.

1.3.2. Research questions

1) What are the present livelihood strategies and are they viable alternatives to joining a JVP?

xi

2) What are the internal institutions that govern the management of property within Punggu Jinggau and how have they conditioned the decision to reject the JVP? 3) How do the residents of Punggu Jinggau interact with government institutions and how do the development policies in the region influence decisions on land use?

1.3.3. Approach to Objective

The current livelihood strategies will be examined along with the compositions of assets. Their choices of livelihoods must be understood through the contextual categories defined by Ellis (2001). Assets, and access to these, will be examined in Chapter 3, together with activities regarding subsistence and income. Traditional Iban institutions and their role behind the rejection of oil palm will be analyzed in Chapter 4, while political institutions influence on the promotion of oil palm JVPs will be discussed in chapter 5.

2. Methodology (All)
This chapter presents the methods used in the study. It also presents the limitations and challenges with regards to how they were conducted.

2.1. Preliminary Considerations

2.1.1. Observer Effects and Positioning in the Field Given our teams size while visiting a relatively small village, it was important for us to consider the roles we took and/or were given by the villagers during our stay. Thus, we tried to divide into groups of two or three when conducting each method, with the intention not to overwhelm our informants. We coordinated with our Malaysian counterparts and conducted all methods jointly. We agreed to not initially ask explicitly about their rejection of the oil palm JVP, but instead express our interest in the villagers livelihoods, since a hypothesis could have influenced their responses to our questions. 2.1.2. Interpreter Effects This research would not have been possible without the three interpreters, which all had Iban ancestry and could speak Iban, Malay and English and were at many occasions able to rephrase or clarify our questions for better understandings, both for the interviewer and the interviewed. The potential for miscommunication, bias and other interpreter effects when working through a translator cannot be overestimated and it was therefore important to consider how best to manage their efforts. In order to ensure these effects were reduced to an absolute minimum, the three interpreters were included in the daily debriefings and their translations were, for some methods such as the household survey, checked against each

other. As a result of this latter process, weaknesses in an interpreters translations were identified and addressed. 2.1.3. Triangulation and Data Quality One strength of our approach has been to interview not only villagers, but also politicians and NGOs to get the view from different stakeholders. Furthermore, we got data about the socio-economic situation of the villagers from a variety of methods. Despite our best efforts, there remains data which, due to our limited time in the field, we were unable to cross-check with other sources as well as discrepancies between sources on topics for which there is no available authority to appeal to for definitive clarification. The decision of when to include such data with the appropriate caveats, and when to disregard it completely, is therefore, regrettably, subject to the teams own personal judgment.

2.2. Methods
The descriptions of methods to follow are outlines only, with emphasis given to the reason for each methods selection. For a more detailed account see (Mikkelsen 2005), who inspired many of our methods. 2.2.1. Household Survey - March 9th to 10th Results can be found in Appendix F The household survey was conducted to gain basic demographic information, characterize different livelihood strategies represented in the community, determine the relative importance of the various crops, livestock and forestry products to the village as whole, and determine bilik views on JVPs and the new NCR initiative. Of the 19 biliks, four were absent at the time of surveying and thus were not included in the results. The fact that these biliks resided primarily outside the village and thus necessarily engaged in distinctly different livelihood strategies as was explained by several other residents, including one of the absentee villagers during a brief return means that there is a significant gap in the data collected from this survey. In future, an awareness of this and similar possibilities would convince us to pay more careful attention to the timing of any methods which required the participation of every bilik. 2.2.2. Participatory Rapid/Rural Appraisal Techniques (PRA) All results of methods described in this section can be found in Appendix B Community map - March 3rd The purpose of this exercise was to gain a preliminary overview of what villagers regard as their land, to determine which areas were presently under which land use/management regime and to gain the initial

xiii

information to help plan later transect walks, GPS mapping, etc. The intention was to have separate groups of men and women but this arrangement quickly dissolved in practice. Each group was asked to draw a map of the Punggu area and the results were then combined into one map. Over the following ten days, members of the longhouse continuously modified and added information to produce the final version. Wealth ranking - March 7th The purpose of identifying what the villagers consider to be the basis for, and indications of, wealth was to be able to understand and discuss the merits of different livelihood strategies in terms of their own cosmology. The exercise was conducted with two groups of volunteers divided by gender to capture the differences in their opinions. The two groups separately identified criteria to define wealth and the results were then ranked by importance. Income and expenditures calendar - March 7th A group of approximately 10 residents were asked to create a visual display on a template of relative annual incomes and expenditures throughout the year. This allowed us to understand the temporal elements of the villagers livelihood strategy and, in that it provided concise aggregate livelihood information, served as a compliment to the bilik-level data gathered in the household survey. Diagram on stakeholder interactions- March 10th The initial purpose was to get information about all institutions and organizations related to the community. In practice, it was considered more urgent to spend our little remaining time understanding the Iban institutions and their interactions with government agencies. We consulted TR Entau who suggested and invited members of the JKKK to participate. On the whiteboard, we sketched out our understanding and asked the group to correct our findings and explain how the external institutions interact with the community and/or the customary Iban society. The group produced two diagrams. Even though important, informal relations were not captured by this method. We failed in getting the group isolated, so we ended up in the common area with the whiteboard facing a very large group of people. However, the ones invited were the ones closest to the board and also those who commented on the mapping. 2.2.3. Semi-Structured Interviews: All semi-structured interviews can be found in Appendix C Tuai Rumah Entau - March 4th and 5th We carried out two semi-structured interviews with the headman in order to understand the structure of the community, his role in it and the attitudes regarding the proposed JVP.

Resident officer of Sri Aman - March 5th Questions asked pertained primarily to the development goals and tactics of the division administration, the decision making process leading to those development goals and tactics and the details of the New NCR Initiative. The interview was conducted in a meeting room with the around 15 students from various research groups and Dr. Wong. Because of this arrangement, the sequence of questions asked lacked a coherent structure. Agricultural Department, Sarawak - March 5th The main purpose was to find out which crops are subsidized for small-holders and who decides what crops to subsidize; the later question never answered. Some of the answers that were provided proved useful in the triangulation of data on the subsidy application process. Land and Survey Department - March 8th A private interview was conducted with Mr. Razali, the superintendent of the Land and Survey Department in Sri Aman. An assistant with longer tenure in the agency was present. The interview focused on the states development goals and tactics, this included advocacy of JVCs, the New NCR Initiative the environmental implications of these development policies. It also addressed the Sarawak Land Code, the rights associated with NCR/NCL, State land, etc. Primary school Sekolah - March 9th The local elementary school, SK Munggu Beringin, was visited and the Senior Assistant Ului Anyi was interviewed on the subject of education and the youth in the area. We sought to explore the Sarawak education system and to discuss patterns of migration and employment in the area. Trang ak Amir, longhouse resident - March 12th The reason we did this interview was to explore the views of someone from Punggu Jinggau on having oil palm as a cash crop, and their view on potential gains and costs involved with this. Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA) - March 19th This interview was conducted with Secretary General Mr. Nicholas Mujah and three of his associates. The purpose was to clarify some of the rights associated with NCR land, to hear an alternative perspective on the development aims of the state- and division- administrations and to examine the implications of those policies on the land use and livelihood choices available to the Iban.

2.2.4. Natural Science Methods

All results of methods described in this section is listed in Appendix D Transect Walks, GPS and remote sensing Six transect walks were taken over the 10 days (Table 1). They were tracked with the GPS, waypoints were

xv

recorded and information was obtained through conversations on guided walks. These walks provided details of agricultural practices and forest-product uses, the communitys relationship to and dealings with neighboring/external groups and the areas boundaries.
Table 1: The routes of the six transect walks in the Punggu area, which provided an overview of land-use and the data from the GPS was used to determine an approximate area and some distances. Date: March 4th Details of Walk: A walk guided by Peron, Masan, Ismael and others north through cash crop fields and fallows to the northern boundary with Biat Ulu and the oil palm plantation A walk guided by Masan, Ismael and others to the rice paddy fields and the irrigated land

March 4th

March 7th

An unaccompanied drive to the regional boundaries west (top of the hill with Bukit Begunan) north (the Penkar river intersection with the road) and east (Kampung Ran) A walk guided by Ismael, Masan and Trang along the private oil palm plantation up through the primary forest to the bat cave on the southern border (the Indonesian border)

March 8th

March 8th March 9th

A walk west along parts the Pantar River, which forms the northern border A walk partially along the boundary with Biat Ulus plantation to determine the north eastern border and see if there was any change in plantation area

Soil Sampling - March 9th The results can be found in Appendix D It was decided to take volume specific soil samples from four sites where rice, cocoa, pepper and rubber are cultivated, to characterize the soil types in the Punggu area. We took 6 samples per site from 3 randomly chosen spots. At these three spots we took two samples from the depth of 0-10cm and from 20-30cm of the soil profile. The samples we collected were analyzed to find color, bulk density, pH and the content of carbon and nitrogen. The sites on the different fields for sampling were chosen by the villagers, so that any crops wasnt damaged or any agricultural activities were interrupted. Soil analysis was conducted in laboratories in both Sri Aman and Copenhagen. Water sampling - March 10th In order to assess the quality of the communitys water resources, another crucial asset to their livelihoods, water samples were taken from four locations (Table 2). The tested parameters were electrical conductivity, total dissolve solids, salinity, pH and dissolved oxygen. Analysis was done at a laboratory in Sri Aman.

Table 0: Water Sampling Site Selection Sample No. 1 Sample Site: Purpose:

Kunang River upstream from rice paddies Kunang River downstream of rice paddies Runau River household wastewater discharge point Longhouse tap piped from source in Kelingrang Mountain Range

To assess the impact of rice cultivation and management practices on water quality Same as above

To assess the effect of wastewater treatment system on water quality To assess the quality of household drinking water

2.2.7. Participant observation and informal interviews The results can be found in Appendix A Over the course of our research, numerous unplanned and informal conversations were held with members of the community and other key informants. These discussions provided a wealth of background information and clarification. In addition to this information, many observations were made directly by members of the team and then recorded in journals.

2.2.8. Secondary Data Collection

In our attempt to acquire a newer photographic map of the Punggu area we discovered that access to those maps is highly restricted and difficult to gain. We expect that without the insistence of one of our Malaysian counterparts, who happened to be a former intern at the Land and Survey Department headquarters in Kuching, we never would even have been granted entry. Even with our counterparts assistance we are still awaiting a soft copy of the desired map.

2.3. Critical Evaluation

Firstly, there was some difficulty with isolating individuals and groups for interviews; they preferred, and occasionally insisted, on conducting them in the Ruai. It then became difficult, with so many others around, to distinguish the views and opinions of the target informants from those of others or to determine to what extent they may have been exercising self-censorship. Similarly, it was difficult to get all participants in the PRA exercises to be engaged, especially in the presence of prominent figures such as the Tuai Rumah, when nearly everyone became more deferential.

xvii

Our sampling selection strategy for the PRAs also relied heavily on convenience. Even where efforts were made to stratify the samples on the basis of gender, age, etc., the pool of potential participants was effectively limited to members of those families who frequently socialized in the ruai. Therefore, there is the distinct possibility that the views of the elderly, youth, those with disabilities and introverted individuals may be significantly underrepresented in our findings. It was our impression that some of our Malaysian counterparts, who were able to speak directly with the villagers and thus gain a lot of informal data which was unavailable to us, failed to document or convey much of what they learned. It should be noted however that the informal data they did convey provided a wealth of data.

3. Livelihoods
Beginning with a characterization of the land, water and soil, then presenting the basic infrastructure, cash crop production, subsistence activities, other income sources, and demographic trends, this chapter presents results and discussions relating to present livelihood strategies of the different biliks and how this relates to the decision to reject the JVP.

3.1. Land Geography, soils and water (Andreas, Simon, Kabir)

Contributing authors: Ida Many rural livelihoods are traditionally agrarian based, but recent decades of economic and industrial growth have resulted in diversified livelihood strategies with off-farm and non-farm activities becoming more important (Preston & Ngah N.D.; Rigg 1998). However agriculture, and therefore the land base, still contributes to the livelihoods in Punggu Jinggau. Both men and women identified land as being important in the Wealth Criteria Ranking activity. The value villagers place on their land could be an attributing factor in their decision to reject the JVPs. This is because the JVP would have required them to relinquish their land rights for sixty years. The implications associated with this and their relations to external institutions are explored in Chapter 5. Data from the community mapping, GPS walks, analyzed with QGIS (Figure 3), show that the area Punggu Jinggau shares with Dadak, Mawang, TinTing, Batu Anchau, Tengah and Tapang is approximately 1800ha (18km2). Properties owned by the 19 biliks are dispersed throughout the Punggu region and there are certain areas of common resources. The amount of land within Punggu border is relatively small and due to the establishment of a permanent longhouse, relocation no longer an option. This limits the options of agricultural practices such as the traditional shifting cultivation, which previously served as a way of maintaining the nutrient balance. Today this balance is maintained through the fertilizer application due to the fact that tropical soils are in general are leaching nutrients (characterization in following section).

Figure 3.1. This map displays the Punggu Jinggau longhouse in relation to other Punggu longhouses and agricultural areas. The cash crops (rubber, pepper and cocoa) areas were under cultivation in by villagers in 2012 and shown to us during the first transect walk. This map shows the distance between the villagers fields and the roads, which was identified as a factor inhibiting individual oil palm production. Also, the Punggu region is approximately 1800ha, and all of it is used by the residents. Thus, unlike other areas Punggu residents do not believe they have spare land to establish a JVP

3.1.1. Soil
The red-yellow podzolic soils (Malaysian classification), are very common in Sarawak and, these soils are also classified as ultisols according to United States soil taxonomy. Ultisol soils can be characterized by their redyellow color and high acidity with a pH between 4 and 5, and they are only suitable for acid tolerant crops as rubber (Katayama et al. 2009; Coulter 1998). Our observations of soil colors (brown, red yellowish) and pH, with a total average pH around 4.5, from our soil tests match these characterizations (see Appendix D for further details). In the light of these observations, the overall soil types in the Punggu area appears to be typical for the region and correspond to the classification on the soil map published by the Land and Survey department in 1968 (European Soil Portal 2012). Figure 4 shows the red-yellowish podzolic soils (marked with 5) and grey-white podzolic soils (marked with 4) in the area. The yellowish soil color, in some areas brown, can indicate high iron contents.

xix

All our soil samples were acidic. This can imply that there can be a high level of phosphorus fixation. The humid climate in Sarawak and the well-drained ultisol soil can also results in high nutrient leaching, which can create a demand for fertilizers (Bruun 2012, personal communication). Lack of nitrogen is said to be the greatest factor causing of poor yields after watereffects (Coulter 1998). The C: N ratio is a way of measuring the amount of available nitrogen in a field. The average C:N ratios of our soil samples from cocoa, rubber and pepper varies between 15 -20 in the 0-10cm layer and from 12.5-17 in the 2030cm layer (see Appendix D). These ratios are under 30, a number which is referred to as a critical level (Coulter 1998), and thus relatively low, even though the scale should not be seen as fixed and resistant to further implications. A relatively low C:N ratio implies that nitrogen is available in the soil and that the decomposition of soil organic matter is relatively high (Pitty 1978). N-Fertilizers can increase the amount of nitrogen in soils, but we do not have data about applied fertilizers or field history from the sample sites. However, we know that fertilizers were already in some of the soil we sampled and can thus have lowered the C:N.

Figure 4: Soil type characterization in the Punggu Area (European Soil Portal 2012)

3.1.2. Water
The complete results of our water quality tests are presented in Appendix D. The important result for this study was the finding that the tap water and the water up and down stream from the paddy fields are ok for drinking according to the Malaysian Standards and Water Quality Index (Department of Environment 2006). The implications of acceptable drinking water, health and livelihoods are briefly discussed in the section on sanitation. The village of Punggu Jinggau is situation at the foot of the Kellingrang Mountain Range and the source of their drinking water. It can be expected that conversion of this land to oil palm plantation would lead to increased runoff and a decline in the quality of drinking water.

3.2. Infrastructure (Anna, Lisbet)

Contributing authors: Maja, Ida, Andreas This section discusses transportation, communication, sanitation, utilities, and physical buildings, which Ellis (2001) categorizes as physical capital. This section presents these assets in the context of Punggu Jinggau and discusses the implications on livelihoods and the decision to reject the JVP.

3.2.1. Transportation
Villagers chose the present longhouse location in the 1970s to be closer to Highway 1. Cramb and Sujang (2011) document instances of other Iban longhouses moving closer to roads during the 1970s to facilitate access to markets and urban areas. The other paved road within Punggu was established in 1995 (Anui 2012, personal communication) and connects the school and Bait Ulu. Because new roads can open lands to further development (Cramb & Sujang 2011), the 1995 road might have been a factor facilitating the establishment of Bait Ulus oil palm plantation. If this link can be drawn, it has potential future implications in the region since the Sarawak government plans to greatly expand transportation networks. Preston and Ngah (N.D.) describe how new transportation infrastructure has facilitated temporary migration patterns, thereby influencing demographics and income from remittances explored in a later section and reduced barriers of distances. Though villagers of Punggu Jinggau lack vehicles (we observed one vehicle and approximately five mopeds and bicycles) the community has strategies to utilize the opportunities presented by the road networks including: a mobile shop visits the village regularly, thereby reducing the burden of shopping in town; middlemen come and buy cash crops directly; collectively renting trucks for large deliveries; and mopeds carrying workers to the paddy fields (2.5km from the longhouse) and harvested rice back. However, the youth working in the urban areas have access to vehicles and are able to return regularly.

xxi

Another aspect of transportation infrastructure in relation to livelihood strategies comes from a villager who said the lack of roads between the land plots and main roads (about 0.5 to 1km) means private oil palm activities would be too costly and given this, rubber and pepper are currently preferable options. Since adopting a plantation would likely result in further infrastructure development (Wwf 2011).

