Contribution to Watershed Management Planning for Prek Thnot Watershed 2019 -2029

Institute of Forest and Wildlife Research and Development (IRD)

22 December 2018 Phnom Penh, Cambodia

PREFACE

The Integrated Watershed Management Plan (IWMP) was developed, under the financial support of APFNet, as a contribution to the Royal Government of Cambodia’s efforts of combating the degradation of the environment. The Institute of Forest and Wildlife Research and Development (IRD) considered the landscape approach to be more appropriate in addressing the environmental issues affecting the country, particularly, Prek Thnot watershed. The loss of the forests in this watershed has affected downstream areas and made the low-lying communities more vulnerable to the onslaught of climate change. We are not prepared to respond to the competing and often conflicting land use demands from various stakeholders in Prek Thnot causing sporadic land developments that led to the loss of the forest cover. The IWMP was therefore developed to serve as a guide to decision makers and resource managers on the judicious use of the land. This IWMP aims to balance economic consideration and carrying capacity of the watershed. While the IWMP was rigorously developed by applying the sciences of watershed management (the scientific and technological criteria), series of consultation and consensus building with the stakeholders who will be affected by the development (social acceptability criteria) and seeing guidance and support from the political leaders in Kampong Speu (political acceptability criteria) are important processes of legitimization this IWMP has gone through, which is the hallmark of developing this IWMP. It is fervently hoped that by using this IWMP, there will be a more organized development of Prek Thnot watershed and ultimately, the impact of climate change will be mitigated.

Sokh Heng Director, IRD

Acknowledgement

This project was made possible through the generorus funding and technical support of the Asia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation [APFNet]. The invaluable support of the Forestry Administration is particularly acknowledged. The role of the members of the Project Steering Committee is underscrored who provided technical guidance during the coruse of implementing the project. The successful formulation of this plan is creadited to the people of Kampong Speu and other stakeholders of Prek Thnot Watershed for participating in the consultation workshops and for providing inputs in developing the plan.

Table of Contents PREFACE ...... i Table of Contents ...... iii ACRONYMS ...... vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... viii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PREK THNOT WATERSHED ...... 2 2.1 Importance of Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 2 2.1.1 Economic Importance of Prek Thnot Watersheds ...... 2 2.1.2 Ecological Significance of Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 3 2.2 Terrestrial Component...... 3 2.2.1 Geology and Soil Characteristics ...... 3 2.2.2 Topography ...... 3 2.2.3 Land Use and Vegetative Cover ...... 3 2.3 Water and Hydrologic Component ...... 8 2.3.1 Climate and Precipitation ...... 8 2.3.2 Lakes, Rivers and Streams ...... 10 2.3.3 Hydrology ...... 11 2.4 Stakeholders, People and Economy ...... 15 2.4.1 Demography ...... 16 2.4.2 Investments and Economy ...... 16 2.4.3 Livelihoods and Poverty ...... 16 2.4.4 Infrastructure and Settlements ...... 17 2.5 Management Issues and Gaps in Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 17 2.5.1 Non-point Pollution and Watershed Disturbances ...... 18 2.5.2 Conflicting and Incompatible Land Uses ...... 19 2.5.3 Inefficient Land Use Plans ...... 20 2.5.4 Flooding ...... 20 2.5.5 Periodic Drought...... 21 2.5.6 Land Tenure ...... 22 2.6 Legal Framework ...... 22 2.7 Responding to the Gap ...... 28 3.0 Description of the Plan ...... 30 3.1 Land Use Planning and Watershed Carrying Capacity ...... 30 3.2 The Planning Process ...... 30 3.2.1 Consultation Process and Public Involvement ...... 32 3.2.2 Field Data Collection ...... 33 3.2.3 Allocation Modeling ...... 33 3.2.4 Validation of the Land Use Allocation ...... 40 3.2.5 Analysis of Proposed Land Allocation and Incompatible Land Uses ...... 42 3.3 Vision ...... 44 3.4 Goals...... 44 3.5 Expected Impacts and Benefits ...... 45 3.5.1 Economic Benefits ...... 47 3.5.2 Source Hydrological Impacts ...... 47 3.6 Expected Challenges and Barriers ...... 52

iii

3.6.1 Limited Awareness ...... 52 3.6.2 Resistance to Technology Change ...... 52 3.6.3 Social Cost and Sustainable Funding ...... 53 3.6.4 Poverty and Limited Livelihood Opportunities ...... 53 3.6.5 Skills ...... 53 3.6.6 Land Speculation ...... 53 3.6.7 Weak Institutional Collaboration...... 53 3.7 Strategies and Proposed Programs and Milestones ...... 54 4.0 CONCLUSION ...... 60 REFERENCES ...... 61

