Livelihood Sovereignty and Village Wellbeing and Gross National Happiness

Social Policy Ecology Research Institute (SPERI)

WWW.SPERI.ORG, speri@speri.org

A4 Ngọc Khanh Science Village = 12 C Phạm Huy Thong, Ba dinh, Hanoi, Vietnam

Livelihood Sovereignty (LISO) and Gross National Happiness (GNH)

A holistic anthropological approach

towards secure and meaningful living for all

Conference co-organized by the Social Policy Ecology Research Institute (SPERI)

and the Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan (expected in November 2015)

‘We wanted development of the kind that would strengthen our sovereignty and give to our people the ability to pursue and fulfil their innermost yearning’. ‘This represents the true spirit of great institutions of learning’ (Jigmi Y. Thinley 2013),

A new development paradigm

                                                                               

             Jigmi Y. Thinley

Former Prime Minister of Bhutan

Chairman, Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan

Context and Consciousness

In over 20 years of learning about the aspirations of indigenous minority people in the Mekong region, SPERI has come to understand their circumstances and the consequences of communities losing their natural spaces of forest, land, rivers and mountains in which they have had the freedom of creating and enjoying their own well-being and happiness generation after generation for hundreds of years. This loss has been caused by ‘industrialization’, modernization’ and ‘globalization’ and an approach to development in which progress and human well-being is measured in terms of ‘Gross Domestic Product’ and the promotions of consumerism within a liberal market economy. This has lead to enormous global economic growth over the past century, but it has also brought planet Earth to the brink of ecological disaster through human-induced climate change, the destruction of vital ecosystems such as forests and the loss of biodiversity. Furthermore, while economic growth has helped lift millions of people out of poverty, many more millions remain poor, and the gap between the world’s rich and poor is getting even wider. Above all, indigenous minority peoples are finding it increasingly difficult to make a living on their ancestral lands. As their land and natural resources are alienated from them, and as their social institutions and cultures are weakened, they are losing control over their lives and destinies.

We need to wake up from our “sleep walking” to the edge of the precipice. We need to change our ways fundamentally and drastically, based on an intelligent and responsible understanding of what constitutes true societal progress and the purpose of development’ (Jigmi. Y Thinley 2013).

The Kingdom of Bhutan has chosen not to follow the dominant development paradigm and to base its national development policy on an alternative approach that is rooted in Bhutanese Buddhist values and which measures progress not in terms of an increase in Gross National Product but Gross National Happiness. GNH is a unique approach to national and global development. The concept of Gross national Happiness consists of four pillars: Fair socio-economic development (better education and health), conservation and promotion of a vibrant culture, environmental protection and good governance (Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan).  This approach ‘ represents the true spirit of great institutions of learning’ (Jigmi Y. Thinley 2013),  It  also helps maintain national sovereignty, the integrity of Bhutanese culture and identity and the natural environment on which human life depends. The Bhutanese national philosophy, strategy and daily practice  of ‘Gross National Happiness’ is now becoming a source of inspiration and a model for people all over the world.

From its beginning in the 1990s, SPERI’s staff has lived and worked with indigenous  minority communities for years at a time to learn the meaning of ‘well-being and happiness’ as understood by indigenous peoples and practiced through their own wisdom in daily behavior and expressed in their traditional customary laws . Alongside indigenous traditional healers, spirit leaders and people, SPERI has been promoting intensively networking at all levels, individually and communally, bottom-up participatory learning and action for the sharing and enriching of the norms applying to the five interrelated rights of ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’ in order to empower grassroots democratization and self-determination for strengthening and regaining the five inter-related rights comprising ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’.

Accordingly, SPERI has recognized and defined five inter-related livelihood rights that an indigenous minority people, individually and communally, or a nation-state, need to enjoy in order to have sovereignty over their livelihoods: 1) The right to land, forest and water, clean air and natural landscape (basic); 2) The right to maintain one’s own religion (unique); 3) The right to live according to one’s own way of life and values of happiness and wellbeing within one’s own natural environment (practice); 4. The right to operate according to one’s own knowledge and decide what to plant, initiate, create and invent on one’s own land; (holistic); and 5) The right to co-manage or co-govern natural resources with neighboring communities and local authorities (strategic).(SPERI, 2009)

‘Livelihood Sovereignty is ‘a holistic ethical alternative solution’ that needs to be daily exercised, voluntarily and legally, at individual, communal, national and international levels  in order to consolidate the sharing of the responsibility towards all living things, for today as well as for the generations of tomorrow. With the achievement of Livelihood Sovereignty, all organisms, human and non-human, will be living in harmony with each other, enjoying happiness and wellbeing, in interdependent self-determination’ (SPERI, 2009).