3.2.2. Sanitation, utilities and communication

The Iban traditionally reside in longhouses, consisting of a common room, the ruai, and family units, biliks. The construction of the longhouse indicates there is a close relationship between biliks. An example of safety net provided by the community was when a woman from one bilik got sick and her husband accompanied her to the hospital during the rice-harvesting season, the other biliks harvested their rice paddy. These longhouse social ties offer a form of insurance against starvation and losses in productivity from illness. The concrete longhouse was built with government support in 2000. The residents of Punggu Jinggau think the concrete longhouse has many advantages compared to the traditional raised wooden one, such as there are fewer mosquitos. Historically Punggu Jinggau moved its longhouse when soil fertility decreased (Informal discussion with Headman). Limited land availability (1800 ha for all 7 Punggu villages) constricts shifting cultivation. The adoption of permanent cropping and associated agronomic practices leave Punggu Jinggau dependent on the free fertilizers from various government schemes. Changes to these fertilizer policies would affect the villagers current agricultural practice. The sanitation system is well developed. Toilet waste is collected in septic tanks. Taps drain into an open sewer along the back of the longhouse. Water is gravity fed through a PVC pipe from the forested hills close to the Indonesian border. We were unable to visit the source. The water source is shared by Punggu TinTing, Dadak, Mawang, and St Marks Chapel. Water shortages can occur briefly during periods of heavy use, particularly the evening, (Observation) and during the drier months of July and August. After particularly heavy rains the water turns brown (Entau 2012, personal communication). As mentioned previously, the tap water is drinkable (Appendix D). Good sanitation infrastructure is important to maintain health. Health is intrinsic to livelihood activities. Village women explicitly indicated this by identifying health as the most important wealth criteria and stating its important to livelihood activities and associated this with wealth. Furthermore the nearest clinic is in Sri Aman and the previously discussed lack of vehicles can be problematic in emergencies. Mains electricity was provided in 2000. Each household pays for use in their bilik and the ruai. The importance and convenience of electricity in daily functions is evident, however electricity also influences telecommunications. Villagers said newspapers were important for information (Informal Conversation) but we observed the importance of television. Every bilik had a television and antenna. The TV was usually on in biliks for many hours daily (Observation). Radios and mobile phones were also used. The mobile network was weak but provided Internet access. However, we only saw the children visiting on weekends using it, not the

permanent residents. The internet could provide the residents with a powerful tool to gain information on market prices, government policies and schemes, and independent alternative media. Infrastructure development projects are ways the government interact with villages. Providing permanent longhouses and infrastructure and other social services can be seen as way for the government to gain votes and political support (Cooke 2006). However, even if there are political motives, the state-driven development has benefitted villages in terms of improved health care, higher incomes, and generally better infrastructure.

3.3. Cash crops (Anna, Andreas, Simon, Kabir)

Contributing authors: Ida, Maja, Lisbet The cash crops produced by villagers in Punggu Jinggau are rubber, pepper and cocoa, information on these crops can be found in the Boxes below. The preferred crop cultivated by villagers depends highly on the market prices and thus farmers alternate between focusing on pepper and rubber. Current prices drive villagers to focus on rubber. Villagers told us that given the present context, such as existing infrastructure, rubber currently provides the highest income per unit of land and labor. This is likely another contributing element in not choosing oil palm. Due to drop establishment times, were rubber not already present in Punggu Jinggau and the prices not high, villagers would have been more open and willing to accept alternative livelihood activities, such as oil palm, in areas close to roads. But given other important factors, such as ownership of land, it is still unlikely the JVP would have been accepted.

xxiii

Box 1 - Rubber (Hevae brasiliensis):

Origin and History: The rubber cultivated in Punggu Jingau is indigenous to the area, although these plants are gradually being replaced with higher yielding, quicker maturing hybrid cultivars. Subsidies in the form of seedlings were provided around 40 years ago and have since been an important cash crop for the community, despite the fact that applications for fertilizer subsidies since that time have been repeatedly declined because they fail to meet the programs minimum acreage requirements. -1 Cropping system: Rubber is a versatile crop, requiring little more than high rainfall (>2000mm yr ) to grow. The rubber tree takes between 7-10 years before it is mature enough to be tapped. In Punggu Jinggau, individual trees or plots are grown without weed control or fertilizer application. Its minimum maintenance requirements and ease of harvest means it has very low labor requirements (1/2 day work in the field the villagers said). Product and yield: Rubber produces year round but production peaks between July and September. The latex produced by the trees is gathered by removing diagonal portions of the outer bark and then collected in small jars. The latex continues to flow for three days following tapping. Processing, sales and distribution:The latex is mixed with acid and cured for 2 weeks. The yield of 100 trees is an 8-10 kg strip which sells for between 1-7 RM (March 2012). These strips are sold to primarily to independent merchants. The Malaysian Rubber Board provides information on daily prices. (Jacobsen et al. 2011)

Box 3 - Cocoa (Theobroma cocoa.)

Origin and History: Indigenous to South America, cocoa has only recently been encouraged as a cash crop for smallholder cultivation in Malaysia, which remains a minor global producer globally. Cropping system: Cocoa requires 1500-3000 mm rain yr-1 evenly distributed throughout the year and cannot suffer temperatures below 20C. It is generally transplanted as seedlings germinated from seed or taken as cuttings. Trees are typically spaced 2.5 3.5 m apart. Large scale cacao producers apply around 100 kg N, 20 kg P and 70 kg K ha-1yr-1, although the residents of Punggu Jinggau are provided, and thus apply, less than 1/5th of these values. The trees begin producing after 2-3 years, but do not begin to yield heavily for several years afterwards. Product and yield: Yields of dried cocoa beans vary between 0.4 and 1.5 tons ha-1yr-1 globally, and Punggu Jinggau is expected to fall on the low end of that spectrum due both to the low fertilizer application rate and high losses to squirrels, the crops main pest in the area. The villagers said the squirrels take bites from large numbers of the pods and render them un-harvestable. Processing, sales and distribution :Cocoa beans are harvested by hand every 2 weeks. In Punggu Jinggau the beans are then dried and the pulp removed before being sold to travelling Chinese merchants. The price fluctuates around an average of 5.5 RM/kg (March 2012). Sources: (Jacobsen et al. 2011)

Box 2 - Pepper (Piper nigrum)

Origin and History: Native to India, pepper production in Southeast Asia began 2000 years ago. Used primarily as a spice. Cropping system: Pepper is a woody vine established through vegetative propagation with four cuttings per hole. These are covered with mulch for two weeks. The rubber plants are supported with poles from the Jinggau tree, which the villagers said are very durable. Ideal soil is well drained, aerates and acidic (pH 5.5-6.0). Pepper grows from 0m to 600m and rainfall from 600mm to 2,000mm with temperatures between 22 to 30 degrees celcius. Product and yield: Harvesting begins three years after planting. The peppercorns ripen 180 to 240 days from flowering. Harvests occur in April when the peppercorns turn yellow. Peak production occurs during the 7th years and harvests decline generally after 12 years. Processing, sales and distribution: Unprocessed black pepper is sold for circa 16 RM kg while the processed white pepper is sold for circa 25 RM kg (prices quoted in march 2012). The product is either transported and sold to the Pepper Board or collected by independent merchants. Source: (Nelson & Cannon-Eger N.D.; Fao 2007)

Box 4 - Oil Palm (Elaeis guineensis & E. oleifera)

Origin and History: The two varieties of oil palm listed above are native to West Africa and South th th America, respectively. Oil palm was first introduced to Asia between the 14 and 17 centuries but th was not an internationally traded commodity until the early 19 century. By 1934 Malaysia had become the worlds leading exporter of this crop. -1 Cultivation & Cropping System: Oil palm requires rainfall between 1500-3000 mm yr ., 5-6 hrs. of -1 sunshine day , temperatures consistently between 24-28C and deep, well-drained soil. Due to slow, irregular germination patterns seedlings are grown for 10-12 months under controlled conditions and -1 then transplanted into the field. Its seeding rate on plantations is 130-150 plants ha . The high yielding varieties most commonly cultivated in Malaysia require a minimum of 180 kg N-, 130 kg P- and 310 kg -1 -1 K- ha yr , along with regular herbicide application during the 2-4 year establishment period. The fruit is harvested by hand using long handled sickles, using a mechanical lift or by climbing the tree. After 30 years the palms, while still productive, become excessively difficult to harvest and are thus replaced. Product & Yield: Under these conditions, each palm is capable of producing 10-40 kg of fruit, -1 -1 corresponding to a maximum yield of 7 tons of palm oil and 0.8 tons of palm kernel oil ha yr . This makes it the highest yielding oil crop known. In addition to palm oil, the fruit also produces smaller quantities of palm kernel oil. Both of these oils are used in culinary, industrial and pharmaceutical products. Processing & Sales: The fruit is transported directly to a processing facility whether cultivated by small holders (in which case the fruit is also sold) or on plantations because in Malaysia there is no history of the small holder processing practiced in parts of West Africa. The fruit must be processed within 24 hrs of harvest to avoid degradation in oil quality caused by the release of free fatty acids. Processing consists of first kilning the fruit, then digesting at ~95C for 30-75min and finally screw-pressing or solvent extraction. Sources: (Jacobsen et al. 2012); (Tropical Crop Consultants Ltd 2010)

xxv

3.4. Subsistence activities (Kabir, Simon, Anna)

Contributing: Andreas, Lisbet, Ida This section discusses how villagers in Punggu Jinggau use their land to produce and collect food and other resources. These activities are non-income generating but are important livelihood activities and provide food security. Paddy rice production is particularly important in ensuring food security for most biliks. The state government provides seed of High Yielding Varieties (HYV) and the fertilizer. The villagers prefer to divide the fertilizer rations between the rice paddies and cash crops. Given a limited fertilizer application, local varieties produce higher yields than the HYV and thus villagers continue to cultivate local rice landraces from saved seed (Informal Conversation). For the biliks engaged in agriculture, one annual planting produces enough rice to feed that bilik all year. Some traditional social practices still occur in some subsistence farming activities. For instance the tradition of co-working called berduruk is practiced in the Punggu paddy field. This means one day everyone works one field and the following day they work in someone elses. Villagers cultivate and collect various fruits and vegetables throughout the year for their own use (Appendix F, Household survey). Villagers also use the local forests to hunt and collect timber. An example of a forest product is the Senggang plant (Figure 5), which is woven into mats and baskets that are used by the villagers. According to the villagers the plant is becoming increasingly difficult to find and they havent succeeded in cultivating it. This indicates that livelihood activities are influenced by environmental degradation around Punggu, and occurring on Borneo generally (Ananta et al. 2011) but is beyond the scope of this paper.
Figure 5; Senggang plant growing wild in the rubber fields. Woven into baskets and mats but the villagers say the plant is increasingly difficult to obtain and attempts at cultivation have been unsuccessful.

3.5. Other sources of income (Ida)

Contributing authors: Anna In addition to agricultural activities, Rigg (1998) identifies the importance of non-farm and off-farm activities in rural livelihoods. Indeed our results show the importance of jobs outside Punggu Jinggau as income sources. More than half of the biliks asked in our survey (8 out of 15; 53 %) receive remittances from adult children working outside of Punggu Jinggau, (Figure 6). Most youth work in urban areas but some have off-farm work. For example a son of bilik 3 works on an oil palm plantation. However, joining a JVP would not guarantee jobs in the Punggu area for this person because plantations close to the border hire Indonesian workers who can be paid lower wages of approximately 14 RM daily (Villagers and Informal conversation Indonesian workers on Bait Ulu plantation). However there are other jobs created by oil palm plantations that are typically filled by Malaysian nationals.

Figure 5: The total income for each bilik with data from the household survey. The total income includes cash-crop profit, work, remittances and pension/ welfare (e.g. government support including illnesses, poverty, senior citizens, role as headman).

Many biliks with adult children working outside of Punggu did not receive remittances. Though we are not sure, this might have a gendered component. Sim (2001) discusses how indigenous women sometimes stay home and marry or if they leave they return to establish families at a younger age than men (Sim 2001). Of the migrating youth in Punggu Jinggau 13 young men left for work whereas eight women left for marriage and

xxvii

four left for work (Household Survey, Appendix F). Thus, over time there is the potential for biliks with sons to receive larger total remittances. The number of youth working outside of Punggu indicates a lack of desirable jobs in the area for the youth, who we found to have higher education levels. Bilik 7 earns the second highest income but the tuai bilik (Peron) works in offshore oil in the Gulf of Mexico and returns a few times a year. Only bilik 16, with the highest total income, managed to reside full-time in Punggu Jinggau running a private business grilling chicken in Lachau. However, bilik 16 is not engaged in agricultural activities and thus, unlike other biliks with lower incomes that engage in subsistence farming, bilik 16 must purchase food. As such bilik 16s income and spending profile differs from other biliks in Punggu Jinggau and relies on one income course. Overall the majority of biliks receive income from multiple. This reflects the diversity in livelihood strategies. Given the relatively small area of the Punggu region it is conceivable that, unlike other larger neighboring communities engaged in JVPs with spare land (Informal conversation with researchers in Gua Sukat), Punggu has little spare land and villagers would therefore loose land and the associated income from agricultural activities on the land. However, JVPs present other income opportunities.
Family structure Bilik nr. Income order Family members living in the bilik and their age Family members working abroad and their age Bilik 5 Poorest Woman (70+) Man (42) Bilik 10 6. richest Man (60) Woman (61) Bilik 9 3. richest Man (55) Woman (53) Woman (23) Woman (27) Bilik 16 Richest Man (49) Woman (42) Boy (9) Boy (4) Man (22) Man (20)

None

Income

Remittances Jobs within the village Income from agricultural activities Governmental support Food

No

Man (42) Woman (40) Woman (37) Man (34) Man (25) Yes

Yes

Pepper, rubber

Pepper, rubber, cocoa Headman salary Paddy, and fruits plus NTFPs from garden and forest 10 chicken, 2 pigs

Pepper, rubber

No A business selling grilled chicken in Lachau None

No No paddy. Fruits plus NTFPs from garden and forest No

Yes, for health Paddy, and fruits plus NTFPs from garden and forest 20 chicken, 1 pig

Subsistence

Yes, for a son with a heart disease No paddy. Fruits plus NTFPs from garden and forest

Livestock

26 chicken, ducks

36

Table 3: differences between the livelihood strategies of four biliks that have different income sources and different total income. While livestock express the difference in economic wealth directly, other assets such as members of family, remittances, agricultural activities and governmental supports do not reflect economic wealth directly. Instead they reflect different combinations of activities and income sources and thus variation in livelihood strategies among biliks.

Another important source of income to consider is from various government support schemes As Figure 3 shows, some residents receive assistance for health issues, old age and poverty. Assistance can be a tool used by the government to sway votes and gain support (Soda 2000; 2001; Soda 2003). We witnessed a number of mothers from Punggu at the elementary school waiting for a one-time government payment of 500RM. When we asked what this payment was four Mr Anyi, the villagers and our counterparts all said it was because and election was approaching.

An area we did not investigate in the field was access to credit. Our Malaysian counterparts mother said it would be possible for villagers to get loans and own bank accounts (personal communication). However an examination of the Financing page on AgroBanks website reveals that in practice the majority of individuals in Punggu Jinggau do not meet the eligibility criteria for any available financing (Agrobank 2012).

3.6. The younger generation, education, and rural urban considerations (Anna, Ida)
Contributing authors: Lisbet Our household survey and informal conversations revealed that the older villagers have received primary education whereas the younger generation completed secondary education and are mostly employed in urban areas. Preston and Ngah (N.D.) describe this general trend in Malaysia and discuss how increased education levels have increased employment opportunities. As mentioned in the previous section, these youth provide important sources of income through remittances. It was our impression that the youth often return home for visits. Soda (2000; 2001; 2003) confirms that many indigenous youth living in urban areas feel a strong connection with their rural homes. No one from Punggu Jinggau has yet attended university (informal conversation). Partial explanatory factors for the lack of university graduates could be that the closest university is in Kuching, that people must apply, and that the youths from Punggu Jinggau would have difficulty becoming eligible for student loans (Agrobank 2012). During conversations with us, members from the older generation expressed a desire for villagers to attain University degrees to get better jobs. The lack of youth residing in Punggu and students who board at school both have implications on the Community. One result is a reduction in the available labor. Furthermore there is a gap in knowledge; the older generation knows about land use and agriculture whereas the youth have a more formal education. This generational divide in knowledge can have implications for questioning institutions. Soda (2003) presents an example that demonstrates these implications and shows the strength of rural urban connections. In 1983 the

xxix

youth members split from SNAP, the political party supported by many Indigenous people. The youth formed the PBDS and promised rural areas development projects in return for votes (Soda 2003). This example also illustrates youth challenging the status quo within SNAP and creating a new party. The same tendency to challenge authority might be present in Punggu Jinggaus youth due to differences in knowledge and access to communication technologies and alternative information source. We cannot say if the youth presently in urban areas will return to Punggu Jinggau eventually and the older permanent villagers themselves think the decision to return depends entirely on the individuals. But the impression from our stay in Punggu Jinggau is that the older generation deeply cares about their land and wants to pass it on to their children. This is an important factor in the decision to reject the Joint Venture Project. TR Entau told us, after lengthy questioning: look at us, we can build our house and send our kids to school we dont need oil palms (Entau 2012, personal communication).

3.7. Livelihoods in the wider context (All)

This chapter presented findings related to the assets and livelihood activities in Punggu Jinggau. The residents place a high value on their land because it is the basic asset that enables the many activities, such paddy and cash crop cultivation and forest cultivation, which provide people with food and cash. The villagers multifaceted livelihood approach insulates them against external shocks, the most important being market price fluctuations but which could also include pest and disease infestations, weather patterns, etc. The switch to a mono-cropping system, whether JVP or not, would remove the insurance provided by this multi-faceted livelihood strategy and increase the communities vulnerability. We notice some activities, such as the production of lankau, which are undertaken in a legal grey zone and we are unclear about the implications of these in terms of the decision to reject the oil palm venture or the degree to which these activities imply a degree of independence from and ambivalence to formal government institutions.