List of Tables Table 1. Soil water infiltration in the different land uses ...... 10 Table 2. List of Climatic stations used for updated SWAT model ...... 13 Table 3. List of Discharge stations used for updated SWAT model calibration and validation ...... 14 Table 4. List of Rainfall stations used for updated SWAT model ...... 14 Table 5. Result of the Land Allocation ...... 34 Table 6. Comparison of the proposed allocation and current land uses ...... 35 Table 7. Revised land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed ...... 42 Table 8. Incompatible use and mitigating measures ...... 42 Table 9. Results of the Societal Goals ...... 46

List of Figures Figure 1. Forest cover of Prek Thnot watershed ...... 4 Figure 2. Forest cover in Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 5 Figure 3. Economic land concessions in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 6 Figure 4. CBFM in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 7 Figure 5. Conservation area in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 8 Figure 6. Average Monthly Precipitation of Prek Thnot basin ...... 9 Figure 7. Rainfall pattern of Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 9 Figure 8. River system in Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 10 Figure 9. Topographic data, Land use and Soil in Prek Thnot for SWAT Model ...... 12 Figure 10. Location of climatic, discharge and rainfall stations used in SWAT model setup at Prek Thnot Watershed ...... 13 Figure 11. Baseline water balance model for Prek Thnot Wateshed ...... 15 Figure 12. Areas in Prek Thnot watershed vulnerable to erosion ...... 19 Figure 13. Flooding incidence in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 21 Figure 14. Steps involved in developing the Integrated Watershed Management Plan ...... 31 Figure 15. Proposed land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed ...... 36 Figure 16. Proposed conservation areas in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 37 Figure 17. Proposed agriculture production ...... 38 Figure 18. Proposed for wood production in Prek Thnot watershed ...... 39 Figure 19. Consultative workshop conducted ...... 40 Figure 20. Revised land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed ...... 41 Figure 21. 100 years Return Period resulted from Baseline, Landuse change and climate Change ...... 48 Figure 22. Mean Annual Discharge at Peam Kley resulted from Baseline, Climate Change and Land Use Change ...... 48

Figure 23. Monthly Average Discharge at Peam Kley resulted from Baseline, Climate Change and Land Use Change ...... 49 Figure 24. Surface Runoff ...... 49 Figure 25. Soil Erosion (tons/Ha./Year) under three scenarios development ...... 50 Figure 26. Groundwater Recharge (mm/year) under three scenarios development ...... 50 Figure 27. Hydrology of Prek Thnot watershed as a resulted from Land Use Change ...... 51 Figure 28. Hydrological characteristics of Prek Thnot catchment as affected by climate change ...... 52

Annexes Annex 1. Criteria for Land Suitability ...... 62 Annex 2. Model Coefficients/Assumptions ...... 63 Annex 3. Annual Target ...... 64 Annex 4. Annual Budget ...... 69 Annex 5. Valuation of Watershed Benefits ...... 74 Annex 6. Benefit-Cost Analysis...... 75 Annex 7. Development LogFrame ...... 76 Annex 8. Organizational Structure of the Province ...... 82 Annex 9. Proposed Organizational Structure...... 82

ACRONYMS

ADB Asian Development Bank ANR Assisted Natural Regeneration APFNet Asia-Pacific Network for Sustainable Forest Management and Rehabilitation BCA Benefit Cost Analysis CARDI Cambodia Agricultural Research and Development Institute CBFM Community-Based Forest Management CBNRM Community-Based Natural Resource Management CCCSP Cambodia Climate Change Strategic Plan CDP Commune Development Plan CF Community Forestry CFMP Community Forestry Management Plan CIP Commune Investment Plan CLUP Commune Land Use Plan CPA Community Protected Areas DWG District Working Group ELC Economic Land Concession Ex-ACT Ex Anti Carbon Assessment Tool FA Forestry Administration FAO Food and Agriculture Organization FiA Fishery Administration GI Geographic Indication GIS Geographic Information System GP Goal Programming IRD Institute of Research and Development IRR Internal Rate of Return ITP Industrial Tree Plantation IWRM Integrated Watershed Resource Management LASSP Land Administration Sub-Sector Program LP Linear Programming MAFF Ministry of Agriculture Forestry Fisheries MIME Ministry of Mine and Energy MIRR Modified Internal Rate of Return MLMUPC Ministry of Land Management Urban Planning and Construction MoE Ministry of Environment MoT Ministry of Tourism MRC Mekong River Commission MOWRAM Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan NFP National Forest Programme NGO Non- Government Organization NSDP National Strategic Development Plan NTFP Non Timber Forest Products OVOP One Village One Product PAR Participatory Action Research PF Partnership Forestry PFT Provincial Facilitation Team PES Payment for Ecosystem Services PFE Permanent Forest Estates PLAU Provincial Local Administration Unit