By practicing according to this understanding of Livelihood Sovereignty, SPERI hopes to advance the popular concepts of ‘food security’, food sovereignty, and ‘right livelihood’ to a new level in order to secure a better future for both humans and nature. Furthermore,

‘Every ‘Livelihood’ has its own identity. ‘Livelihood identity’ defines a holistic system of social identity which reflects an interaction of living things within a relationship between human and nature for maintaining its own characteristics culturally, socio-civilly, ecologically and economically’ (Tran thi Lanh 2009). 

Similar to the Bhutanese value of Well-Being and Happiness, the indigenous minority people in the Mekong region maintain a deep spiritual commitment to nature and cultural identity. In their religious worship of nature, and in their traditional forms of leadership, they are confident in governing their own people and preserving their natural surroundings in unity from generation to generation by their own customary laws, balancing their material and spiritual needs without abusing either society or nature.

We believe that ‘Well-being is your own gift to yourself, from your own values and behaviour. If you consciously nurture this gift, at any moment in your life, it will return to you the happiness that is yours. Thereafter, your sovereignty of freedom and creativeness will not desert you” (Tran thi Lanh 2009).

In order to promote alternative and holistic ways for human development, existing practices need to be linked with each other and exchange facilitated for cross-learning and mutual inspiration, reassurance and support. Thus, the idea was born to organise a sharing of ideas and experiences between indigenous minority peoples from the Mekong region and the people of Bhutan.

The conference is aimed at building a strong connection between The Livelihood Sovereignty Alliance (LISO) in Mekong and The Gross National Happiness Centre in Bhutan, with the aim of expanding an understanding among people of the linkages between Livelihood Sovereignty and Gross National Happiness as a possible way of living, and of changing the attitudes of those who are handling development decisions world-wide.

Objectives

1. To  create an opportunity for international  networking between North and South to develop common values and understandings based on GNH and Livelihood Sovereignty;
2. To make a contribution to a new development paradigm: ‘Gross National Happiness’ instead of ‘Gross Domestic Production’, and to promote worldwide the desire for ‘development of the kind that would strengthen our sovereignty and give to our people the ability to pursue and fulfil their innermost yearning’.

Key Actor who will be involved:

1. Traditional Elders (“Traditional Professors”) from Mekong Countries and Bhutan,
2. Young Indigenous Minority Leaders both in Mekong countries and Bhutan;
3. Civil Society activists engaged with indigenous minority rights, TOA and INEB, North-South Networker;
4. Intellectual Activists with backgrounds in social, political and ecological anthropology and people’s rights based approaches, who are concerned with indigenous minority rights;
5. Media who focus on indigenous minority rights and Public Relation’s responsibility from Funding Agencies World Wide;
6. Policy Makers who have a progressive attitude towards alternative development approaches.

Themes of concern

1. The meaning, visions, aims and behavior of GNH and LISO: their commonalities, differences and complementarities;
1. The 5 rights of LISO  needed for daily practice toward achieving happiness and wellbeing (both Mekong and Bhutan case);
2. The system of governance need to nurture the 5 rights of LISO  and GNH (both Mekong and Bhutan case);
3. The forms of leadership needed in a system of governance for the nurturing of LISO and GNH (both Mekong and Bhutan case);
2. Examples of how GNH and LISO have been applied in practice at the local and at higher levels, i.e. community and national levels;
3. The difficulties encountered in applying this approach; obstacles and challenges to applying these approaches more widely (i.e. at higher levels, like nationally, and in other countries); the gaps that need to be addressed when applying the approach at different levels?
4. How to make GNH and LISO happen:  the key conditions and key elements for a successful application of the GNH and LISO approaches?
5. Strategies for the global promotion of a re-orientation of human development in line with GNH and LISO approaches.