However the government contributes to the livelihood strategies in Punggu Jinggau in a number of ways, from direct financing support to indirect support from subsidies and infrastructure development. These contributed to increased living standard in Punggu Jinggau and the villagers are content. However there could be alternative negative impacts associated with such government strategies focused solely on economic development (Cooke, 2006). These issues are discussion in chapter 6. Furthermore, communities supporting the right ruling party are rewarded with infrastructure developments where the converse is true and development is withheld (Cooke 2006). Differences in political thought have shaped dynamics in the Punggu region, for instance one reason Punggu TinTing split was because they supported a different political party. Either way, government actions influence rural decision making and livelihoods. The way the community of Punggu JInggau engages with external agencies is determined by the internal community structure and is presented in the following chapter.

4. Traditional inst. & Intra-dynamics (All)

Punggu Jinggaus decision to reject the proposed JVP should be understood as the product of complex, multiscaler decision making processes, the internal dynamics and procedural functioning of which must necessarily result in an elevation of the voices of some groups, interests and values above others. As such, an understanding of the workings of those institutions and organizations within the community, particularly those which affect land use decisions and property rights, is crucial to gain an appreciation of the factors leading to the rejection of the JVP. This chapter will therefore attempt to examine both formal and informal organizations within the community and their internal dynamics at each of three distinct levels. Following that it will analyze the role of the Tuai Rumah - a uniquely important institution within the village and a discussion of how these various institutions relate to and interact with external stakeholders.

4.1. Community structure

The system which defines the policies and institutions that structure the daily lives of the residents of Punggu Jinggau, in common with all the indigenous communities of Borneo, are the customary laws known as adat. While these systems have increasingly come under the influence of state and national policies, they remain the central authority on matters of property use, distribution, transfer and inheritance at the community level. Furthermore the internal systems define the local political institutions, avenues for conflict resolution and the community penal code. Cramb (2011) provides a more complete description of the historical practices of adat. The following abbreviated account of the situation observed in Punggu Jinggau reflects both the modern influence of external institutions as well as this researchs preoccupation with matters of land use and livelihood strategy.

4.1.1 The biliks

The village of Punggu Jinggau exists as an independent political unit composed of one longhouse and four detached residences (Figure 7). Each bilek is entitled to several properties, at least one rice paddy and one upland plot and usually a kitchen garden, for which it reserves exclusive authority regarding all management decisions, including which crops/livestock to cultivate, which external inputs to employ and how to dispose of the produce (TR Entau, Informal conversation). Responsibility for cultivating private land resides solely with the bilik which manages it. Not surprisingly, the labor requirements of a crop, its expected performance on that land available to the bilik, the availability of subsidies and its market price were all named as important factors in the crop selection process (Transect walk). Other important factors, not explicitly stated but still evident as such, in the crop selection process include the biliks dietary preferences and the products shelf-life (participant observations).

xxxi

Figure 7: Layout of the biliks in Punggu Jinggau. There are 19 biliks and we were told there were 114 residents.

Privately owned properties are delineated by landmarks such as streams, trees and foot paths that are known and recognized by all members of the community but which are otherwise undocumented (Transect walk). These landmarks would be removed were the land to be incorporated into a JVP and the land cleared for the establishment of an oil palm plantation. Informal conversation with researchers in Gua Sukat revealed this created some conflict because biliks had not received titles prior to the land-clearing and no longer know where the boundaries lie. This suggests that the process of redistributing different plots among the biliks following the expiration of the contract would require initial surveying to prevent conflict and address the villagers of permanently losing their land by joining a JVP. Cramb (2007) describes how land is not bought or sold within Iban communities, but that it can be lent, usually on annual terms, or leased, with payment as a fixed share of the harvest (Cramb 2007). The former was observed only once in Punggu Jinggau (single wet rice paddy) and the latter was not observed at all (Household Survey). Villagers explained during conversations that when an individual from within the community marries and the new couple decides to have children, they construct a new home at the far end of the longhouse and they then constitute a new bilik. Until marriage, an individual is considered to still be a part of their parents bilik, even if they live mostly in the city working or attending school, as was often the case among the Punggu youth. Furthermore, some biliks formed within the community and then took up residence outside the village so they are still considered to be part of the community. Thus it is only those who marry and move away without forming a new bilik who forfeit their residency within the community, and all the associated voting rights, claims to land, etc. Upon forming a new bilik, the parents of the new couple will provide them with land to farm, although few, if any, of the youth from Punggu Jinggau appeared to be engaged in the work of farming, forestry, hunting or any of the other traditional livelihood activities. It is unclear whether, or to what extent, the villagers expertise in these areas will persist in future generations. In addition to the property managed by individual biliks, two other property types can be identified, each bearing its own rights regime: jointly-managed commons and unmanaged commons. The former includes a number of individual trees of particular economic importance which are owned and managed collectively, either by Punggu Jinggau or the Punggu community. The only specific example provided of jointly managed property was a mature sandalwood tree, whose bark fetches 1000 RM/kg wholesale. The unmanaged commons include the remaining areas of secondary forest, important watercourses and shared equipment like the

mechanical rice husker. All non-rivalrous1 uses of these commons are open and unregulated for every resident of Punggu Jinggau, including hunting, fishing, the harvesting of (most) timber products and the collection of NTFP. It is only in this sense that these commons are unmanaged; any rivalrous uses by residents or any uses by non-residents are managed and are done so at the village level.

4.1.2 The Village

Village level decisions regarding property use are made by finding consensus among all the tuai biliks during general meetings facilitated by the tuai rumah. Examples of village level property use decisions include choosing a subsidy programs to apply for, whether or not to participate in a joint venture scheme, the granting of logging concessions and the lease or sale of community land to non-residents (Informal Conversation). This last example, which recently occurred when a parcel of land was sold for oil palm cultivation, is not within the realm of NCR and thus was done without legal recognition or protection (Community Mapping PRA). The same applies to logging concessions of junggau and teak trees that were granted to non-residents in the recent past (transect walk). These facts carry two significant implications. Firstly, they demonstrate that the community is not completely unwilling to part with their property under the right circumstances. From an examination of box X presenting the stated reasons why Punggu Jinggau rejected the JVC, we can infer that in the instances described above, the area of land was considered small relative to their overall holdings, that the sale would not influence the villagers managerial control over the land or their present, diverse, cropping system and that the price offered for the property was reliable and fair. Secondly, we can imagine that the legal grey zone in which some of the communitys livelihood activities operate reflect a degree of vulnerability and possibly an uneasy relationship with the authorities. The status as tuai bilik, and thus suffrage within the general meetings, belongs to the husband/father of the bilik with only two exceptions where, due to widowing or divorce, none is present (Household Survey). This would seem to suggest that on matters in which the interests of men and women diverge, as a reflection of their differing cultural roles and values, the decision making process would be weighted in favor of the men. For example, from the wealth ranking exercise we have seen that the two genders have differing conceptions of what defines wealth. As a result, we can expect that in a decision which forced the community to prioritize between health and land holding, the latter would take precedence. The extent to which such examples of gender-related and mutually exclusive interests emerge in practice or whether this pattern had any bearing on the decision to reject the proposed JVP is impossible to say. Nonetheless, the implications are significant enough to take note of this situation. In addition to the Tuai Rumah, whose role will be discussed in detail below, there are a number of formal and informal organizations within the community serving as sources of authority. The JKKK (Village Development
1 Understood in the practical, not theoretical, sense. The stock of Jinggau trees, for example, while technically limited in number, is sufficiently abundant to be considered non-rivalrous for all intents and purposes.

xxxiii

and Security Committees), a legally recognized body since at least 1998 (Nyumay 1998) serves as a kind executive committee on matters pertaining to safety, health, welfare and development and, along with the Tuai Rumah, acts as a link to the state and district governments. In fact, the JKKK appeared in conversation to play a rather negligible role in the functioning of the village. Its members were nominated by the Tuai Rumah and confirmed by the villagers at large. Also observed was a division of the sexes during social gatherings and among each of the two emergent groups, individuals who for reasons BOX 5: The Role of the Headman. of age, education, wealth, travel, Translation of TR Entaus certificate personality or some Translated by Melissa Riman 08.03.2012 combination thereof, 1) To assist the Penghulu (government appointed tuai rumah/official with commanded the respect and many longhouses as area of responsibility (Cramb & Sujang 2011) several longhouse in the Punggu region) in administering their esteem of the other governing jurisdiction residents. This group, itself not 2) To assist the government in protecting the welfare of the people within recognized as such explicitly this jurisdiction by the villagers 3) To encourage the peoples participation in any governmental activities themselves, appears to have an 4) To assist the governmental officer in conducting related official matter outsized influence on village5) To resolve all family disputes according to the related customary law 6) To reduce the gap between the government and the people level decision making 7) To collect birth and death information within his jurisdiction to be processes (Participatory submitted to the district officer every end of each month (Birth and observation) and thus the attitudes Death Sarawak Cap. 10 1965 section 23) and opinions of individual 8) To execute any related matters assigned by the government from time to personalities could play a subtle time but profound role in some major land use decisions, including that of whether to join the JVP.

4.2. Selection and responsibilities of the Tuai Rumah

According to TR Entau, the position as Tuai Rumah is in many cases passed on from father to son, or from grandfather to grandson, which is the case in Punggu Jinggau. However, if the villagers do not approve the appointed candidate they can appoint another village member and it can therefore be said that the Tuai Rumah is indirectly selected by the members of the village. Once the village members have come to an agreement the chosen Tuai Rumah must be registered with the Government - the Resident Office of Sri Aman. With the registration the TR will be given a certificate stating his responsibilities as the Tuai Rumah (Box 5.). The TR, whose candidacy must now be endorsed by the Penghulu prior to election (Genta 2012), must be reaffirmed as such by the villagers periodically. During the TRs tenure they receive an annual government stipend of 5,400 RM. Before 2007 the allowances was 1000 RM annually. Before the 1980's, Tuai Rumah were unpaid. If the villagers come to disapprove of the Tuai Rumah during his period of election, they can choose a new candidate,

but the villagers cannot interfere before the end of the period stated by the government. Reelection is possible within an age limit of 75 (Entau 2012, personal communication). As the Tuai Rumahs is the authority of the longhouse, he is responsible for the tasks listed above (Box 5.). Many of these tasks make him the intermediary between the longhouse, the state, government and local organizations and groupings, such as the JKKK and the Penghulu. He is responsible for informing the villagers of new governmental actions, proposals and regulations, and on the other hand he is the responsible for getting wishes from villages to local and governmental institutions, where he represents the interests of the villagers of Punggu Jinggau. The Tuai Rumah, historically, has been downwardly accountable, but after the government started registering, paying and certifying the responsibilities of the Tuai Rumah is now also upwardly accountable (Entau 2012, personal communication). The shift from leader to middleman puts the TR in a more difficult situation than before (Diagram on Stakeholder Interactions; Entau, informal conversation). While we have not witnessed negative effects of any kind resulting from this process in Punggu Jinggau, the moral dilemma created by these divided loyalties may be playing a role in the broader context of village level land use choices in Sarawak. If the villagers have any problems regarding public complaints, the Tuai Rumah will bring complaints to the local government or to Iban institutions. If there are internal problems in the longhouse, e. g. Land conflicts, the Tuai Rumah is responsible to solve this. If he is not capable of doing this he can bring the problems to the SAOs office (Van Den Berg et al. 2004).

4.3. The Punggu community

The internal relations in the Punggu are structured around the different villages (see community map). If decisions common Punggu community land or interests, all Tuai Rumah from the meet at the Rumah - the gathering of all of the Punggu community - to represent the individual village's interests. (Diagram Stakeholder Interactions) During our stay community we noted how some were involved in the villagers decisions livelihoods. For example, the support for drainage systems in the common Punggu applied for through a Punggu community (transect walk). The agricultural can also be approached directly by the village Tuai Rumah, if there is a need for

Box 6. Reasons to reject oil palm JV (Household survey) 1. Do not want monocroping, too risky 2. have heard bad things from villages that have converted (dividend issues) 3. afraid to loose (rights to) the land 4. do not think they have enough land 5. do not believe they can profit from it (income from dividend, not land) 6. it doesnt create work, Indonesians are hired 7. want to use land themselves 8. high entry costs 9. dividend too small compared to land required 10. too dependent on company

community Punggu concerning common community Tuai Rumah and discuss of in the Punggu institutions and dams and rice field was meeting department specific agricultural

xxxv

support and knowledge or they have problems concerning a lack of tools, agricultural infrastructure etc, (Raseli 2012, personal communication) but if the application is made as a community, they have a bigger voice. The decisions to reject JVPs has been made on both village and community level. It is known from informal talks that the rejection was nearly unanimous among the villagers of the Punggu community (Major reasons given are presented in box 6).

4.4. Loss of sovereignty

From this assessment of the communitys organization, its dynamics and those patterns which emerge from it, one factor stands out clearly, if only for its repeated expression during the field research: Punggu Jinggaus explicit concern for the loss of rights to their land. The granting of managerial control over the communitys agricultural and forest land to a third party is perceived by the villagers as a loss of sovereignty. This loss of sovereignty would be a serious cost not only because of the cultural value that the Iban attach to it but also because it would erode the overall community structure and thus the social capital and support network which that structure provides.

5. Government institutions and policies (Maja, Lisbet, Simon)

Contributing authors: Anna, Kabir, Andreas, Ida Institutions create the frame in which the local people operate and therefore has an essential influence on those decisions taken by the individuals and community as a whole. Rules and regulations may be said to have a direct influence, while respect for authority and titles influence decision making indirectly. To get an understanding of the factors influencing Punggu Jinggaus decision to reject the JVP, it is important to gain knowledge of the external institutions operating within the Sri Aman area dealing with the development plans and policies of Sarawak, especially within agriculture. In this chapter we will provide an overview of the different external institutions, their policies and their interactions and discuss how these are affecting the inhabitants of Punggu Jinggau in terms of land use decisions and, more specifically, the rejection of oil palm JVP.

5.1. Land Tenure system in Sarawak

Before discussing development policies, it is central to present the land tenure system and the different land category definitions which have given rise to conflicts over land and property rights. These conflicts arise due to differing concepts of, and hence the possibility of making claim to, Native Customary Rights (NCR). The land tenure in Sarawak is based on a classification system dividing the land into five different classifications. For the purpose of this report, Native Customary Land is the category of interest, as it is this land which the government considers subject for NCR and because the inhabitants of Punggu Jinggau consider all land within the boundaries of the Punggu area as NCR land.

5.1.1. Native Customary Land (NCL) and Native Customary Rights (NCR)
The Land Code of 1958 does not define Native Customary Rights but recognizes the term through the definition of Native Customary Land (NCL) (Land is Life ch.2; Land and Survey Dept. 2012, Land Classification in Sarawak): Land in which native customary rights, whether communal otherwise, have lawfully been created prior to the 1st day of January 1958 and still subsist as such Allocation of NCR to land after 1958 is possible (Box 7) but requires a permit (Razali 2012, personal communication). To determine whether land is subject to NCR, the Land and
Box 7. Creation of NCR after 1958 (a) the felling of virgin jungle and the occupation of the land thereby created; (b) the planting of land with fruit trees; (c) the occupation or cultivation of land; (d) the use of land for a burial ground or shrine; (e) the use of land of any class for rights of way; (f) (any other lawful method removed in 2000)

or

Survey Department makes use of aerial photographic Box 0.1: Methods for creation of NCR post 1958 maps from 1947-1951, the condition being that the forest was cleared at that time. This approach would seem to invite the potential for disputes between natives and the government regarding the perceptions of claim to NCR. Importantly, the natives must prove the creation of NCR prior to January 1st 1958 (Cooke 2006). Immediately, one could ask how, given this approach, an NCR claim to land cleared between 1951 and 1958 could possibly be verified. A characteristic of the Iban peoples way of living has for many years been shifting cultivation (Fox et al. 2009) meaning that some areas used and considered as NCR land by the natives must have laid fallow at the time, and would have therefore appeared uncultivated on an aerial photograph. Generally, uncultivated land is considered by the government to be idle, which like forest, is seen as state land (Cooke 2006). This perception is contrary to the one the Iban people have of their NCR, which includes not only farmland but also fallow, forest and other areas important to their livelihoods (Colchester et al. 2007). According to Mr. Razali (2012, personal communication), however, such disputed areas can be considered as NCR land if the village can give evidence that the land constitutes an important part of their livelihood. Secondly, the natives traditionally had a semi-nomadic lifestyle. It is only within the last decades that the villages began to settle permanently; this with support from governmental development projects constructing longhouses of more permanent material and establishing water pipes,

xxxvii

power and sanitation. That many villages, including Punggu Jinggau, have also moved to other areas long after the cut-off date in 1958 (Appendix E) only makes the approach more questionable. Another issue attached to the land tenure system is that NCR land usually lacks titles; such titles can only be acquired by requesting a survey of the land. In order to address such request the Sarawak State and Federal Governments have in 2010 agreed to the NCR New Initiative (Razali 2012, personal communication).

5.1.2. NCR New Initiative

Generally the purpose of the New Initiative is to survey and register all land in order to differentiate NCR from state land, with the aim of improving the rural economy (Razali 2012, personal communication). The survey will be conducted in two phases Prior 2015: survey and register communal NCR land in order to establish boundaries Post 2015: giving titles to individual plots within the NCR land It is up to the communities themselves to agree upon the boundaries between them and to resolve any disputes before requesting a survey of the land (Jonathan 2012, personal communication; Razali 2012, personal communication). The individual titles given are permanent and the owner has free disposal over his land, i.e. he is allowed to make agreements with various companies or to sell it. Also, the title can be used to apply for subsidies. However, the title cannot prevent the land from being claimed for governmental projects such as health care and roads (Razali 2012, personal communication). In Punggu Jinggau not all inhabitants are aware of the initiative and those who are have heard about it via radio and television. Despite limited knowledge of the details of the initiative, most of the villagers who were aware of the initiative expressed a positive attitude toward the planned surveys, but at the same time uncertainty regarding the consequences of it. Nonetheless Punggu has not yet applied for the survey at Sri Aman Land and Survey Department (informal consersation). Because of continuous amendments to Land Code 1958 it has become increasingly difficult to prove claims to NCR. According to Mujah (2012, personal communication) proving NCR claims is a technical process to be tried in court, which can be costly to the natives and hence a possible explanation for why Punggu has not applied for the survey. Given the actual execution of the process and the Land Code amendment 2000, stating that all untitled land is considered as state land (Mujah 2012, personal communication), one can only guess about the consequences for those areas not surveyed before the final deadline for the NCR New Initiative, which at present seems to be unknown.

