Trees create water?
Debunking some gospel truths of Thai environmentalism
By Jon Fernquest |
Deforestation certainly doesn't seem good.
Hills stripped of trees are certainly not a pretty sight.
But exactly why is deforestation bad?
Because trees create water?
Because if highland hilltribe farmers cut all the trees down with their slash-and-burn farming then lowland farmers won't have any more water to farm with?
Science requires that beliefs be supported by evidence.
Forest Guardian, Forest Destroyers: The politics of environmental knowledge in Northern Thailand by Tim Forsyth and Andrew Walker, is a new book that takes a careful look at the scientific basis of popular environment beliefs in Thailand.
A book review in today's Bangkok Post summarizes the book's main points and also takes a look at some of the unstated assumptions of the authors as well. The review is written by noted historian of Thailand Dr. Chris Baker and contains many new and challenging vocabulary words. (See book announcement and first online book review).
debunking - proving that a widely held belief or truth isn't as good as people think
gospel truths - strong beliefs that people have (that they try to force others to have)
slash-and-burn farming - farming where highlanders migrate to an area, burn the trees down, farm there for a few years, and then move on to another site (See Wikipedia)
X supported by evidence - there is data that can be shown to prove X
a scientific basis - using the scientific method to prove that something is true
assumptions - the beliefs that you start your argument with
unstated assumptions - assumptions used in argument, not described or discussed
Here is the article in full:
Book Review
'Trees do not create water'
An iconoclastic and provocative study of forests, science and politics in Thailand CHRIS BAKER Monday September 01, 2008 In the key passage of this resolutely iconoclastic book, Forsyth and Walker target a foundational truth of Thai environmentalism - that trees create water. According to the gospel version, forests help create rainfall, save more of it in their spongy earth, and release it in measured fashion. Deforestation means less rainfall, more drought and more flash flooding. Conserving the forest is thus a national priority, and the debate is only over how that should be achieved.iconoclastic - goes against established believes
provocative - intended to make people angry and argue
key passage - an important part of the book
resolutely - determined, will not give up easily, will not change mind easily
a resolutely iconoclastic book
a foundational truth - a basic truth that comes before everything else
environmentalism - a philosophy and social movement centered on a concern for the conservation and improvement of the natural environment, speaking of a planet or place faced with a plethora of grave and urgent threats, often associated with unbridled consumption, economic growth, materialism, insensitive development, and booming population (See Wikipedia)
gospel - when people believe in something very strongly and try to convince others to believe in it
the gospel version - the version that people repeat over and over again (and insist upon as if religious truth)
in a measured fashion - carefully and deliberately
drought - a period of time when there is little rain and little water
flash flooding - very rapid flooding of lowlying areas caused by heavy rainfall and thunderstorms
Forsyth and Walker trawl the scientific evidence. There is no statistical link between the amount of forest and the amount of rainfall. Much of the rain falling on forests gets evaporated from the leaves or transpired through the roots. Forest soils are no better than cultivated fields at retaining and releasing moisture. In short, the idea that trees make water is a myth. A Mien highlander said the traditional way to increase water supply was to cut down big trees around the village.
Changing the terms of debate
By targeting this and other gospel truths, Walker and Forsyth hope to change the terms of debate over the environment in Thailand, and especially over the role of forests in the North. They argue that there has been one dominating story: Forest cover on the highlands is vital because it generates and regulates the water supply for the lowlands; this forest cover is under threat by deforestation, settlement of hill tribes, increasing commercial agriculture, soil erosion and more agrochemicals; the result is a "crisis" marked by declining water supply to the lowlands, more contamination and sedimentation, and loss of biodiversity. This idea of a "crisis" justifies the Royal Forestry Department taking control of the highlands as "A1 watershed". It has also reduced the environmental debate to one fiercely contested issue: Do highlanders living in the forests act as "guardians" or "destroyers"? One side of the debate points a demonising finger at Hmong cabbage farmers, and demands their ejection. The other side points a romanticising finger at the Karen, and suggests they are better guardians than forestry officials so should be allowed to stay.