Steps toward the conference

Step 1. Draft conference concept paper and distribute to target groups for comments and contributions (by Ms Tran Thi Lanh during July to August, 2014);

Step 2. Finalize conference concept paper and send to Bhutan for initiating cooperation with co-organizing partner (the Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan, the expected partner) (by Tran Thi Lanh in August, 2014);

Step 3.  Meeting of Key Traditional Elders and Young in Mekong Region (expected November 2014) and in Bhutan (expected December 2014) in order to open discussions on LISO and GNH under the themes of concern listed above; and update lessons on progress toward 5 rights of LISO and community wellbeing and happiness in order to prepare case studies and select participants for the conference;

Step 4. Prepare guidelines and time frame and identify researchers for case study writing on LISO and GNH (September 2014); writing of case studies (January to March 2015);

Step 5.  Review draft case studies (with comments and contributions via electronic communication); (April to  May 2015);

Step 6. Finalize case studies and their compilation for the conference documentation (June to August, 2015);

Step 7. Logistic preparation and confirmation (visa, passport, accommodation, air ticket, international insurance); (August to end of October, 2015);

Step 8. Travel to Bhutan (October 27 to 29 2015);

Step 9. Introduction to Bhutan (identify key village where case study and pilot demonstration will be based) (expected for 5 days from October 30 to November 3 2015);

Step 10. Join 60 year anniversary celebrations of Bhutan’s 4^th King (November 4- 6, 2015);

Step 11. ‘LISO and GNH Conference’ (November 7 to 9 2015 with the following rough draft program: Day one: Plenary for presentation of case studies on LISO and GNH; Day two: Group/Theme discussions and analysis on LISO & GNH; Day three: follow up action and further publication)

Step 12. Farewell Dinner (sharing culture, telling stories, photographing and videoing for further networking)

Expected outcomes from the conference

• A new network of elders, intellectuals, civil society activists, media, and authorities will emerge for international enlarging of GNH and LISO;
• An action plan  based on a joint resolution to follow up for the Youth of Bhutan and the Mekong Region.
• A book on LISO and GNH will be co-published by the LISO Alliance and the Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan
• A series of pilot demonstration models where the performance of LISO and GNH in Bhutan and the Mekong region will be opened for knowledge exchange and learning.

Logistics

Intellectuals, civil society activist, government authorities and members of the media will cover their own international air ticket, insurance and accommodation, while food and travel inside Bhutan will be covered by ‘Livelihood Sovereignty Alliance’. (Official participants do not have to pay the visa fees for entry to Bhutan).

All expenditure for Traditional Elders and Young Farmers will be covered by ‘Livelihood Sovereignty Alliance’.

Budget will be sourced from allocations to capacity building and training workshop for 2014 and 2015 for LISO Alliance.

Conceptual Framework for writing a case study/an article towards

 ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’ and ‘Gross National Happiness’ Conference in Bhutan

November 7^th – 10^th, 2015

Gross National Happiness – Consciousness and Context of Bhutan

The concept of Gross National Happiness consists of four pillars: Fair socio-economic development (better education and health), conservation and promotion of a vibrant culture, environmental protection and good governance (Gross National Happiness Centre, Bhutan).  This approach ‘represents the true spirit of great institutions of learning’ (Jigmi Y. Thinley 2013),

Livelihood Sovereignty & Livelihood Identity – Consciousness and context of Mekong Regioin

‘Livelihood Sovereignty’ is conceptualized in terms of five interrelated ‘livelihood rights’ that an indigenous minority, individually and communally, or a nation-state, need to have for their well-being:  1) The right to land, forest and water, clean air and natural landscape (basic); 2) The right to maintain one’s own religion (unique); 3) The right to live according to one’s own way of life and values of happiness and wellbeing within one’s own natural environment (practice); 4. The right to operate according to one’s own knowledge and decide what to plant, initiate, create and invent on one’s own land; (holistic); and 5) The right to co-manage or co-govern natural resources with neighboring communities and local authorities (strategic).(SPERI, 2009)

‘Every ‘Livelihood’ has its own identity. ‘Livelihood identity’ defines a holistic system of social identity which reflects an interaction of living things within a relationship between human and nature for maintaining its own characteristics culturally, socio-civilly, ecologically and economically’(Tran thi Lanh 2009). 

Background

There are three very important natural resource issues in the Mekong region: 1) land; 2) forests; and 3) water. All three natural resources are under threat of over-exploitation by multinational and foreign companies in alliance with national governments.

Resource exploitation takes the form of mining, hydroelectric power generation and the appropriation of farm and forest lands for commercial and industrial crop production. At greatest risk in these developments are first, the millions of people whose ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’ and ‘Livelihood Identity” are dependent upon those resources of their own territory, and second, the climate, biodiversity and soil fertility of whole regions.