5.2. Development plans for Sarawak and Sri Aman area

Once a landscape characterized by shifting cultivation and smallholder farming, Sarawak is now dominated by oil palms which account for 57 per cent of the total agricultural land (Cramb & Sujang 2011). Especially after a logging boom in the 70s and 80s, oil palm was promoted as the crop to maintain the export industry and, despite price fluctuations, has. Unfortunately yield tends to decrease over the years, which could be an

additional explanation for the push for rapid expansion. According to Cooke (2006), the development of oil palm differs from earlier programs by targeting NCR land systematically. Since 1981, the year where Abdul Taib Mahmud was appointed Chief Minister of Sarawak (Sarawak Government 2010), the focus changed from smallholder development to large-scale plantation agriculture (Cramb 2011). A change generated by the increased global demand for oil palm products and the prospects of improved profitability of oil palms as an industrial plantation crop (Cramb 2011). The governments vision is for Sarawak to become a state with vibrant and sustainable land development which will be achieved by: Expediting the development of Native Customary Rights (NCR) land and other idle land into economically productive assets for optimal and sustained benefits to the land owners and the State through plantation development and commercial oriented programs (Ministry of Land Development 2012b). Another change seen when Taib was appointed was a policy shift with regards to NCR, with the state adopting the presumption of proprietorship over all land (Cramb & Sujang 2011). The same year, the Land Consolidation and Development Authority (LCDA) was set up. LCDA can acquire both NCL and state land for private estate development, and act as the mediator between landholders and companies in order to invite private investors to participate in land development (Bulan 2006). Amendments to the Land Code allowed companies, including foreign ones, to purchase land (Cooke, 2006). In the Sri Aman area a major upcoming development project, already approved by an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), is the Batang-lupar, Agropolitan project, which aims to establish several large scale oil palm plantations of 14,000 hectares, reaching a total area of 132,000 hectares (Raseli 2012, personal communication; Razali 2012, personal communication). The land portioned for this project is state land and is primarily consisting of forests. According to Razali (2012, personal communication) the long-term goal is to convert all state land into plantation, a project that requires expansion of the infrastructure, some of which has already been carried out (see Chapter 3). At this point it is worth clarifying the notion of development we encountered in Sarawak. Development refers to economic development. Once understood, the explanations and opinions we got from both government officials and village people made much more sense, and fortunately it was spelled out for us at an early stage by Razali (2012, personal communication) - development is money. Cooke (2006) establishes the same fact, adding that political or social development, at best, is pushed aside. It is virtually impossible to spend time in Sarawak without sensing the dominant role of this concept of development in government land use decisions. This applies to all levels, but in the following we will relate it to the community level, in general, and Punggu Jinggau specifically.

xxxix

5.2.1. New Concept and Joint Venture Project (JVP)

One of the strategies for including the NCR lands in the plantation development is through the Konsep Baru (1994) (Ministry of Land Development 2012a). The idea is to organize the fragmented NCR lands by bringing together the native landowners and, in cooperation with the private sector, creating a basis for large scale development pursuing optimum returns. The Joint Venture (JV) program has been formulated as a standard land development model approved by the State Government. To be viable for investment a minimum of 5,000 hectares is required and the land title to be issued to the JV company for a period of 60 years. The value of the leases of these land titles must be agreed upon while the monetary ratio of the JV is set at 60 per cent for the company, 30 per cent for local communities and 10 per cent for the government as they, by appointing its agency LCDA to manage the interests of the landowners, act as a trustee (Cooke 2006, Ministry of Land Development 2012a). One issue regarding the JV model, which was also expressed as a concern in Punggu Jinggau, is the fact that farmers are only paid if the plantation generates a profit. And even to this there have been cases where farmers didnt get what they were supposed to. It is also questionable what will happen after the 60 years when the lease expires. By joining the JVPs the traditional land tenure systems of the villages are erased and issues relating to the ownership of the land raised. Another potential problem is the soil quality and possibilities of growing other crops after 60 years with oil palms.

5.2.2. Perception of development

In order to reach the goal of two million hectares of oil-palm, Konsep Baru has become increasingly important. The schemes promoted by LCDA involve the transfer of land rights in exchange for becoming shareholders in a private joint-venture company, and persuasion is the strategy to carry out the plan. NCR land is considered unorganized and fragmented by officials and must be turned into an economic asset (Bulan 2006). The assumption behind the strategy, according to Cooke (2006), is that Dayaks are vulnerable to being left behind; they need to be brought into the mainstream of development in the face of globalisation. The method used is to repeatedly inform the natives of their right to develop, thereby reminding them of their backwardness. Cooke (2006) argues that there is a culture of looking towards government for development in Sarawak; development is a gift to the people and wanting development in modernist Sarawak means supporting the ruling party. Rural areas are rewarded with good infrastructure and services, initiatives which can be withheld. Doubts regarding development, even just asking for clarification, is considered an ungrateful act and this psychology of consensus and the fear of being anti-development or anti-government have made leaders accept JVPs. In many cases security of tenure and NCL questions are not discussed at community and official level out of fear of stigmatization (p. 38-42). This statement was partially supported by a statement from a former longhouse resident explaining that they wanted to vote for another party but were repeatedly reminded about the importance of their childrens education.

In this light, the rejections of the JVPs by Punggu possibly have more implications than first perceived. Are they now in bad standing? Does it cause restrictions, projects withheld, or lockouts? Or have times changed over the last 6-7 years? According to Cramb and Sujang (2011), the powerful state-business alliance has, to some extent, understood the advantage of negotiating. The number of protests and cases in court may have altered their procedures. Cramb and Sujang (2011) describe a case similar to that of Punggu, where the residents some years after having rejected the JVP returned with a negotiating proposal and reached an agreement on their own terms. This example proves that there is still room for the Iban to maneuver in spite of considerable pressure, although this case is described by the authors as somewhat isolated. The Iban tradition for thorough debate and the fact that a lot of idle land really had become idle, due to migration, cash crops and a new road, enabled a solution. The Punggu area does not offer the possibility of handing over idle land, as it is too small. According to Mujah (2012, personal communication), the area has already been alienated to Pelita (Land Custody development Authority). Hopefully they will reflect on the rejection of the JVP by the residents and weigh the risk of protests and lawsuits against the relatively small area.

5.3. Institutions involved in the agricultural development of Sri Aman, Sarawak

Besides being Chief Minister, Taib is also Minister of Finance as well as Minister of Resource Planning and Environment. As already described, Taibs entry has been decisive for the significant changes of land use and natural resource management in Sarawak. At division level, the Government is represented by a local council, the Resident Office. Mr. Jonathan Lugoh was appointed to head the office, which must be regarded as an administrative unit, not a locally elected government institution. The Resident Office constitutes the upper level of a political hierarchy, which include the customary Iban institutions in the bottom levels:

xli

Figure 8. Iban political hierarchy diagram

Apparently, decisions about the extension of large scale plantation management are made at the state level, while the district institutions in this context function as administrators of the higher level policy. None of the officials are elected and their accountability must be expected to be upwards toward the office appointing them. Even at village level, the Tuai Rumah must be endorsed by the Penghulo and approved by the Resident Officer. The raise of his remuneration could be interpreted as an attempt of further linking of the headman to the government apparatus, although it could also reflect rising costs of living in Sarawak in general. When a State or Parliament Representative presents a new development project, he can either approach the SAO or contact the Tuai Rumah/JKKK directly. When the LCDA in 2005 and 2008 proposed the establishment of a JVP, they approached all members of each longhouse in the Punggu Area. According to SADIA, there is a parallel process to this, where Tuai Rumahs are invited to meetings in other locations and persuaded or even bribed to give up land to oil palm companies. SADIA further stated that they consider the whole Punggu area as oil palm plantation, since it has already been alienated by the LCDA and the Tuai Rumahs under the Penghulo actively or passively consented to the development plans for the area. This statement we have not been able to verify. The reason, they argue, that the Tuai Rumahs seldom actively oppose the suggestions of a superior is the customary obedience to authorities, which is characteristic of the older generation. According to Mujah (2012, personal communication), the younger generation is much less authoritarian, and when SADIA has meetings with longhouse residents they always encourage them to have their children present.

With regards to the new NCR initiative it is most often the younger generation that approach the organization to get advice on how to conduct appeal proceedings or simply to have the initiative explained.

5.4. Situation of Punggu Jinggau and Punggu Area

In this chapter we have outlined the hierarchy of governmental institutions, and looked into the way they interact with the village. The JVPs have been rejected and the perimeter survey of the NCR New Initiative has not yet been applied for, although we have seen how the de-politicized definition of development, and possibly the intimidation of those questioning it, can put pressure on the decision makers at the local level. The institutions involved, and their interrelations, can themselves be factors influencing decisions. This is so because the upward accountability of government officials and traditional leaders and the closer attachment of the Tuai Rumah to the government institutions. Adding to this, the customary political hierarchy may constitute barriers to question suggestions from authorities. The younger generation seems to have a different perception of authorities than their parents. They do not necessarily share the worldview of their parents, many pursue new livelihood strategies, and yet they still seem to be attached to the land, which is reflected in their interest in the new NCR initiative (Mujah 2012, personal communication) and continued relation to the longhouse. To them, the keeping of land may represent a security of income in case of unemployment or after pension. They are usually better educated (Ngah and Preston, nd; & informal conversation.) are better informed, and by residing in urban area they have access to information originating from various sources. Web-based media like Sarawak Report and TV sarawak bebas, as well as Radio Free Sarawak which, since 2010, is broadcasting and podcasting daily, report on irregularities, corruption, protests and lawsuits regarding NCR-surveys and JVPs among other things. They have also presented evidence of Chief Minister Taibs and his closest family and political allies personal fortune made on both logging and the oil palm industry (Sarawak Report 2011). Who knows if Taibs long time governance will be challenged by the younger generation and if their increasing interest in legal procedures will make them turn to their customary land with renewed and strengthened interest?

6. Conclusion
The objective of this report was to explore the factors surrounding Punggu Jinggaus rejection of the proposed oil palm Joint Venture Projects; a decision interesting to investigate due to their ability to continue practicing diversified agricultural systems despite external pressure and the fact that neighboring communities have already joined JVPs.

xliii

From Ellis' livelihood framework we pointed out three main levels, local, regional and state, necessary to identify possible factors influencing the rejection and the data was collected during ten days of field work using both methods from natural and social science. Throughout the last decades the state-driven development policies have narrowed down in their focus and are now specifically targeting NCR land, to the extent that they are affecting not only the Ibans present livelihood strategy, but their cultural values and social organization as well. The government not only set the context in which the farmers operate and thereby indirectly affect the land use decisions, they now also have a more direct influence on the decision making processes in the villages. Thus, the JVP development model as it has been implemented throughout Sarawak and proposed in Punggu Jinggau is qualitatively different from previously implemented development projects. The comprehensiveness of the changes implied in participation in a JVP appears, from our perspective, to be unpalatable for the residents of Punggu Jinggau and as such they have rejected it. The villagers loss of managerial control over their property, the risk of permanent dispossession of their lands, increased vulnerability arising from dependence on a single crop and the elimination of commonly held property and their traditional social organization all constitute major changes stemming from adoption of the JVP. As such, these have been identified as the main factors contributing to the villages choice to reject the JVP. It must be acknowledged, however, that the shear complexity of the situation under investigation means that there remain more variables, stakeholders and systemic forces than our limited study can account for.

Reference

Agrobank (2012): Agrobank [Online]. Agrobank. Available: http://www.agrobank.com.my/pinjaman-peribadiagrocash [Accessed April 2 2012].

Ananta, A., M. Soekarni, S. Arifin, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies. & Bank Indonesia. (2011): The Indonesian economy : entering a new era, Singapore Jakarta, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies ; Bank Indonesia. Anui (2012, personal communication): Re: Sarawak Education System, Punggu, Mr. Ului Anui, Senior Assistance, Primary school SK Munggu Beringin. Basiron, Y. (2002): Palm Oil and Its Global Supply and Demand Prospects. Oil Palm Industry Economic Journal of Affective Disorders. Vol. 2, pp.

Bruun, T. B. (2012, personal communication): Re: Soil sampling tutorial, Copenhagen, Dr. Thilde Bech Bruun, Adjunkt, University of Copenhagen.

Bulan, R. (2006): Native Customary Land: The Trust as a Device for Land Development in Sarawak. In: Cooke, F. M. (ed.) State, communities and forests in contemporary Borneo. Canberra, Australia: ANU E Press The Australian National University.

Chin, J. (2011): Sarawaks palm oil industry: the next catalyst for growth [Online]. The Borneo Post. Available: http://www.theborneopost.com/2011/09/18/sarawaks-palm-oil-industry-the-next-catalyst-for-growth/ [Accessed February 23 2012].

Colchester, M., W. A. Pang, W. M. Chuo & T. Jalong (2007): Land is Life: Land Rights and Oil Palm Development in Sarawak, Forest Peoples Programme and Perkumpulan SawitWatch.

Cooke, F. M. (2006): Expanding State Spaces Using Idle Native Customary Land in Sarawak. In: Cooke, F. M. (ed.) State, communities and forests in contemporary Borneo. Canberra, Australia: ANU E Press, The Australian National University.

xlv

Coulter, J. K. (1998): Agriculture in the tropics.

Cramb, R. & P. S. Sujang (2011): 'Shifting ground': Renegotiating land rights and rural livelihoods in Sarawak, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint. Vol. 52, pp. 136-147.

Cramb, R. A. (2007): Land and Longhouse: Agrarian Transformation in the Uplands of Sarawak, NIAS Press (Nordic Institute of Asian Studies).

Cramb, R. A. (2011): Re-Inventing Dualism: Policy Narratives and Modes of Oil Palm Expansion in Sarawak, Malaysia. Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 47, pp. 274-293.

Department of Environment (2006): Malaysia Environmental Quality Report, Malaysia, Department of Environment.

Ellis, F. (2001): Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries, Oxford University Press.

Entau (2012, personal communication): Re: role of headman, Entau ak Entai, Tuai Rumah, Punggu Jinggau.

European Soil Portal (2012): Soil map of Sarawak, 1968 [Online]. European Soil Portal. Available: http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/esdb_archive/eudasm/asia/maps/MY3002_1SO.htm [Accessed March 30 2012].

Fao (2007): Piper nigrum [Online]. Rome, Italy: Ecocrop, FAO. Available: http://ecocrop.fao.org/ecocrop/srv/en/cropView?id=1714 [Accessed April 2 2012].

Fox, J., Y. Fujita, D. Ngidang, N. Peluso, L. Potter, N. Sakuntaladewi, J. Sturgeon & D. Thomas (2009): Policies, Political-Economy, and Swidden in Southeast Asia. Human Ecology. Vol. 37, pp. 305-322.

Genta, F. (2012): Candidates for Tuai Rumah are being properly screened [Online]. Sarawak Tribune. Available: http://tribune.my/home/14157-candidates-for-tuai-rumah-are-being-properly-screened.html [Accessed March 30 2012].

Jacobsen, S. E., J. C. Streibig, B. W. Grout & T. B. Bruun (2011): Tropical Crop Production 1 - Selected papers, Copenhagen, Denmark, Academic Press, University of Copenhagen.

Jonathan (2012, personal communication): Re: Development plans of Sri Aman, Mr. Jonathan, Resident Officer, Sri Aman, Resident Officer.

Katayama, A., T. Kume, H. Komatsu, M. Ohashi, M. Nakagawa, M. Yamashita, K. Otsuki, M. Suzuki & T. Kumagai (2009): Effect of forest structure on the spatial variation in soil respiration in a Bornean tropical rainforest. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology. Vol. 149, pp. 1666-1673.

Mikkelsen, B. (2005): Methods for development work and research, a new guide for practitioners, London, UK, Sage Publications Ltd.

Ministry of Land Development (2012a): The new concept [Online]. Sarawak: Official Website for Ministry of Land Development Sarawak. Available: http://www.mlds.sarawak.gov.my/modules/web/page.php?id=62&menu_id=0&sub_id=133 [Accessed March 30 2012].

Ministry of Land Development (2012b): Vision and Mission [Online]. Sarawak: Official Website for Ministry of Land Development Sarawak. Available: http://www.mlds.sarawak.gov.my/page.php?id=47&menu_id=0&sub_id=103 [Accessed March 30 2012]. Mujah (2012, personal communication): Re: Land tenure and property rights, Kuching, Mr. Nicolas Mujah, Secretary general ,Sarawak Dayak Iban Association (SADIA).

Nelson, S. C. & K. T. Cannon-Eger (N.D.): Farm and porestry production and marketing profile for black pepper (Piper nigrum), Specialty Crops for Pacific Island Agroforestry.

Ngidang, D. (2002): Contradictions in land development schemes: the case of joint ventures in Sarawak, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint. Vol. 43, pp. 157-180.

Nyumay, H. Z. (1998): Guidelines for Establishment and Administration of the Village Development and Security Committee (JKKK) in Sarawak [Online]. Official Website of General Administration Unit, Chief Minister Department. Available: http://www.pentadbiran.sarawak.gov.my/modules/web/download_show.php?id=48 [Accessed March

xlvii

30 2012].

Padoch, C., K. Coffey, O. Mertz, S. J. Leisz, J. Fox & R. L. Wadley (2007): The Demise of Swidden in Southeast Asia? Local Realities and Regional Ambiguities. Danish Journal of Geography. Vol. 107, pp. 29-41.

Pitty, A. F. (1978): Geography and soil properties. Vol., pp.

Preston, D. & I. Ngah (N.D.): Change in rural malaysia in an global context. University of Oxford and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.