trawl - search through a large number of things looking for something suitable
trawl the scientific evidence - look through the scientific evidence
evaporate - when a liquid turns into a gas, when water dries up off the ground and enters the air as moisture
transpired through the roots - water soaked up through the roots
gospel truths - strong beliefs that people have (that they try to force others to have)
change the terms of debate - change what people are debating about
deforestation - when trees are cut down and the forest is lost (See Wikipedia)
soil erosion - water washing away the earth
contamination - made harmful by dirt or chemicals getting mixed in
sedimentation - the process of dirt and rock settling at the bottom of water, after being carried along by the water
biodiversity - the variety of animals and plants in an area, often used as a measure of the health of biological systems, on Earth today biodiversity consists of many millions of distinct biological species, which is the product of nearly 3.5 billion years of evolution (See Wikipedia)
a watershed, a drainage basin - an area of land where water from rain or snow melts and drains downhill into a body of water, such as a river, lake, reservoir, estuary, wetland, sea or ocean (See Wikipedia)
one fiercely contested issue - a problem that people had a big argument over
Forsyth and Walker do a brilliant job of summarising the technical research in a way that allows lay readers access to the issue. They suggest that the "science" underlying the forestry issue is very shaky. Findings from elsewhere have been imported and used uncritically. Local research is rather sparse. Unwelcome findings are simply ignored. Forsyth and Walker pick through what local research there has been, and perform a lot of mythbusting. Rainfall patterns are made by the monsoons over the sea, not by the forests on the highlands. The Forestry Department's new tree plantations are probably hopeless at storing water. Roads are a much worse cause of erosion than highlanders' sloping fields. Agrochemicals aren't carried downhill in streams. The levels of sediment are surprisingly low. Hysterical claims about the decline in biodiversity are not borne out of careful studies of local environments.
technical - involving the specialised skills, methods, and knowledge used in an activity (such as science, engineering, art, crafts, or a sport)
technical research - research that uses specialised skills, methods, and knowledge (so is difficult to understand)
lay readers - non-expert readers
allows lay readers access to the issue - allow people who are not experts to learn about the issues
sparse - a small number spread over a large area
monsoons - the heavy rains during the rainy season of South and Southeast Asia
sediment - dirt and rock settled at the bottom of water
hysterical - in a state of uncontrolled excitement and anger
a hysterical claims - a claim made with uncontrolled excitement and anger
borne out of - created out of
Creation of false narratives
Forsyth and Walker are not trying to argue that there are no problems in the northern uplands. Rather, they are pointing out that scientific findings are being selected and assembled to produce a very specific story. They call this a "narrative", which is constructed to lead unerringly towards a certain conclusion. Trees make water. Therefore watersheds are vital for the nation. Therefore the highlanders are a threat to the nation and must be removed. Therefore the Forestry Department has a duty of guardianship.
Also, other issues are being screened away. Forsyth and Walker spend a lot of time on the famous dispute in Chomthong, where lowlanders complain that Hmong farmers upstream on the highlands are taking their water. A "dark green" NGO seized land that the Hmong had been using. The issue became internationalised and even Prince Charles felt compelled to condemn the Hmong. But Forsyth and Walker show that, in this and similar cases, the volume of water used by the upstream farmers is very small. The problem is not declining supply, but increasing demand. The lowland farmers have planted lychee plantations, and started growing soybeans in the dry season. The Irrigation Department has built devices to facilitate these enterprises. The volume of water being used downstream has increased far more than any decline in supply, but this factor is not part of the debate. Forsyth and Walker's point is that the usage of water needs to be managed all along the watershed, but this is not happening because of the way that the problem is being framed.
issues are being screened away - issues are not being looked at, are bing hidden
the way that the problem is being framed - the way the problem is stated (stating the problem differently might lead to a different solution)
How do these "narratives" get created? Forsyth and Walker show that a lot of people contribute. NGOs need a cause. Journalists need a catchy argument. Academics need a topic of research. Among the population as a whole, and especially in the new middle class, the image of the forest has changed from something wild and uncivilised into something exotic and valuable. But the presiding genius that Forsyth and Walker detect behind the production of this "narrative" is the state itself. Hills tend to be near borders and are easily occupied by communists, smugglers, opium-growers or illegal immigrants. The narrative of a forest crisis provides a rationale for controlling this unruly territory.