Politicians are being persuaded to accept the western model of industrialization by foreign resource companies that have much to gain from the process. The promise is that commercial resource exploitation will not only generate jobs, tax revenue and infrastructure development, but also fuel a large number of ‘downstream’ production and service industries, which will generate further investment opportunities, create jobs and increase government revenue.The expectation is that large numbers of people now dependent for their livelihood on a direct relationship to the land will be removed from it as it is taken over by large commercial enterprises. The expectation is that the displaced people will in future earn their livelihood by working for the companies and, as has happened in many places all over the world, their lives will change from being independent farmers to being dependent wage workers under  the promise that their wages will give them greater access to modern commodities. What they will lose however is their five fundamental rights of ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’ and  their own livelihood identity. For the companies and governments concerned, however, this is not seen as a loss, as the five fundamental rights of ‘Livelihood Sovereignty’are seen as ‘backward’ and an obstacle to modernization and economic development.

The promise of wage employment in exchange for an independent farming livelihood will most likely prove false. Modern commercial resource exploitation and industrial agriculture is highly mechanized and requires little labour input. The majority of former independent farmers will have to move to towns and cities to search for employment. There they will face the disadvantage of having inappropriate skills, lack of social networks and high living costs. They will be faced with a very long and difficult period of hardship, culture loss and social disintegration. This is not the kind of development “that would strengthen our sovereignty and give to our people the ability to pursue and fulfil their innermost yearning’. (Jigmi Y.Thenley,2013).

Context and Background of the case study

Case studies should provide a historical analysis of the cultural history, socio-economic circumstances, and political-civil rights situation of the case study population- include map, demography, ethnicity, religion, education – and address contradictions between two different ways & values towards ‘livelihood’: traditional diversity cultivation and modern conventional cultivation (industrialization), and how your target group is suffering from this contradiction. (Hottest problems: such losing land and forest by forced appropriation; flight to the city; migration into wage slavery; the dependency situation; the selling of cultural identity….).

Challenges and advantages analysis

Political, Cultural, Religious and Civil Rights challenges and advantages of your target group in moving towards the Livelihood Sovereignty:

1. What and how has your target group been suffering from the lack of the five interrelated rights of ‘livelihood sovereignty’ in your working context?

2. How have you been working with your target group in order to achieve their five rights of Livelihood Sovereignty in your working context?

3. What difficulties have you been facing and struggling with in helping people to fight for the five rights of Livelihood Sovereignty in your working context?

4. What and how have you been lobbying policy makers and policy implementers in order to gain the five rights of Livelihood Sovereignty in your working context?

5. How can your case study contribute  to ‘Gross National Happiness and “Livelihood Sovereignty’ Conference in Bhutan as a strategic pointer for influencing policy making attitudes?

Identify Case Study both from Bhutan and Mekong for writing (expected)

·         Bhutan Case studies;

·         Livelihood and Identity (Anthropology Department, Waikato University, New Zealand);

·         Livelihood Sovereignty: Challenges, Facts and Perspective;

·         From Sustainable Livelihood to Livelihood Sovereignty – A Rights Based  Approach Towards Development among Indigenous Communities;

·         Beyond Livelihood Sovereignty: From Livelihood Identity  to Ethnic Identity -  a strategy to achieve  Well-being and Happiness ethnically and nationally

·         Beyond Livelihood Sovereignty: From Sustainability to Mutual  Well-being and Happiness-  a case study of Long lan Community in Luang Prabang Province, Lao PDR (CHESH Lao);

·         Garden market instead of Supermarket -  a pilot of wellbeing and happiness  (Mr Hoang van Phuoc – Key Farmer in Vietnam);

·         Family livelihood  and  self – sufficiency  inter-generationally;  and neighborhood  schooling (case of Mr Somlit : Key Farmer in Northern Lao PDR;

·         Livelihood Identity – Teaching by Learning – Learning by Doing (a case of Human Ecology Practical Area in HEPA Farmer Field School – Central Vietnam);

·         Wellbeing and Happiness in  family/community  gardening (a case of Elder Farmer Mr Thao A Zua in Maesamai - Chiangmai, Thailand); (Video and summarize ?);

·         Fighting for Livelihood Sovereignty and Identity: a pilot of well being and happiness – Hin Lad  Nai,  Chiang rai province,  Thailand; (Video and Summarize?);

·         Livelihood Sovereignty via Community Forestry  Governing and Traditional Farming and Land  Use Planning (Video and Summarize in San state of Myanmar by METTA);

·         From self-sufficiency to dependency and destruction of culture and identity (Dao Ethnic Community in Bavi National Park); Ha noi Capital, Vietnam;

·         Traditional Village Hospital – a pilot indicator of Wellbeing and Happiness by Hmong People in On Oc Villge, Son La province, Northern Vietnam (Video and Summarize);

·         And others….