Raseli (2012, personal communication): Re: crops and subsidies, Sri Aman, Mr. Raseli, Directors assistant, Agricultural Department.

Razali (2012, personal communication): Re: NCR new initiative, Sri Aman, Land and Survey Department, Superintendent Mr. Razali.

Rigg, J. (1998): Rural-urban interactions, agriculture and wealth: a southeast Asian perspective. Progress in Human Geography. Vol. 22, pp. 497-522.

Sarawak Government (2010): The official portal of the Sarawak Government [Online]. Sarawak Government. Available: http://www.sarawak.gov.my/ [Accessed February 9 2012].

Sarawak Report (2011): We release the land grab data [Online]. Sarawak Report. Available: http://www.sarawakreport.org/2011/03/we-release-the-land-grab-data/ [Accessed March 30 2012].

Sim, H. C. (2001): Bidayuh Housewives in a Changing World: Sarawak, Malayisa. Journal of Anthropological Research. Vol. 57, pp. 151-166.

Soda, R. (2000): Living strategies of the urban poor in a local town in Sarawak, Malaysia: population mobility of the Iban between urban. Geographical review of Japan. Vol., pp. 139-164.

Soda, R. (2001): Rural-urban migration of the Iban of Sarawak and changes in long-house communities. Geographical review of Japan. Vol., pp. 92-112.

Soda, R. (2003): Development Policy and Human Mobility in a Developing Country: Voting Strategy of the Iban in Sarawak, Malaysia. Southeas Asian Studies. Vol. 40, pp. 459-483.

Tropical Crop Consultants Ltd (2010): Identification and elimination of yield gaps in oil palm plantations in Indonesia. FAO Agriculture and Consumer Protection. Small-scale palm oil processing in Africa.

Van Den Berg, J., M. N. Salleh, M. A. Demies & J. Amir (2004): A Rapid Diagnostic Appraisal Report of the Socioeconomic Value of Forest Products for the Population in the Vicinity of Maludam National Park, Sarawak. Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia: Alterra, Forest Department Sarawak, Sarawak Forestry Corporation.

Wwf (2011): Oil palm, For the World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment, World Wildlife Fund.

Yusof, Z. A. & D. Bhattasali (2008): Economic growth and development in Malaysia: Policy making and leadership. Washington DC: The World Bank. On behalf of the Commission on Growth and Development.

xlix

Appendix A. Informal Conversations

Notes from informal conversations with Longhouse Residents, particularly during the evening in the Ruai 1) 2) Last years yields of paddy rice was 20 bags unprocessed, approximately 7 bags processed per household from approximately 1.5 hectare per bilik. Cocoa is a cash crop and the last 2 years the subsidies given by government. The cocoa sold to Chinese merchant who takes it to Kuching. Villagers applied for the subsidy, they were given 700 of the promised 1000 trees, 300 survived. Rubber is an important cash crop; the local communities wanted government subsidies but did not meet the criteria. (Refer to interview with DOA) Related to the oil palm plantation, oil palm on individual plots would be desirable if they could retain managerial control, but transport costs prohibit this. Especially the nearest processing facility is 45 minutes until 1 hour drive away. In order to accept the Joint-Ventures Project (JVP) for the oil palm plantation, they would have to surrender entirely of land because the plot are so scattered. All seven longhouses of Punggu would have to agree and sign the contract. Most of them are not willing to do this. The old longhouse moved in 1970 to the current location. 12 years ago, the concrete longhouse was built to replace wooden houses. Some hunting in the forest for home consumption related the border issues, they only can across the border when the guards not around / looking. Smuggling of commercial goods and rubber into the area from Indonesia. Some of the villagers cultivate hill rice alternating in rotation with pepper. A few fruit trees like mango, rambutan, durian, and others used for own consumption. Primary and secondary school children return every weekend from hostel and as of yet no university graduates. Wet rice paddies along river, area are shared with neighboring communities. Others Punggus mainly related- friends and family that have accepted oil palm plantation scheme. Generally, the distrust voices related to JVC scheme. Punggu Jinggau is the originator of all the Punggus in the area. Original location is about 15 minutes away. The location changed in 1970 and the concrete house built in 2000. The concrete houses much preferable to wooden house, more comfortable (fewer leaks, less maintenance, more comfort and amenities and fewer mosquitoes). The concrete in the longhouse is only reinforced by locally sourced timber and without foundation. Therefore the second story is all constructed by wood. The piped treated (unsure how) water since 1975 originally steel pipe but now the better PVC. This was established with government help. Electricity since 2 years, previously individual generators and before that a single large one that supplied by government which was unreliable (unfixable locally) Still no land titles (NCR) Small buildings behind the longhouse store grains and raise livestock. (chickens, ducks, pigs). Also small fruit gardens. With increasing oil palm and associated deforestation, two major effects:

3) 4)

5)

6) 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8)

a) b) 9)

Materials used to make matts (Senggang) is almost gone. Now, it is very hard to find many products (timber, NTFP, generally more scarce) Monkeys used to be heard during the morning but now are hardly ever heard. Rice wine made from a rice and sugar starter and the dregs of last batch provide yeast. Fermentation lasts a couple months, but the best quality has been fermented for year. Local still in Dadak to produce a kind of rice spirit /rice brandy. Punggu (Jinggau) has had at least 5 headmen thus in the last 100 years old. The government makes improved rice seeds available but the locals find their landrace producers is better (preferred taste and performs better) thus still save seeds. The use the free fertilizers from the government for the rice on their other plants. Herbicides use to clean fields before planting, not after planting. They have no major pest problems. They prefer to control by hand or using smoke, they say they use little pesticides used. The longhouse originally two-sided (west hallway at end) but not since concrete are built.

10) 11)

12) 13)

Conversation about Local/Regional Iban Political Hierarchy and resulting diagram

li

Appendix B. PRA results

Community Map subsequent schematic map of Punggu region.
Conducted 4th March 2012. Two separate maps were created. These were then compiled and this version was updated throughout the week.

Wealth Ranking Criteria

Conducted March 7, 2012: Results from both the men and womens groups in the PRA Ranking 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Men Land Paddy Rice Rubber, Pepper, Cocoa Education Fruit Livestock Pokok Jinggau tree Women Health Land Paddy Rice Rubber Pepper Education for children Working children Owning a shop Travelling Appliances (TV, DVD, washing machine) Car Job/Income labour Cocoa

Income and expenditure calendar

Conducted on the 7th March 2012: both men and women participants

liii

Income and expenditure calendar

Conversation about local/regional Iabn political hierachy and resulting diagram

Diagram on stakeholders interaction

Conducted on March 12, 2012 with the headman and members of the villa

lv

Appendix C. Semi-structured Interviews

First interview with Headman 04.03.2012
Interviewee name: Entau, headman (Tuai Rumah) of Punggu Jinggau age: 50 Topics: Background as headman, history of the longhouse. Guiding interview questions were presented to the interpreters before the interview. The interview was conducted in the Ruai with lots of people in the vicinity. An interpreter re-confirmed the findings with the headman on March 8, 2012. Can you shortly introduce yourself? He is the 5th generation of headman for this village. Punggu was the first village, which later dividing into more Punggus. The history of Punggu is more than 100 years old. This particular longhouse, in this location, was built in 1972 and is the 4th location of the Punggu. 1. How long have you been the headman of this longhouse and how did you become it? TR Entau has been the headman of Punggu Jinggau since 1998, taken over from his father. In this case the position of being a headman has through the generations stayed in the family (either son or son in law) but it doesnt necessarily has to be like this. Process of election: The candidate needs to be accepted by the member of the villagers and is therefore indirectly selecting the person they want. If the members of the longhouse are not satisfied with the candidate they can appoint another one. Once a headman has been elected/appointed he must go to the Government to get registered. After the registration he will receive a certificate describing the responsibilities of his position and frame the period of time he holds the position as headman. Besides the certificate the headman will receive allowances of an amount of 450 RM per month from the government. Before 2007 the allowances was paid on a yearly basis (1000 RM/year). It is possible for the headman to be re-elected but it depends on the villagers. If the villagers dont like him, they can choose a new candidate. But the villagers cannot interfere before the end of the period stated by the government. Education (headman chooses topic): when TR Entau was really young (10 years) the school was a local authority. He has finished primary education but couldnt continue part because he couldnt afford it, because of poor road system (use boats) and because he was placed in a very far school (another than the one he had applied for). 2. How long have you been a member of this longhouse? Since he was born (from the books kept by the headman he is born 1947) 3. What are you responsibilities as a headman? Approximate

Translate from certificate (Mel 08.03.2012)

1) To assist the Penghulu (several longhouse ~ Punggu region) in administering their governing jurisdiction. 2) To assist the government in protecting the welfare of the people within this jurisdiction. 3) To encourage the peoples participation in any governmental activities. 4) To assist the governmental officer in conducting related official matter. 5) To resolve all family disputes according to the related customary law. 6) To reduce the gap between the government and the people. 7) Collecting birth and death information within his jurisdiction to be submitted to the district officer every end of each month (Birth and Death Sarawak Cap. 10 1965 section 23). 8) To execute any related matters assigned by the government from time to time. 4. Can you tell of the establishment of Punggu Jinggau important events in the past? Does Punggu Jinggau have any contacts in Indonesia? NO; illegally hunting and gathering. Why they moved: In 1972 they moved to this current location because partly because they could no longer produce rice (due to infertile soil) and partly because it was closer to the Sri Aman road finished in 1962. The older village was far from road. Criteria for choosing location: In old days just move along trail. Before 1963/64 they planted paddy in Indonesian border but when Sabah and Sarawak joined Malaysia in 1963 the Indonesia army chased them away. 5. How have the population size of the longhouse changed over recent trends in population? The total population size has decreased. Old village consisted of 36 biliks. After Rawi passed away the longhouse separated into two longhouses (19+19) each. New members: People from Punggu area are welcome at any time and it happens that people move from one longhouse to another. Dont accept people from other areas only if married into the village. 6. Can you describe how the village makes decisions? How is a decision that affects the entire community made (i.e. to establish a community road, cut some trees, or do oil palm etc.)?

lvii

E.g. Subsidies: He will get an order from the local council; the rest of the village (heads of households) will give their opinion on the subject during a discussion in the longhouse. Everyone (heads of households) must agree before a decision is taken. If the matter is only village level, no representatives from government are present but in the case of state level projects, then yes. In the case of state/governmental proposals every member of bilik are present at the briefing. Joint Venture Proposal: Governmental agency asked about oil palm joint venture but most of the villagers opposed to that. In the case of JVP villagers can still say no but for other governmental activities such as road and health care construction the villagers cant do anything about it. If NCR land (land of Punggu) is required for infrastructure and public services the villagers cant say no. If they say no, they will not get compensation and the project will be conducted anyway. Land distribution: 7. How many villages share the same land farm area with Punggu Jinggau? First village, Punggu, was divided into several villagers: now 7 villages. Some of the villages have more than one headman (because there is one bilik with 2 headmen, some villagers said there were 8 Punggus). How is the boundary established between villagers? (Any conflicts in relation to the establishment?) 8. Have the area of Punggu (start village changed)? The area of Punggu has not changed since 1958, the year of NCR rules, stating that Iban communities cannot take more land. Only land cultivated by Ibans before 1958 is considered NCR land. Conflicts: issues with another village community (XXX?) try to take land from each other. Conflicts within Punggu are sorted out by discussions within the community. 9. Within the village boundary, how is the land distributed? Normally one bilek just clear the land and claim it, passes on to the next generation). Usually land is passed on from the generations to generations; boundaries marked by geographical features such as trees and river marks. Land is given from generation to generation. Divided to siblings by parents. The parents decide who gets the bigger part. The parents will tell the children what area they can use. NCR only land on which there has been activities on before 1958. Must continue to cultivate the land. Before 1958 there were aerial photos of Sarawak. Refer to this photograph. Anything after 1958 not considered as NCR land.

Second interview with headman

Topic: Land rights Duration: 1.5 hours 10. Is there any restriction on what an individual can do with their land? E.g. regarding producing etc.

No restrictions. They may plant whatever they want in their own land. 11. Do decisions on land use have to go through the village council? To which degree do the individual biliks have to decide on their land use? Only on shared land, eg paddy fields that are shared, building, drainage, etc 12. If a person moves out of the village does he/she then still have rights to use the land? (How many years?) If person moves away, they still own the land and can use it. BUT they loose the physical bilik. However an offspring or new generation can apply to regain the bilik if they choose to come back. The one who moves cannot claim it. (Question this, cannot sell if it belonged to them because should save for the new generation) 13. How do you plan/envision for the land use in the future? It depends on each persons own right. Can plant any crop. If you leave loose bilik but keep the land ownership. Can sell land to non-bilik. Political issues 14. Are you bound by certain government policies? Not bound by policy for example if gov. policy is to plant rubber, they will plant if they want to. Must all follow general laws? NO.2 The decision process regarding oil palms (Recall the time up to the decision to reject oil palms) 15. How many proposed JVP has Punggu Jinggau and by whom? LCDA Politian, join with Gua and Ran. LCDA has offered but the villagers were not interested. The proposal was withdrawn because available land was too small, must share everyones land, and the land already has LCDA (Polita in Malay). The proposal included all of Punggu area. By majority the villagers of Punggu Jinggau as well as the villagers of whole Punggu area said no to the proposal. 16. Can you describe the main arguments for/against in the discussion you had in the village? Land too small and they would have tos remove all other crops and share all villages land. Profit is not seen. If they join the JVP the land no longer belongs to them. They dont want to loose the land for 60 years. Also afraid they might loose ownership of the land completely. Assume they would no longer own it. Also concerns over dividends, perhaps they would not receive it if the company did not make any profits. The workers would be Indonesian laborers. Villagers must a wait certain period to gain the profits and by that time they might no longer be alive! 17. Who from the village was involved when the final decision was taken? And how was it made?

lix

Mutual decision. However there were a few who wanted it but most of them said no. Not applied for the new land initiative. Taxes: House tax to Sri Aman local counsel 6RM annually per bilek, all same Water Shortages: Frequent during the dry season (June to August) on and off and mostly occurs during high use periods (evenings or lots of visitors) particularly in the busy time. Water source is shared with Punggu Mawang, Dadak, TinTing. During heavy rain occasionally the water can get brown and muddy. Notes: 2 Pigs slaughtered during harvest festival. Headman will hatch eggs for chickens. Honey/Rubber/Pepper: Pepper takes 3 years before can harvest. Headman harvests fruits etc from his own land. Things in the forest are for everyone. Currently no one is collecting honey in Punggu Jinngau, previously they did but not anymore. He says no longer have the trees where the bees used to live (but we spotted a big bee hive on a walk between the longhouses). Headman Procedure: Must be over 20 and with a family to qualify for the position. The age limit for the position is 75. Will his son become headman Hopefully! If people want him to be Headman then good! Education: Depends on the kids what will happen (if they return etc.) but prefer for his kids to have a better and stable job. If they can get a job where they make enough money then they can invest in the land and can return to manage land themselves. Can bring back knowledge - but it depends on themselves. TR Entau has only shown one son (James) a few things relating to the land and its history because he returns frequently and is interested in it.

Agricultural Department, Sri Aman

Interviewee: Directors assistant Mr. Raseli Date: March 5, 2012 1. What crops the subsidies provided and what are the crops subsidies in Punggu Jinggau? The crops that are subsidized are: 1) Rubber -assisted for subsidies for 5 years 2) Parennial / Vegetables/ Annual -1 year subsidies 3) Herbs- ginger and tumeric 4) Oil Palm- no subsidies 5) Fruit industries- 3 years subsidies 6) Fish and prawn The subsidies given by government:

1) 2) 3) 4)

Paddy fertilizer (20 begs that consist of 4 types of fertilizer , pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, Rubber- herbicides, stem Cocoa- herbicides Vegetables- seeds

The organic fertilizers are supplied to the organic farmers. 2. Who decide what to subsidize? District communities consist of members of farmers of organization? Other agencies that give subsidies such as Malaysia Palm Oil Board (MPOB), Under farm mechanization for paddy plants: Blowing Transplanted Harvester (the charge RM 300 per hectare of land)

3. What is the application process, what documentation is required when applying for subsidies? The process for yearly calling for application: 1) From April to June, the application is opened and the farmers can apply. 2) The application will be processed during district meetings. 3) To apply the Malaysian citizen that has land and in between 18 until 60 years old. The members of farmer organization (The fees RM50 as entry and afterword RM 1 per year. 4) December, the order for the input is made through quotas. The Headman of the longhouse must certify the land. No help given in time of crisis including during down of price of crops, disaster and others. 4. On which basis are recommendations made with regards to crop choices? It depends on the landowner selection. a) The smallholders of oil palm- have to bring to the mill by their own and transport to local mill. b) Rubber is sold to wholesale. c) Rubber- marketing board

Resident Officer, Sri Aman

Interviewee: Mr Jonathan Date: March 5, 2012 Others present: Assistant Officer Mr. Crispin and Officer Mr. Willam (Development Section). Sri Aman Division: 5466 km2. Two Districts: Sri Aman and Lubok Antu. Kampungs (Malay): 30 Longhouses: 510 Land use: It is an Agricultural Division, Oil palm upriver with some rubber and pepper; downriver it is mostly

lxi

paddy fields. 1950: Timber extraction. Today: Most land in Sri Aman is cleared for Agriculture. 1. What are/are there any current or upcoming development projects in our area? Roads, water, electricity mostly already carried out. Currently two major projects: 1. Batang-lupar, Agropolitan project: Large-scale oil palm plantation, 14.000 ha. 230.000.000 Rm spent by govt. on this project. State Land, not NCR Land. Peat swamp land. Locals are participants. Hope there will be no negative socio-economic impact. Has been approved by an EIA, carried out by the State Government, department of Environment in Kuching. 2. Stumbin Bijak, Granery Project, wet paddy under Ministry of Agriculture. Tourism, including ecotourism, focus in Lubok Antu because of rivers, lake Batang Ai. Agrotourism, Homestay. Try to focus on traditional costumes on festivals etc. Agriculture more important than tourism involves more people and creates more skilled jobs. Who is involved in deciding which potential development projects to pursue? Participation usual starts from local/longhouse level1) Local representative from longhouse will be approached for the project 2) Resident office will look at request and analyse. 3) District Officer level must approve 4) Back to Resident Office. Implementation will be carried out and monitored. Once approved it is under the Technical Dept. Participation of community people is to observe and sign when the project has been carried out satisfactory. Training carried out by Dept. of Agriculture, regularly done for the technical part. Go to the longhouse teaching how to plant, control pests, manage crops, how to use fertilizer. Sometimes villagers go to other villages on tours to exchange knowledge. Villagers more involved, self-help, when eg doing plein-walk to cross wet areas. Implemented by villagers themselves, paid afterwards. Refer to Q1: Villagers no say in choosing crop, but complaints (about pollution etc.) are looked into. Could you briefly explain the new NCR-Land titling initiative? 60.000.000 RM spent by Federal Govt. for about 200.000 ha of NCR to survey the land. Process-the villages must agree on the boundaries, there can be no disputes, and be united before they can request for the survey. That is a condition. Parameter survey to determine boundaries between longhouses started in 2010, and runs until 2015. Only the boundaries, not the individual plots. Second round: Individual plots.