NGOs - a Non-Government Organisation, a non-profit non-government organisation that works and campaigns on issues of public concern, often working to create positive social change
a cause - a goal that a group of people are fighting for
catchy - attractive and easy to remember
a catchy argument - an argument that is attractive and easy to remember
wild - uncontrolled and excited behaviour, full of energy
uncivilised - unacceptable behaviour that is very crude, rude, or cruel
wild and uncivilised
exotic - strange and different, because it is from a far-away country
exotic and valuable
How to reach beyond these "narratives"? Forsyth and Walker admit this is not easy. More research would help, but research is often framed to confirm old ideas. More participatory styles of research and of land-use planning are important, but often "participation" is only for show. Reform of government agencies is needed, but will take time. Most of all, Forsyth and Walker argue that debate over the northern forests needs to be more open and fair. Give the highlanders a bigger voice, stop demonising the Hmong, and pay attention to the research that challenges the simple "truths", are some of the solutions offered by the authors.
confirm - show what you already believe is true
research is often framed to confirm old ideas - research that tries to prove what we already commonly believe (biased), rather than allow for other possibilities
land-use planning - government policy on how the land in different areas (zones) can be used (for example, some areas are residential where houses can be built, other areas are commercial areas where shops can be located)
reform of government agencies - improving government agencies
demonising - describing someone as evil, a monster or demon (amybe to convince yourself, maybe to convince others)
This is a deliberately provocative book. A lot of people will dislike it intensely. Some will feel it beats down more than it builds up. It tilts against all sides in the environmental debate and thus risks uniting them all in opposition. Its demolition of the scientific orthodoxy is sometimes convincing but at other times a bit thin. It argues for a more complex and "nuanced" approach but sometimes simple ideas are needed to unlock action. Some will find the book politically naive and even dangerous, given the fierceness of many battles over the forest.
provocative - intended to make people angry and argue
deliberately - done with a purpose
deliberately provocative - done with the purpose of making people angry
tilts against all sides in the environmental debate -
demolition - destroying a building to build a better building in its place
an orthodoxy - a view accepted by many people
a scientific orthodoxy - a scientific view accepted by many people
demolition of the scientific orthodoxy - destroying a commonly accepted scientific belief, to replace it with another
a nuance - a slight difference that is important but difficult to notice
a nuanced approach - an problem-solving approach that pays special attention to small important details
naive - lacking experience, not knowing how things really work
politically naive - lacking political experience, not knowing how politics really works
The unstated assumptions of the book
And what is Forsyth and Walker's own "narrative"? They don't apply their technique to themselves, but it can be done. They are generally sceptical of state controls. They note that commercialisation is already far advanced in the highlands. They think this is by and large a good thing because it improves people's livelihoods. They are sceptical of those who value the Karen as protectors of the forest because they are simply romanticising backwardness. They welcome more use of agrochemicals because they increase yields and hence economise on land use. In short, they think that commercialisation is undeniable and is probably beneficial. Policies for the highlands need to be built around this reality rather than myths of wilderness and natural economies. Forsyth and Walker promote a sort of neoliberal environmentalism.
Like it or hate it, this book cannot be ignored.
assumptions - the beliefs that you start your argument with
unstated assumptions - assumptions used in argument, not described or discussed
sceptical - do not believe easily, question whether something is really true
a livelihood - work that a person does to earn money to feed and take care of their family
improves people's livelihoods - provides more money for people to take better care of their family
romanticising - describing something so that it seems a lot better than it is
backwardness - being poor and underdeveloped
romanticising backwardness - make being poor seem like fun
neoliberal - a trend in thought towards economic liberalism, a belief that government control over the economy is inefficient, corrupt or otherwise undesirable, seen in Libertarianism and the work of economist Milton Friedman (See Wikipedia)
neoliberal environmentalism