R&D Research and Development REDD+ Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation SFM Sustainable Forest Management SLMC State Land Management Committee SWAT Soil Water Analysis Tool UNCDF United Nations Capital Development Fund UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United. Nations Environment Programme UNISDR United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Risk Reduction

vii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Prek Thnot is one of the most important watersheds in Cambodia that provide important ecological and economic services such as rice and industrial crops. The watershed is also the site for the production of palm sugar that has gained Geographic Indication (GI) certification. However, Prek Thnot are subjected to encroachment of human activities and improper activities of the watershed. The watershed is increasingly exposed to hazards and disasters, particularly to droughts, flood, pest and diseases, and storms that affect people’s food and nutrition security. The inappropriate land use has been the considered the main cause of degradation. The Integrated Watershed Management Plan aims to address this problem by efficiently allocating the land use. An optimization model (LP and GP) was used to allocate the Prek Thnot watershed. The optimization considers satisfying the societal goals (i.e. maximization of benefits and minimization of the externalities or negative impacts). These goals are used as basis of the watershed management plan. The plan give consideration on the carrying capacity of the watershed. There are eight land use options considered in the model as follows:

1. Rice Production 2. Production of Industrial Crops (cassava, sugar cane, potato, etc.) 3. Industrial Tree Plantations (Eucalyptus, Mangium and other Fast Growing Species) 4. Fruit Orchards 5. High Value Crops (Cabbage, Tomato, Spices, etc.) 6. Conservation/Protection Forest 7. Sustainable Forest Management (CF, Partnership Forestry, Low Impact Logging) 8. Forage Production

There are 11 goals that the model aims to satisfy:

1. Maximize income from land use (honey, mushroom, sugar, rattan, resin, rice, fruits, ecotourism, et.) 2. Maximize rice production (limited by site carrying capacity) 3. Maximize meat production - bushmeat and livestock (limited by site carrying capacity) 4. Maximize supply of construction/high value timbers 5. Maximize supply of fuelwood 6. Maximize total biomass produced 7. Maximize forage production 8. Maximize water infiltration (for 3-hr. rain) 9. Minimize soil erosion 10. Minimize total chemical (pesticide and fertilizer) loads 11. Minimize social cost for protection and management

The management plan offers to maximize the benefits from the land uses with consideration on the carrying capacity of the watershed. The plan is expected to contribute to economic developments and the condition of the ecosystems of the watershed. The result of land allocation noted some conflict between recommended land use and actual situations in the ground. Mitigating measures were drawn to mitigate these conflicts that include: (1) Promote sustainable land management and eco-farming in the ELCs and farmers; (2) Developments of some areas for

viii

ITP; (3) Introduce agroforestry to ELCs and individual farmers; (4) Promote organic rice farming to areas recommended for rice farming but located in critical areas. These areas have to be delineated solely for production of organic rice; (5) Promote precision agriculture technology and judicious use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. (6) Set aside buffer zones along rivers and streams for protection forest.

The optimum land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed is shown as follows:

Land Allocation Area by District (ha) Aoral Basedth Chbar Kong Odongk Phnum Sam- Thpong Total Mon Pisei Sruoch raong Tong Rice Production - - 7,200 9,700 9,000 8,400 56,200 13,800 104,300 Industrial Crops 67,000 200 - - - 11,300 1,300 12,700 92,500 Industrial Tree 3,200 100 - 400 - 4,300 3,500 2,300 13,800 Plantations Fruit Orchard 39,400 100 600 13,200 - 69,400 3,600 8,900 135,200 High Value Crops 2,000 - - - - 3,500 1,400 500 7,400 Conservation/Prote 95,100 - - - - 5,700 100 100 101,000 ction SFM 19,000 600 100 1,500 - 20,100 5,800 5,200 52,300 Forage Production ------0 Total 225,700 1,000 7,900 24,800 9,000 122,700 71,900 43,500 506,500