Why do they do the titling: Want to issue title and give legal documents? There have been disputes involving NCR-land no deeds. Titling to secure longhouses. There are NGOs disagreeing with the plans. Parameter surveys only involve NCR Land, not the NCL Land (Native Communal Land), which is gazetted as community land. What are the visions of the development in the district? To become agricultural and agro-tourism powerhouse- Modernisation of agriculture, high technologies and machineries. To create high skilled jobs and prevents out migration of young people. - Festival Benak, top 10 event in Sarawak, organised by ministry of tourism, to boost tourism.

Land and Survey Department

Interviewee: Superintendent Mr Razali Date: March 8, 2012 Other present: Assistant to Mr. Razali (Interviewers notes: Mr Razali seemed nervous during the entire interview and did not answer our questions). Maps of Sri Aman area Can be bought from the main office in Kuching, but a police clearance is needed. What is the definition of NCR Land and what is the concept of the new initiative? According to Mr. Mr Razali NCR is an easy definition; NCR based on old photographical maps from 1947-51, the areas cleared at that time are seen as subject to NCR. Mr. X showed us a (confidential) map of Sri Aman district indicating areas subject to NCR. New Initiative: Land and Survey department wants to register all land (~132.000 hectares) in Sri Aman to differ NCR from state land and help the people developing the area. Until 2015 communal land will be surveyed; before this can happen the villages must agree upon the boundaries. Post 2015 a second survey will be carried out to identify individual plot and in this connection titles will be given. It is the farmer himself that identifies his own land. According to Mr. X there are no forcing elements from the government. The surveys are conducted based on the maps from 47/51 but only as a guideline. In practice the survey are assessed from case to case. Also, if the farmers are cultivating state and can argue that these plot are an important element in their livelihood Land and Survey department can include the particular land in NCR land identification (and new initiative) is based on the APIS (aerial photo interpretation system). Phase 1: based on images from 1947-1951: This is obligatory (?) and will be completed by 2015. Survey regional periphery boundaries. Villagers must apply (?) but all periphery land. Phase 2: images from1957-1967: will be conducted post 2015, optional. Individual land surveying and titling. Only if you want, not forced. But you should know your land and there should be no conflict. Land and Survey

lxiii

is interested in protecting the people. They use a rights based approach. There is reason why they would not get their land surveyed, without the survey, people have no security and no rights. How does NCL differ from NCR? Compared to NCR land, NCL is communal i.e. the assets they share together in the village (e.g. longhouse and graveyard). What are the conditions related to the NCR title? We never get a clear answer on this question. He said: there are many benefits attached to the individual NCR titles. The purpose of the new initiative is to promote business and make sure that people have food on the table. Individual NCR titles are a good thing; people can use them to apply for subsidies. Also he keeps saying that there are many success stories attached to the NCR e.g. in relation with rubber where people earn a lot. The title is permanent, can sell if want or make agreements with different/various companies and organizations. What about common land? Mr. Y says no forest within communal land while Mr. X says maybe some, referring to secondary forest. Community land, up to adat, burial longhouse etc. Plan for Sri Aman area? To convert all state land into plantations this is a good thing because it will make people rich. Promote cattle; according to Mr. X there has been many success stories related to mix oil palm plantations. Other tiltag is new infrastructure, greater connectivity new roads, etc. along the river and through some present forest area; also a tech novation park. Vision: agriculture, food based ecotourism initiative. Help local people; please explain this/ clarify - Try to prevent rural urban migration. The government does not want to overwhelm urban areas. Development means more money (making people rich). The development plans will make people rich. Do you consider the environmental aspect in the development of Sri Aman area? Before establishing a plantation, an EIA is conducted. However the EIA is not given too much weight because this would restrict and delay action and would take too much time. Climate change? (Laughs) 1.5 mm sea level rise annually? This does not bother him, and anyway consequences will not be seen, at least not in his generation. Also he is not convinced about scientific evidence for climate change and said nature works by itself. According to Mr Razali, some areas are more suitable than others. Indonesia has good oil palm plantation practices, more organic material used, build their land. Are there concerns about recommending oil palm to communities that it would be risky if prices go down? And the land would be very difficult to reconvert to earlier use? We are not forcing them, it is their own choice! Global market prices are currently GOOD and will be for at least the next 3 years they are certain there will be good prices. In 3 years, who knows? This is beyond anyones knowledge and or control. Asked about the 14,000 ha of oil palm, where will they be? Yes, but pointed to area that was forested 1947-1951 (not the interviewers are not sure he really knew about it).

Other things No record in the sales of NCR. The farmers can sell their land to whoever they want. Even though the land is titled it can be claimed for governmental projects such as health care and roads. In such a case the farmer/owner will be compensated.

Primary school SK Munggu Beringin

Interviewee: Mr Ului Anui, Senior Assistance Date: March 9, 2012 Opened in 1968, Road to school in 1995, before it was a jungle path. The classes are in Malay, 1 Iban subject 4 times per week, English class also. Iban tradition integrated with syllabus. 114 students currenylu enrolled, up to grade 6 (age 7 to 12). Islamic and Christian students and Chinese descent. From surrounding area (Punggu, tara, etc), some stay over boarders, some go home, up to the parents. My Anyi: boarding is a better environment for learning Understanding that since 1974 all students stay at the school all week, except for the pre-school pupils. Not taught agriculture skills. Secondary school SMK Munggu. 90% continue, low drop out. University, Anyi said most want to go but students have to apply. University is in Kuching, none in Sri Aman. Daily schedule, 630 breakfast, 712 school start, 945 break 30min, 13:00 lunch. 1430 extra curricular. 6 dinner. 7 homework 9 bed. Syllabus from the Education Ministry (Sarawak government or federal?). Parents at school (some mothers) to get a 1 time grant of 100 to 500 Ringgit. Likely students in future look elsewhere for jobs. Changed a lot in the last 10 to 20 years. Migrate overseas or to the cities after educated. In a few years, the number of students in the school might reduce due to young people moving away and sending their kids to school elsewhere. Future of the school? 15 min away to SK selenjan. SJK Chinese school. Indonesian workers children dont get free education. (Do they bring their children to Malaysia when they work)

Keyinformant Mr. Trang ak Amir, bilik 6

Date: March 13, 2012 Reason for choosing Trang: Trang answered in the household survey that he would like to grow oil palm if possible. Q: If you had the opportunity, would you have oil palm as a cashcrop? Smallholder/JVC? A: Only if he can manage it himself, but he needs more money to do it. He does not want joint venture. Q: What is needed for having/to cultivate oil palms? A: To prepare the field a tractor/machine for ploughing. Then fertilizers, pesticides and seedlings. Sixty seedlings per ha (Andreas) acre (Lisbet), price per seedling 12 Rm. Transport: The mill is one hour away by truck. Need to rent truck (but Trang has no drivers licence). Or a collector takes it to the mill, which costs 150 Rm each trip (3 ton). Market price for oil palm: 300-500 Rm/ton.

lxv

Q: How do you choose which crop to cultivate on your different land? A: Depends on the soil. The soil here is very acidic. Dolomite/soil preparation is needed for pepper. He just plan it as he likes. Oil palm need more, need access to road. Q: Which considerations did you make when looking at a possible oil palm plantation? A: Oil palm is a long-term crop, once it grows big, it takes care of itself, no need for herbicides. The market price is quite good.

Sarawak Dayak Iban Assiciation (SADIA)

Non-governmental institution Interviewee: Mr. Nicholas Mujah, Kuching Date: March 19, 2012 Recommended by Dr. John Phoa in order to gain a better understanding of the new NCR-initiative and land tenure issues in general. Interviewees: Mr. Nicholas Mujah (secretary general), Mr. Rapelson, Mr.Taylor, Mrs. Niloh Nicholas explained that SADIA has 6000 people attached to it. They help out mapping NCR land, in the field with GPS and in the office processing the data (Mr. Rapelson). They are present at protests and staffs in the field often get arrested. Mrs Niloh films at these occasions, her shots can be found at you tube: TV Sarawak bebas. SADIA facilitates contact to lawyers; around 300 land tenure/NCR cases are in court, SADIA involved in most of them. 90 % of cases are won, but the state has means of appeal and the cases are prolonged. I presented my understanding of the new NCR initiative as explained to us by the superintendant at the Land and Survey department in Sri Aman and Nicholas confirmed it was understood correctly. On my question of his opinion of the initiative he said it was good, if only carried out as it was supposed to. The problem is that the perimeter survey is not done; only few individual plots are surveyed and given titles. The rest will be caracterized as State Land and developed. This is understood. When a new large plantation is to be established, the companies use sub-contractors and give them very limited time to carry out clearing and planting (ususally 2+2 years). If not complied with, payments are withheld or contacts cancelled. According to Nicholas, he already considers the Punggu area as oil-palm plantation. He said that the head of the Penghulo is politically appointed and that all the Tuai Rumahs fear him, and is corrupted by him. Fear in the sense respectful as the customary Iban political hierarchy requires. In this sense the customary institutions themselves become obstructions to customary practices. I told him that the LCDA had approached Punggu Jinggau twice through meetings with all community members, and that the rejections were decided at Tuai Bilik meetings. Nicholas said this is the way it is supposed to be done, but that usually meetings are (also) held with Tuai Rumahs alone. If a Tuai Rumah is reluctant to government plans, they have means to put pressure on him, even replace him. Often they find one of the poorer residents, as 450 RM a month is a lot of money in the rural areas. The community itself cannot choose headman. When Punggu area is still not cleared it must be because of a significant opposition towards the JVC, and they (LCDA/companies) hesitate to enter an area where the Tuai Rumahs do not control their people. He further said that many people in this area are working shifts in a nearby coalmine and therefore still are very attached to their land.

With regards to the NCR-initiative Nicholas said that it is the responsibility of TR Entau to inform and explain all residents about the new initiative and apply for the survey to be carried out. He is very aware of it, so how come 1/3 of the longhouse are ignorant of it? Rapelson: All land without titles is considered state land. They are changing the laws (that was promoted initially by Brookes). I said that I had heard that (some) rural people were quite happy about the money from oil-palm, now they could by cars and canned food/beer (I heard this from a friend, anthropologist who had been to Sabah)... Rapelson: Who says that? They do not benefit from it, not even as employees, they use indonesians. Mr. Tayler, who also works as a tourist agent, told that Bako and the island in front of it, are to be developed into luxury-resorts and that a bridge will be built to the island.

Mail communication with SADIA, March 30, 2012

1) For example, how exactly do alienation of NCR land take place, can timber or private purchase of land concessions occur without the community knowing of it previously? as per Sarawak Land code 58, Minister in charge under section...?.. has the prerogative power that he may alienate any land to a person deem fit......... 2) Or like in the Punggu Area that I stayed in, the residents of the longhouses have rejected the JVP, how can the land alienation take place? I do not expect you to comment on this specific case, but if you could sketch out some examples I would be very grateful. 2. Sarawak land code amendment 2000, all land in Sarawak are government land until you hold with title, any native claim to have asserted Native customary right land is to proof evident. ( this is a very tricky and technical process, meaning any native claim NCR must got to trail court which is costly and disadvantage to Native). hence this answer whether purchase of land concessions occur without the community knowing it. Yes very much.- many instances this is done under the pretext of land development purposes. 3) The Tuai Rumah must be approved of (and paid) by the Resident Officer, which makes him a government representative within the longhouse. How does this affect his relationship with the other residents? Any Examples? Yes every one in Punggu area may be objecting to the JVC but in reality those area is already being alienated to Pelita( Land Custody development Authority) long time ago and it just a mater of time and to me it a question whether the peoples are strong enough and united to face physical or confrontational approach to resist the Authority. Bet me the Tuai Rumah would not willing to forgo his RM450.00 government allowance. As proven during the National inquiry carried by Malaysian Human Rights Commission on encroachment over NCR recently, land alienation only involved the Ministry and the Land and Survey Department It really doesn't go in consultation with the Resident or District Office department faraway involved the Tuai Rumah. weird.

lxvii

Appendix D. Natural Science methods

Soil sampling results
Analyzed in Copenhagen th 19-22 march 2012. Para. Depth 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm %N Rubber 1 0.1249 0.05611 1.991 0.7129 4.35 4.43 630 630 1.07 1.43 Cocoa 1 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0.1874 0.06063 3.257 0.9156 4.39 4.28 990 630 %C Rubber 2 0.05427 0.05083 0.6872 0.6413 4.25 4.44 540 450 1.16 1.43 Cocoa 2 0.1955 0.06678 3.045 1.008 4.5 4.37 1170 630 pH Rubber 3 0.1299 0.06171 2.142 0.7736 4.4 4.29 900 -1800 1.11 1.37 Cocoa 3 0.2266 0.04379 5.347 0.6195 4.27 4.5 1710 540 MnoxC (mg/kg) Average/rubber 0.1030233333 0.0562166667 1.6067333333 0.7092666667 4.3333333333 4.3866666667 690 -240 1.1133333333 1.41 Average-Cocoa 0.2031666667 0.0570666667 3.883 0.8477 4.3866666667 4.3833333333 1290 600 Bulk density (g/cm3) Standard dev. 0.0422955746 0.0054407843 0.7999102533 0.0662247939 0.0763762616 0.0838649708 187.349939952 1353.9940915676 0.0450924975 0.0346410162 Standard dev. 0.020694041 0.011902018 1.2722845594 0.2029553399 0.1150362262 0.1106044002 374.6998799039 51.9615242271

0-10 cm 0-20 cm

0.989 1.36 Pepper 1

0.976 1.37 Pepper 2 0.1056 0.01468 2.304 0.2334 4 4.27 990 540 1.11 1.55

0.921 1.49 Pepper 3 0.09301 0.01559 1.801 0.2933 4.03 4.29 450 540 1.11 1.65

0.962 1.4066666667 Average-Pepper 0.0988 0.0158133333 2.0086666667 0.2675333333 4.0666666667 4.22 690 510 1.1366666667 1.59

0.0360970913 0.0723417814 Standard dev. 0.006355478 0.0012599339 0.2627095989 0.030814012 0.0907377173 0.1044030651 274.9545416974 51.9615242271 0.0461880215 0.0529150262

0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm 0-10 cm 0-20 cm

0.09779 0.01717 1.921 0.2759 4.17 4.1 630 450 1.19 1.57

Water sampling - results Water Sampling Point W1 NWQS class. Paddy Field (Up.) 7.00 25.57 6.17 0.012 0.018 IIA IIB I

Para.

Units

pH Temp. Oxy. TDS EC

C mg/L g/L mS/cm

NWQS W3 NWQS classificati class. on Paddy PJ Field Discharge (Downstre Receiving am) Point 6.34 I 6.80 I 26.55 6.10 0.019 0.003 IIA IIB 25.13 5.59 0.007 0.011 IIA IIA

W2

W4 PJ Tap Water

6.75 31.01 6.44 0.005 0.009

lxix

Saline Nitrate

Sal mg/L

0.01 ND 0.07 ND

I I

0.01 ND 0.04 10.00

I I

ND ND 0.09

I I

ND 0.02 0.11

Phosphate mg/L COD TCM TFC mg/L

I I

11.00 104 92

I I IIB

9.00 108 ND

MPN/100 40 ml MPN/100 ND ml

68 ND

COD=Chemical Oxyzen Demand, TCM=Total Coliform Micro. TFC=Total Faecal Micro.

