In the Mekong region early approaches to land use planning had many
similarities among the riparian countries, but with time developments
took different directions. These differences are mainly due to varying
degrees of administrative decentralisation, institutional responsibilities
and differing overall objectives for land use planning. In Cambodia and Laos, land use planning has been formalised and has become an integral
part of the overall planning system. In Cambodia, Commune Land Use
Plans are part of the decentralised development planning system and are
meanwhile elaborated by Commune Councils in all parts of the country.
In Laos, land use planning has a long history. In the early 1990s the Lao
Government started a nationwide ‘Land Use Planning/Land Allocation’
campaign. Even though results are questionable, land use planning is
well-known and accepted and reached widespread coverage in rural areas.
Recently, the approach has been further developed and participatory land
use planning at village and village cluster level is now a standard procedure
in land management. In Thailand land use planning started in the
1980s with a focus on watershed management and opium reduction. Since
then it has been expanded to many mountainous areas, particularly in the
North-West of the country, but has never become an institutionalised and
regulatory procedure. Elements of LUP have been introduced in the more
recent river basin plans. Vietnam started elaboration and regular updating
of land use master plans for all districts and provinces as part of the national
development planning approach. In the context of local watershed
management and community forestry, more participatory approaches
were introduced at commune level in the 1990s. At present, local LUP is
widely conducted in forested and mountainous areas, while the master
plans still take little account of this.
In the Mekong region early approaches to land use planning had manysimilarities among the riparian countries, but with time developmentstook different directions. These differences are mainly due to varyingdegrees of administrative decentralisation, institutional responsibilitiesand differing overall objectives for land use planning. In Cambodia and Laos, land use planning has been formalised and has become an integralpart of the overall planning system. In Cambodia, Commune Land UsePlans are part of the decentralised development planning system and aremeanwhile elaborated by Commune Councils in all parts of the country.In Laos, land use planning has a long history. In the early 1990s the LaoGovernment started a nationwide ‘Land Use Planning/Land Allocation’campaign. Even though results are questionable, land use planning iswell-known and accepted and reached widespread coverage in rural areas.Recently, the approach has been further developed and participatory landuse planning at village and village cluster level is now a standard procedurein land management. In Thailand land use planning started in the1980s with a focus on watershed management and opium reduction. Sincethen it has been expanded to many mountainous areas, particularly in theNorth-West of the country, but has never become an institutionalised andregulatory procedure. Elements of LUP have been introduced in the morerecent river basin plans. Vietnam started elaboration and regular updatingof land use master plans for all districts and provinces as part of the nationaldevelopment planning approach. In the context of local watershedmanagement and community forestry, more participatory approacheswere introduced at commune level in the 1990s. At present, local LUP iswidely conducted in forested and mountainous areas, while the masterplans still take little account of this.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..