Color classification 10YR Paddy 1 0-10cm = 3/4 10YR 4/2 Paddy 1 20-30cm Paddy 2 0-10cm 10YR 5/8 Paddy 2 20-30cm 10YR 6/8 Paddy 3 0-10cm 10YR 3/3 Paddy 3 20-30 10YR cm 4/2 Rubber 0-10cm 10YR 5/8 Rubber 20-30 10YR cm 6/8 Pepper 0-10cm 10YR 3/3 Pepper 20-30cm 10YR 4/2 Cocoa 0-10cm 10YR 4/6 Cocoa 20-30cm 10YR 5/6
Soil color classification

Color

Dark Yellowish Brown Dark G rayish B rown Y ellowish B rown Brownish Y ellow Dark B rown Dark G rayish B rown Y ellowish B rown Brownish Y ellow Dark B rown Dark G rayish B rown Dark Yellowish Brown Y ellowish B rown

Appendix E. History of Punggu Jinggau

lxxi

Appendix F - Results from household survey

HH B ilek (M/F ) 1 *

Me m ber s F am ily P en s ion or F ore s t / c rop m a in c as h Tota l a g r liv ing in th e liv ing R em itta nc e w elfare An im al hom e g a rden (bas ed on c rop inc om e Tota l a ge Inter view e rs bilik ou ts ide (R M/yea r) (R M/yea r) s (R M/yea r) C a s h c rops inc om e) (R M/yea r) (R M/yea r) inc om R P C

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

M F M M M (M) M M M M M M F * M M * *

Peron

Entau

75 43 58 42 48 43 66 55 59 53 64 46 58

Andreas/Hanif/Mel Eva/Ida Dae/Anna/S ebik/Lulu S imon/E va Vincent/Kabir Vincent/Kabir Lisbet/S iti Ida/S iti Ida Ida/Anna/Mel Dae/Anna/S ebik/Lulu Andreas/S imon Dae/Anna/S ebik/Lulu

6 5 4 2 3 4 3 3 2 4 3 2 2 4 3

2 1 2 0 1 1 2 1 5 2 1 2 2 2 2

3600 NA 0 0 3000 18000 400 1200 Y 0 4800 Y 3600 0 0

3600 0 0 0 0 0 500 700 5400 0 0 0 0 2400 0

N Y N N Y 720 720 Y Y Y N Y N Y Y

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y

X X X X X X X (X) X X X

X X (X) X X X X X X X X

(X) X X X (X)

0 rubber rubber rubber rubber pepper rubber pepper rubber rubber rubber rubber cocoa 0 rubber

0 7665 8820 1092 4200 5850 13104 10400 9000 10920 8820 11760 NA 0 7665

0 7665 10356 1092 7450 8705 15561 20592 9000 13520 9780 16960 NA 0 7665

7 7 103 1 104 267 171 224 144 135 145 169 3

48 Andreas/Hanif 48 Eva/Lulu

N Y X

408 7

Bilik Reason for opion about JVP

Knowledge about new NCR NCR (Y/N)

Comments on new initiative

1 2 3

%No data% Divident issue; heard that they can only get the divident after 20 years, woun't happen in his lifetime Because is not enough; not only want to focus on one crop; not interested in JVP, labour from Indonisia because it is cheaper; even their son will not be able to get a job close to home.

Y N Y If no dispute they can apply; have no opion because it will no have any impact to his life; re division: likes the assurance of land division %no data%

the divident is paid on profit basis; affraid that is it not profitting; all Indonesian workers Want to use the land for themselves

Knows the new initiative but doesn't uderstand; mixed feelings about NCR initiative; re division: it will be a good effort

If it is for himself it is good, if not it is not good; re division: still keep it for himself

6 7

But not enough land (personal); good profit Interested but it is not possible and hard to be done because of the large area required and the high costs

N Y

good for people; confirm the land; improve current land division will be good as the land will be known and determined; re division: will be much better, less worries Not sure waht happens to this land; With title your land is more secure; Re division: not sure %no data% Know the purpose but for oil palm he is not ok with it; re division: will not affect the land division Good, get to measure land and get right to the land; Re division of land: whoever stays will get the land Heard about it but don't know it If no dispute they can apply; safety about the land; he would then possibly rent the land

Afraid to loose land; Villagers of Gua Sukat brought issue N to the court If the company gets profit, the villagers will get 'dividen'. Y They only get RM 100 per each hectares of land Concerned that their land will be lost No, difficult to cultivate and poor transportation facilities; not enough land Too old, had to work hard and afraid to loose rights to land; Know about Gua Sukat nut still don't want to join Too dependent on company and no money Y Y Y N

9 10 11 12 13

14 15

single mother and no one to help her manage the oil palm Too little land and wouldn't be able to run his business; have just as much saying about longhouse desicions even though they don't cultivate land.

Y N

%no data% Good thing becasue the land rights will be secured; but diffecult to know the consequences as their are no experiences. Get subsidies for his business from agricultural department; money for kichen equi, training (sum 10.000 RM)

16 17 18 19

Not enough land %No data% %No data% %No data%

lxxiii

Household Survey Questionaire

Background Bilek Data Bilek Number: _______

Name Age (date of birth) Gender

1) In the last 12 month have any family members (living in bilek) been employed outside Punggu Jinggau? Bilek members living outside Punggu Jinggau First Name Residing Occupation where?

Month of occupation per year

Reason for residing elsewhere (work, study, etc)

1) How many members of your bilek moved out of Punggu Jinggau? Permanently ______ temporarily _______

2) Do any of them (permanent and temporary) send remittances back home? No____

Yes ____

3) Do any of your family members receive pension or welfare (state support or for organizations)? Yes____ No_____ a. How often? ______

INCOME SOURCES
Crops Field size Own consumption Government For sale Middleman Others (also inter-village) Own land Rented Land type Borrowed Others (exchange) Seeds fertilizers training Involvement with external agencies pesticides cash incentives others estimated Pepper Rubber Rice Cocoa Others

lxxv

LIVESTOCK Do to keep any livestock/animals YES / NO

Animals No. Own consumption

Chicken

Pigs

Ducks

Other

For Sale Notes and additional comments

FORESTY PRODUCTS

Forest products

Types of Own use products

For sale

Sold where town village elsewhere

Timber Fruit Animals (fish) Honey Plants Medicinal plant Herbs/spices Other

Land Management
Joint Venture Contract/Project
1) If it were possible, do you want to join the neighboring oil palm JVC?

2) Based on your knowledge of Gua Sukats experience, would you like to join the JVC?

New NCR Initiative

1) Do you know about the new NCR initiative? 2) What do you understand about the new NCR Initiative?

3) What are your opinions about the new NCR Initiative? 4) How do you think it will affect the division of land within the household/community?

lxxvii

Appendix G Synopsis Report

Table of Contents
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 80 1.1. Punggu Jinggau A brief introduction ................................................................................................... 81 1.2. Conceptual framework.......................................................................................................................... 82 1.3. Objectives and Research questions ....................................................................................................... 83 1.3.2. Research questions......................................................................................................................... 83 1.4. Background ........................................................................................................................................... 84 1.4.1. Research question 1 Livelihood strategies.................................................................................... 84 1.4.2. Research question 2 Institutional Policies .................................................................................... 84 1.4.3. Research question 3 Community land distribution ....................................................................... 85

2. Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 85 2.1. Positioning in the field........................................................................................................................... 85 2.2. Methods ............................................................................................................................................... 86 2.2.1. Livelihoods ..................................................................................................................................... 86 2.2.2. Institutional Policies ....................................................................................................................... 87 2.2.3. Distribution of land......................................................................................................................... 87

3. References................................................................................................................................................... 88

4. Appendixes .................................................................................................................................................. 93

4.1 Timeline ................................................................................................................................................. 93 4.2. Household survey and ranking exercise................................................................................................. 94 4.3. Soil sampling ......................................................................................................................................... 97 4.4. Semi-structured interviews: .................................................................................................................. 99 4.4.1. Structured interview with Bilek members: ...................................................................................... 99 4.4.2. Headman Interview ...................................................................................................................... 101 4.2.3. Governmental Institutions............................................................................................................ 103 4.2.4. Interview with an NGO-representative ......................................................................................... 105 4.2.5. Interview with urban migrants regarding land distribution and oil palms...................................... 106 4.3. Participatory Rural Appraisal ............................................................................................................... 108 4.3.1. Seasonal calendar......................................................................................................................... 108 4.3.2. Livelihood Focus Group Key Discussion Points............................................................................ 110

5. Data Matrix....................................................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

lxxix

1. Introduction
Malaysia is classified as an upper-middle-income country (World Bank Data) and is heavily dependent on income from its natural resources. Since independence in 1957, Malaysia has experienced rapid population and economic growth coupled with an expansion of market infrastructure (Fox et al. 2009). Malaysia has emerged as a world leader in oil palm production in response increasingly global demand (Yusof 2002; USDA 2010; Yusof & Bhattasali 2008). Borneo, Malaysia, is an important area for further oil palm developments, which is supported by the state government (Cooke 2006).Oil palm plantations have expanded greatly in Sarawak from 55,000 hectares in 1990 to 900,00 hectares in 2010 (Cooke 2006; Chin 2011). The governments goal is two million hectares by 2020 and this is being achieved by encouraging private sector involvement and converting lands under Native Customary Rights (NCR). Legislative and administrative changes under Koncep Baru (1981) removed earlier obstacles to converting NCR lands into oil palm plantations and encouraged native landowners to transfer their lands to the state for 60 years to be developed in Joint Venture Projects (JVPs) with private companies (Sarawak Government 2010). JVP establishment requires contiguous areas of at least 5000 hectares. This means land must be allocated from smallholder rural communities and aggregated for management under a single agent and deed (Ndigang 2002).

For Iban communities, the largest ethnic group in Sarawak, state-driven development has resulted in changes to traditional land use and cultivation practices. Shifting cultivation agroforestry practices have been traditionally important to Iban communities, but government policies discourage these, saying they cause forest and environmental degradation (Fox et al. 2009; Padoch et al. 2007). Cramb (1990, 1993) has been influential in documenting traditional practices of rights allocation in Iban communities. These communities are egalitarian and rights are distributed at the household (bilek) level. These include rights of access and rights to clear the forest for agriculture. During cropping periods, bileks have exclusive rights to these areas and can return to this land in subsequent years. Bileks that leave the longhouse relinquish their associated rights and land returns to the community (Colchester 1993). Systems of land tenure within Iban longhouse communities have proven relatively well-defined over-time and secure with regards to land rights, resulting in productive and efficient resource use (Cramb 1993).

1.1. Punggu Jinggau A brief introduction

The Iban community of our study is the longhouse Punggu Jinggau, located in southwestern Sarawak, Borneo, approximately two kilometers from the Indonesian border and near the rivers Sungai Ensiap and Sungai Lebai. During World War II, the longhouse community briefly resided in Kalimantan, Indonesia, where they may still retain ties. Punggu Jinggau consists of 19 households and 118 inhabitants. Punggu Jinggau is surrounded by secondary forest that villagers use to collect timber for construction, non-timber forest products (NTFP), and hunting. Punggu Jinggau is situated close to the main road connecting Kuching and Sri Aman. The village description characterized the majority of Punggu Jinggau residents as being subsistence farmers, many who produce hill rice; traditionally this is done with shifting cultivation. Punggu Jinggau also produces cash crops consisting mainly of rubber and pepper. Communities surrounding Punggu Jinggau have adopted or applied for JVPs. Google Earth images from 2007 (Figure 1) display a mosaic of land use around Punggu Jinggau. There is a major clearing approximately 1.5km North East of the longhouse, which is likely for oil palm, and surrounds a patch of forest. Despite several external development agencies promoting JVP and the fact that neighboring areas have already accepted JVP, to the best of our knowledge most members of Punggu Jinggau were not keen on the idea and have so far rejected JVP proposals.

81

Figure 1: Punggu Jinggau and surrounding areas (Google Earth 2007)

1.2. Conceptual framework

The decision to reject the oil palm JVP might represent an optimal allocation of assets within the local and regional context of Punggu Jinggau. Despite pressure from the state, private industries and numerous non-governmental agencies to adopt JVPs as a remedy for rural poverty, and the fact that many nearby villages already accepted such schemes, Punggu Jinggau rejected the idea, indicating to us that they must have preferable alternatives. The dynamics leading Punggu Jinggau to reject the proposed JVP might be understood through Ellis livelihoods framework, which defines livelihoods as the assets (natural, physical, human, financial and social capital), the activities, and the access to these (mediated by institutions and social relations) that together determine the living gained by the individual or household (Ellis 2001: 10).

Livelihood platform

Access by Social relations Institutions

Context Trends Shocks

Resulting in

Composed of NR-based activities

Effects on Livelihood security

Assets: the 5 capitals

Livelihood strategies Non-NR based activities Environmental sustainability

Organizations

Adopted from Ellis (2001)

Ellis livelihood framework differs from comparable frameworks due to its academic basis, which serves as a theoretical, analytical and operational tool. Ellis framework can be used to examine livelihood strategies residents of Punggu Jinggau use from different perspectives and scales. This ranges from the assets possessed by individual households, community organizations and regional and national institutional policies. Exploring the residents current activities will help us estimate the household composition of the five capitals within the context frameworks dynamic nature. Social relations, institutions and organizations link the capitals to the activities and other contextual categories (trends and shocks). This framework will assist us in our attempt to understand Punggu Jinggaus decisions.

1.3. Objectives and Research questions

1.3.1. Objective Taking the livelihood strategies of the inhabitants of Punggu Jinggau as our point of departure, we aim to explore the factors surrounding the decision to reject the proposed oil palm JVPs. 1.3.2. Research questions 1. What are the principle livelihood strategies of the community? a. What are the primary income sources of the community, including off-and non-farm activities? b. What agricultural and forestry activities are conducted and how? c. What quality are the agricultural soils in the area, specifically of the region proposed for inclusion in the oil palm JVP?

2. Which political initiatives, laws, regulations and amendments seem to influence the land use decisions of the villagers, such as the rejection of oil palm JVPs? a. What land use rights do the villagers possess and how would these change by implementing a JVP? b. What development agencies are negotiating with Punggu Jinggau and what is the relation between the parties? c. What is the role of the local government, its accountability towards citizens, and does it share the vision of the Sarawak

83

government? d. Who owns/uses the neighboring lands? Does this indicate anything regarding the decision to reject the oil palm proposal?

3. How is land distributed within Punggu Jinggau, what are the processes behind it and does this relate to the rejection of the oil palm project? a. What does Punggu Jinggau consider to be the present boundary of their land? b. What is the current distribution and pattern of land use within the community of Punggu Jinggau? c. How and when were these rights established? What is the recent history associated with the land and what will become of this land? d. What and whose land was included in the proposed JVP? e. Which arguments for and against JVPs emerged during the negotiations?

1.4. Background
1.4.1. Research question 1 Livelihood strategies Examining the livelihood activities and assets possessed by individual households will allow us to characterize the different households with regard to the possible consequences of JVP adoption. We assume there is homogeneity and variation regarding livelihood strategies in Punggu Jinggau, both of which are important to understanding the residents decision to reject the proposed oil palm JVPs. 1.4.2. Research question 2 Institutional Policies In trying to identify trends that have influenced the villagers decision to reject oil palm JVPs, we will examine the potential of Iban communities to make land use choices. In the context of large scale development projects, such as politically decided and facilitated oil palm plantations, the choices of smallholders appears to be increasingly limited. Apparently, the requirement for prior consultation with the villagers when the government wants to introduce a large scale project is no longer needed after the 1981 Koncep Baru (Cramb 1993). Upon arrival we

might find the villagers experience political pressure from the government to accept JVPs, which would suggest the space for villagers to make decisions is decreasing. The communitys relation with the local government, professional or political organization and their participation in other development projects or programs might add perspective to the rejection of the proposed oil-palm schemes as well as their ability to reject them. In considering the ownership and land use of neighboring areas we will also bear in mind the possibility of sensitive, illegal or cultural activities that wouldnt be immediately apparent or willingly revealed. 1.4.3. Research question 3 Community land distribution Recently there have been major socio-economic changes in Iban communities and perhaps these have translated into further changes in local land use patterns and perceptions. Cramb (1990; 1993) has documented adaptation measures in the traditional systems to deal with inequalities in land distribution that emerge over time. Therefore we cannot assume traditional processes of land distribution are operating in Punggu Jinggau but it is essential to understand these to determine if and how they relate to the rejection of JVP. 2. Methodology

2.1. Positioning in the field

Given that we are a big group visiting a relatively small village (consisting of 19 households), we are aware that it is important for us to consider the roles we partly take and partly are given by the villagers during our stay. We will divide into groups of two or three when we use a method and thereby hopefully avoid overwhelming our informants by being too many present at once. Different ages, gender, knowledge and experiences constitute our group, and we will try to use this as an advantage when meeting different villagers. Furthermore, we will try to coordinate with our Malaysian counterparts by carrying out methods that supplement rather than overlap with theirs. Also, we have agreed upon having an open attitude by showing our interest in their livelihoods and not initially and explicitly asking about their rejection of the oil palms since a hypothesis can influence their way of approaching our questions. Another important aspect to consider is the role of the interpreters, who will be included in the daily debriefing.

85

2.2. Methods
The following methods have been chosen in light of our limited time and resources to acquire an overall impression of the livelihood strategies, institutional policies and land distribution patterns associated with Punggu Jinggau. Many of the chosen methods belong to the group referred to as Participatory Rural (Rapid) Appraisals (PRAs). These activities are meant to create dialogue and enable data collection. They are characterized by flexibility and rigid execution of these compromises the PRA concept itself. Our own best judgment of the situation in the field will determine the final decision on how to best adapt the proposed PRA methods (Mikkelsen 1995). Informal interviews will be conducted with some of the longhouse residents, who will be selected opportunistically, and their responses could be further used to triangulate our research. 2.2.1. Livelihoods The household survey will seek to provide quantitative information concerning agricultural production and migration patterns from all 19 households. A focus group will construct a seasonal calendar that will allow us to determine the major occupations that collectively constitute their livelihood, while also determining how these activities are distributed over time and among different groups. Importantly, the process of collectively constructing such a calendar and the following discussion will bring to the forefront occupational variation within the community, points of contention, recent trends and other community dynamics. During this exercise the conversations surrounding various key discussion points will illuminate issues in the community from a different perspective than the same questions might generate if presented individually. Understanding the variation and distribution of soil quality within the area will give us an appreciation for the natural resource base upon which the village has constructed its livelihood strategy. Through walks and informal interviews we will map the communitys perception of the soil qualities, which will form the basis for site selection of volume specific soil samples. These soil samples will be used to evaluate the locals

impression of their soils quality. We will also conduct visual assessments of the topography, accessibility and other land aspects that might affect land use choices. Knowledge of the soil quality in the area proposed for inclusion in the JVP will provide insight into the opportunity costs associated with the projects adoption. 2.2.2. Institutional Policies We will identify important institutions governing the different categories of land surrounding the longhouse and interview representatives from these institutions regarding land use and pros/cons of oil palm JVPs. Semi-structured interviews with key-persons who represented the community in the oil-palm negotiations will ask about the associated pros and cons and other possible disagreements JVP implementation. A preliminary community map with two to three volunteer residents who will sketch a rough informal map identifying land use zones and borders to neighboring lands will give us a general overview of the area. The sketched map will help us understand the guided periphery walk where we will plot the extent of the communitys land using a GPS and discuss tenure and management regimes in their own and neighboring areas. Neighboring communities experiences might influence attitudes in Punngu Jinggau towards JVPs and government policies generally. Informal conversation during the walk should provide us with a basic understanding about what (bundles of) rights are attached to the different land-use types to help us determine which issues are important, and who should be our key-informants. We will openly ask if people want to guide us on this walk. We will use remote sensing tools to map and measure the land around Punggu Jinggau. The purpose of our Venn-diagram is to obtain information about the important institutions (formal or informal) and organizations related to the community. Because the diagram is influenced by differences in age, gender, occupation, political and professional orientation, we will attempt to obtain participants that represent variation within the community. Information from the Venn-diagram will help us to identify interesting institutions for further investigation and to determine if any relations are specifically important for understanding villagers motivations for certain decisions. 2.2.3. Distribution of land A second guided area walk with GPS will map individual land plots and common areas. We will need community members with knowledge of the lands history. During the walk we will engage in informal conversation about land use, ownership, and whatever else emerges. The GPS

87

data will be transposed to Google Earth, which uses a 2007 image of Punggu Jinggau. It will be interesting to compare our data from 2012 to investigate recent changes. It might be possible to use Qantum GIS for further analysis. Semi-Structured Interviews with bilek members, migrants and the headman will investigate land distribution processes. Possible earlier instances of conflicting land-use rights will be examined in semi-structured interviews with village elders.

3. References
Abdullah, S. A. & A. A. Hezri (2008): From Forest Landscape to Agricultural Landscape in the Developing Tropical Country of Malaysia: Pattern, Process, and Their Significance on Policy. Environmental Management. Vol. 42, pp. 907-917.

Colchester, M. (1993): Pirates, Squatters and Poachers - the Political Ecology of Dispossession of the Native Peoples of Sarawak. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters. Vol. 3, pp. 158-179.

Colfer, C. J. P. (2011): Marginalized Forest Peoples' Perceptions of the Legitimacy of Governance: An Exploration. World Development. Vol. 39, pp. 2147-2164.

Cooke, F. M. (2002): Vulnerability, control and oil palm in Sarawak: Globalization and a new era? Development and Change. Vol. 33, pp. 189-211.

Cooke, F. M. (ed.) (2006): State, communities and forests in contemporary Borneo Canberra, Australia: ANU E Press, The Australian National University.

Cramb, R. (1993): The evolution of property rights to land in Sarawak: An institutionalist perspective. Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics. Vol. 61, pp.

Cramb, R. & P. S. Sujang (2011): 'Shifting ground': Renegotiating land rights and rural livelihoods in Sarawak, Malaysia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint. Vol. 52, pp. 136-147.

Cramb, R. A. (1989): Explaining Variations in Bornean Land-Tenure - the Iban Case. Ethnology. Vol. 28, pp. 277-300.

Cramb, R. A. (2011): Re-Inventing Dualism: Policy Narratives and Modes of Oil Palm Expansion in Sarawak, Malaysia. Journal of Development Studies. Vol. 47, pp. 274-293.

Cramb, R. A. & I. R. Wills (1990): The Role of Traditional Institutions in Rural-Development - Community-Based Land-Tenure and Government Land Policy in Sarawak, Malaysia. World Development. Vol. 18, pp. 347-360.

Doolittle, A. A. (2010): Stories and Maps, Images and Archives: Multimethod Approach to the Political Ecology of Native Property Rights and Natural Resource Management in Sabah, Malaysia. Environmental Management. Vol. 45, pp. 67-81.

Eilenberg, M. & R. L. Wadley (2009): Borderland livelihood strategies: The socio-economic significance of ethnicity in cross-border labour migration, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Asia Pacific Viewpoint. Vol. 50, pp. 58-73.

89

Ellis, F. (2001): Rural Livelihoods and Diversity in Developing Countries, Oxford University Press.

Fox, J., Y. Fujita, D. Ngidang, N. Peluso, L. Potter, N. Sakuntaladewi, J. Sturgeon & D. Thomas (2009): Policies, Political-Economy, and Swidden in Southeast Asia. Human Ecology. Vol. 37, pp. 305-322.

Government, S. (2010): The official portal of the Sarawak Government [Online]. Sarawak Government. Available: http://www.sarawak.gov.my/ [Accessed February 9 2012].

Hansen, T. S. & O. Mertz (2006): Extinction or adaptation? Three decades of change in shifting cultivation in Sarawak, Malaysia. Land Degradation & Development. Vol. 17, pp. 135-148.

Ichikawa, M. (2007): Degradation and loss of forest land and land-use changes in Sarawak, East Malaysia: a study of native land use by the Iban. Ecological Research. Vol. 22, pp. 403-413.

Island, E. (2012): Borneo Project [Online]. Berkely, USA: Earth Island Institute. Available: http://www.earthisland.org/index.php/projects/borneo/ [Accessed February 9 2012].

Lambin, E. F., H. J. Geist & E. Lepers (2003): Dynamics of land-use and land-cover change in tropical regions. Annual Review of Environment and Resources. Vol. 28, pp. 205-241.

Lambin, E. F., B. L. Turner, H. J. Geist, S. B. Agbola, A. Angelsen, J. W. Bruce, O. T. Coomes, R. Dirzo, G. Fischer, C. Folke, P. S. George, K. Homewood, J. Imbernon, R. Leemans, X. B. Li, E. F. Moran, M. Mortimore, P. S. Ramakrishnan, J. F. Richards, H. Skanes, W. Steffen, G. D. Stone, U. Svedin, T. A. Veldkamp, C. Vogel & J. C. Xu (2001): The causes of land-use and land-cover change: moving beyond the myths. Global Environmental ChangeHuman and Policy Dimensions. Vol. 11, pp. 261-269.

Mikkelsen, B. (1995): Methods for development work and research. Sage Publications India, New Delhi.

Moma (2012): Ministry Of Modernization Agriculture [Online]. Sarawak: Ministry Of Modernization Agriculture. Available: http://www.moma.sarawak.gov.my/modules/web/index.php?menu_id=0&sub_id=1 [Accessed February 9 2012].

Padoch, C., K. Coffey, O. Mertz, S. J. Leisz, J. Fox & R. L. Wadley (2007): The Demise of Swidden in Southeast Asia? Local Realities and Regional Ambiguities. Danish Journal of Geography. Vol. 107, pp. 29-41.

Ribot, J. C. & N. L. Peluso (2003): A theory of access. Rural Sociology. Vol. 68, pp. 153-181.

91

Tanaka, S., S. Tachibe, M. E. B. Wasli, J. Lat, L. Seman, J. J. Kendawang, K. Iwasaki & K. Sakurai (2009): Soil characteristics under cash crop farming in upland areas of Sarawak, Malaysia. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment. Vol. 129, pp. 293-301.

Van Den Berg, J., M. N. Salleh, M. A. Demies & J. Amir (2004): A Rapid Diagnostic Appraisal Report of the Socio-economic Value of Forest Products for the Population in the Vicinity of Maludam National Park, Sarawak. Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia: Alterra, Forest Department Sarawak, Sarawak Forestry Corporation.

Van Vliet, N., O. Mertz, A. Heinimann, T. Langanke, U. Pascual, B. Schmook, C. Adams, D. Schmidt-Vogt, P. Messerli, S. Leisz, J.-C. Castella, L. Jrgensen, T. Birch-Thomsen, C. Hett, T. Bech-Bruun, A. Ickowitz, K. C. Vum, K. Yasuyuki, J. Fox, C. Padoch, W. Dressler & A. D. Ziegler (2012): Trends, drivers and impacts of changes in swidden cultivation in tropical forest-agriculture frontiers: A global assessment. Global Environmental Change. Vol., pp. 12.

Wiersum, K. F. (1997): Indigenous exploitation and management of tropical forest resources: An evolutionary continuum in forest-people interactions. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment. Vol. 63, pp. 1-16.

Yusof, Z. A. & D. Bhattasali (2008): Economic growth and development in Malaysia: Policy making and leadership. Washington DC: The World Bank. On behalf of the Commission on Growth and Development.

4. Appendixes
4.1 Timeline
Methods Coordinate with counterparts Community meeting (remember drinks and snacks) - Introduction & discussion Interview with headman (general introduction, land distributed, oil palm) Preliminary map and periphery walk(s) with GPS and guide (Land use) Informal interviews and participatory observation Preparation for presentation (sum up) Presentation Household survey (agricultural production and migration patterns) Focus group with seasonal calendar (Livelihood, division of labour, products) 4th-5th
X X

6th

7th-9th

10th-11th

12th-13th

X X
X X X X X X X

93

Semi-structured interviews with villagers (Negotiation on oil palm JVP) Semi-structured interview with government officials/NGO Semi-structured interviews with elders (historical) Household and community land Walk/ GPS Focus group discussion with Venn-diagram (social relations, Institutions and organisations) Market (crop prices) Soil samples and field assessment (natural capital: soil quality) Final presentation of findings
(X)

X X X

(X) X X X
X

X
X

4.2. Household survey and ranking exercise

To be administered to each bilek in Punggu Jinggau: Family Name: Family Members First Age Name

Gender

Occupation

Residing elsewhere?

Reason for residing elsewhere (work, study, etc) what kind of work/study?

M/F M/F M/F M/F

M/F M/F M/F M/F M/F

Notes Remittances

Position regarding oil palm JVPs (household or individual)?

Ranking exercise
+ Grown for this purpose ++ Important reason for growing this crop +++ Very important reason for growing this crop

Crops

Households use

For sale Sold in town Sold in village

Sold elsewhere

95

Pepper Rubber Rice Cocoa Oil palm

Other

+ Collected for this purpose ++ Important reason for collecting this product +++ Very important reason for collecting this product

Forest products

Households use

For sale Sold in town Sold in village

Sold elsewhere

Timber Fruit Animals Plants Medicinal plant

Herbs/spices

4.3. Soil sampling

We will collect a number of soil samples depending on the results of our walks, mapping and conversation. This process will consist of informal interviews with farmers while at the longhouse as well as during the periphery and area walks (described below). The information gathered regarding the soil fertility, drainage, ease of use, accessibility and topography will be consolidated into a simple map, which will then be used as a base for soil sample site selection.

Since the upper soil (a depth of 30cm) is the most exposed layer we will concentrate are samples at this soil level. If there seem to be big differences in the soil layers from top to bottom we will collect samples from the lower layers. At each field we will mark the samples correct position with GPS coordinates. We will ask permission of the owners of the chosen fields before collecting the samples.

The soil samples will be assessed and analysed in context of both physical and chemical properties. The chemical properties will be examined with tests of pH, Permanganate Oxidizable Carbon, organic carbon, electrical conductivity, and total nitrogen content. The physical properties will be assessed by looking at texture, colour, soil profile and soil density. All the chemical analyses will be conducted in Denmark.

Table for soil samples: (According to FAO soil description)

Name:

97

Date: Waypoint: Coordinates: Profile number: Slope: Photo:

Vegetation:

Land use history:

Comments:

Sample Id

Horizon thickness Sampling depths

Color

Comments

4.4. Semi-structured interviews:

4.4.1. Structured interview with Bilek members: Interview with bilek members regarding land distribution and oil palms

Bilek number: Name: Land use What is your occupation?

Age (approx):

Gender:

Children: M: F:

How long have you been member of the Longhouse? How long have you had the land?

99

What do you consider your land? How did you get it?

What do you use the land for? What have you used the land for before? What do you expect to use it for in future?

How do you divide your crops in the land (over time)? Production and oil palm considerations Do you produce oil palm? How and when did you start? Was your land included in the JV proposal? What was your position in the negotiations regarding JV?

Pros/cons of engaging? Can you mention some conditions you would have for considering joining a JVP in the future?

Social relations Can you describe your family connections and friendships outside the village?

Do you visit them? Do they return? How often?

Have you yourself lived other places, and can you tell a little about that?

Do you see yourself or your family one day moving away from here?

What would you like to see your children/grandchildren doing? Other things you might want to add?

4.4.2. Headman Interview Interview with the headman (and other elders/ key informants if possible) regarding the decision making process within the village and land distribution

Name: Approx age: Background as headman & the process of decision taking in general How long have you been a member of this longhouse? How long have you been the headman of this longhouse and how did you become it? Can you tell anything about the history of the community?

101

Can you describe how the village makes decisions? How is a decision that affects the entire community made? (i.e. to establish a road, cut some trees, or do oil palm etc)

Land distribution How is the boundary established between two longhouses? Within the village boundary, how is the land distributed? Are there special ways to distribute different types of land?

Land rights Is there any restriction on what an individual can do with their land? Fx: Regarding producing etc.

Is land retained in the community by temporary migrants? Fx: Your son/ daughter, does he have rights in the land here?

What do you, envision for the area in the coming generation? Political issues Are you bound by certain government policies? The decision process regarding oil palms (Recall the time up to the decision to reject oil palms) How many proposed JVP has Punggu Jinggau and by whom?

Under which circumstances/ conditions was the village suggested to join a JVP? Which political institutions and NGOs if possible were involved? Other parties? Can you describe the main arguments for/against in the discussion you had in the village?

Who from the village was involved when the final decision was taken? And how was it made? Other things you might want to add?

4.2.3. Governmental Institutions Interview with governmental officials

Name M/F Position Institution Introducing ourselves and our mission (maybe present ourselves as agr. rural development-students) Can you shortly introduce yourself Shortly present this institution What is the role of this institution? Do you have any development projects in our

103

area? Visions What are the visions of the agricultural development in Sarawak?

What are the advantages and the challenges related to JVPs?

Is your institution involved with the promotion of JVPs?

JVPs How do negotiations regarding JVPs proceed?

Can you mention some of the recent JVP-cases you have experienced? Which attitudes/ opinions did you meet that were for and against JVPs?

What do you do in a situation where a community is uncertain if they want to join a proposed JVP? (To which degree do the decisions depend on the attitudes of local people?)

Other things you might want to add? 4.2.4. Interview with an NGO-representative

Name Political power Shortly present this NGO What is the role of the NGO? Which cases do the NGO engage in? Please give some examples (If these examples do not include agricultural cases, ask specifically to such) What is the relation between the NGO and local people? What is the relation between the NGO and the government? To what degree does the NGO influence local land use decisions? Political standpoints Can you shortly tell us about the most important visions/ goals your NGO has? What do you see as the advantages and the challenges related to JVPs? How do your NGO relate to the goal of the government to double oil palm productions within 2020?

Organization

M/F

105

The decision making process and land rights How does this institution make decisions and/ or research? To which degree do the decisions depend on the attitudes of local people? Which rights do they have over their own land? How is land rights generally given/ understood in Sarawak? Can you mention some of the recent JVP-cases you have experienced? Which attitudes/ opinions did you meet that were for and against JVPs? Other things you might want to add? 4.2.5. Interview with urban migrants regarding land distribution and oil palms

Name Rural-urban link How and where do you spend and divide your time between the village and the city?

Age

M/F

Bilek

Children

To which degree do you consider yourself belonging to PJ? How long have you belonged to P.J? When did you leave?

How often do you return to P.J and why/ in which occasions?

Is this your land? Do you have ownership over land here? When you are in PJ, how do you use the area (farm, walks, forests, relaxing etc) / How do you spend your time when you are in the village? Are you close to other longhouse communities/ do you engage with them?

Do you enjoy hill rice? (thought it could be a fun question, see if they prefer it, and if they would plant it) Would you consider returning to live here full time? For the future what would you like to see yourself doing and where? (any idea) How do you feel about rubber and oil palm developments proposals?

How do you feel about JVPs?

107

If you have children, do you bring your children back? What do you see with them and this land? / Do you think that they have a future here? Other things you might want to add

4.3. Participatory Rural Appraisal

4.3.1. Seasonal calendar

Seasonal Livelihood Calendar Notes The occupations listed (rice, pepper, rubber, etc.) are our best guesses as to the principal occupations of the residents of Punggu Jinggau, but the choice of which occupations to include will ultimately be left entirely to the PRA participants. It should also be mentioned that they will be presented in the local language, pictorially or both.

Similarly, the calendar is laid out from January to December (with each months corresponding rainfall presented as an aid), but could be reordered/translated in order to serve the preferences/needs of the participants.

For each occupation, the participants will be asked to identify the timing of the individual tasks associated with it (in the instance of upland rice, this might include land clearing/preparation, planting, weeding, harvesting, post-harvest processing, etc). This is done on a continuous scale in order to allow the expression of intra-monthly variation of activities.

Participants will then be asked to identify the relative intensity of work for each (discrete) month associated with that occupation. This could be estimated either in terms of proportion of individuals engaged in that specific occupation during that month or proportion of time spent in that month by individuals engaged in that occupation, or any consistent combination thereof, depending entirely on the wish of the participants.

Either this calendar could be completed by each of several distinct demographic groups (men & women; youth, adult & elderly; etc.) or it could be completed collectively, with notes made for which activities were associated with which particular groups. It could be expected that the former would be simpler to conduct, while the latter could provide interesting and insightful discussion on the division of labor within the community.

109

Those individuals conducting this exercise would be expected to carefully observe, listen and note what occurs, as a source of ethnographic data, in order to understand the dynamics at play within the community and to determine which issues/ points of discussion might be relevant to further research, especially interviews and focus groups.

4.3.2. Livelihood Focus Group Key Discussion Points To be conducted upon completion of the seasonal livelihoods calendar 1. Are there times of the year which are particularly difficult (the next part we might only add if they have difficulty answering the question) due to, for example: higher food prices, difficulty getting credit, more demanding workload, taxes coming due, etc?

2.

What are some of the biggest differences between the calendar just completed and one that might have been created a generation ago? Follow up (if relevant) with specific questions on trends in gender roles, importance of off-farm labor/remittances, the crops produced, extent of land under cultivation, the productivity of the forest/importance of NTFP.

3.

What do you expect to change most for the next generation? Follow up (if relevant) with specifics mentioned in question 2 as well as any issues mentioned which relate to the viability/continuity of the community, security of land tenure and principal occupations.

Clarify what for you are the most important development priorities and project suggestions of the Sarawak government within recent time. What do you think of the Sarawak governments development priorities and projects?