The integrated watershed management plan has 4 specific objectives (SO):

▪ SO1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed ▪ SO2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed ▪ SO3: To improve the natural capital in Prek Thnot Watershed ▪ SO4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed

The plan is expected to produce the following results:

▪ R1.1 Implemented community livelihoods ▪ R3.1 Implemented ecoagriculture and sustainable land management ▪ R3.2 Developed the target sites according to plan ▪ R4.1 Developed land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas ▪ R4.2 Conducted environment and governance monitoring ▪ R4.3 Enhance the capability of state and non-state actors ▪ R4.4 Conducted research and development ▪ R4.5 Established and supported a platform for institutional linkage and co-management ▪ R4.6 Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan

The plan is expected to generate the following benefits:

▪ Maximized production of rice, estimated at 383,820 t/year. ▪ Increase the growing stock of high value timbers, estimated at 420,530 m3/year. ▪ Increase the sustainable supply of fuelwood estimated at 572,590 m3/year. ▪ Increase biomass production estimated at 1.16 million ton. ▪ Increase the availability of forage, estimated at 190,670 t/year.

▪ Improve the water infiltration capacity of the watershed, estimated at 14.45 million m3/year.

Several programs are proposed for implementation to achieve the identified goals:

Result 1.1: Livelihoods implemented [The programs are linked to SO3] Result 2.1: Ecoagriculture and sustainable land management implemented Program 2.1.1.1: Mapping for SLM/Precision agriculture in areas allocated for Intensive Agriculture in critical areas. Program 2.1.1.2: Buffer planting along riparian and headwater areas Program 2.1.1.3: Organic rice production development in critical areas Program 2.1.1.4: Conservation, protection and monitoring of critical areas

Result 3.1: Sites developed Program 3.1.1.1 Support the development for Systems of Rice Intensification (SRI). Program 3.1.2 Support the development of Industrial Crops (ICs) Program 3.1.3 Support the development of fruit orchards Program 3.1.4 Support the development of High Value Crops (HVCs) Program 3.1.5 Support the establishment of Agroforestry/Taungya models in ELCs Program 3.1.6 Support the establishment of ITPs

Result 3.2 Improved productivity of existing forest Program 3.2.1.1: Provide support to manage existing production forest for SFM development

Result 4.1: Improved management and protection of natural resources Program 4.1.1.1: Law enforcement Program 4.1.1.2: Demarcation and zoning Program 4.1.1.3: Conduct environment and governance monitoring

Result 4.2: Land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas developed Program 4.2.1.1: Management Plan Development for Low Impact Logging and Forest Farming in SFM Areas and Impact Plan Mitigation in Critical Areas Program 4.2.1.2: Management Plan Development for ITP Areas Program 4.2.1.3: Prediction Modeling and Tracking of Milestones

Result 4.3: Capability building conducted to state and non- state actors Program 4.3.1.1: Capability Build-up of CF, CPAs and Farmer Groups on CF Management Planning and Sustainable Farming Program 4.3.1.2: Research and Technology Development Program 4.3.2.1: Holding of Investment Forums Program 4.3.2.2: Development of Forest-based Livelihoods Program 4.3.2.3: Ecotourism and Other Payment for Environmental Services (PES).

Result 4.4: Platform for institutional linkage and co-management established and supported Program 4.4.1.1: Multisectoral Coordination Meetings

Result 4.5: Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan Program 4.5.1.1: CLUP Development, Zoning and Management Plan Development of Conservation Areas Program 4.5.1.2: Promoting Ecoagriculture and Sustainable Land Management and Sustainable Farming

The benefit cost analysis indicates that the project has modest rate of return. Using a modified IRR (MIRR) method, the rate of return is estimated at 10.2% and a NPV of US$ 74 million. The value of benefits only considers the market benefits. The rate of return maybe higher if the environmental services will be included. Aside from economic benefits, the modeling study indicates that the

x proposed land allocation will result to the improvement of the hydrology of Prek Thnot watershed.

Among the important challenges and barriers in the implementation of the project are: (1) limited awareness of the stakeholders and the communities; (2) resistance of target farmers to technological changes that will be introduced; (3) uncertainty of sustainable funding to support the development programs; (4) prevalence of poverty among the target communities that will likely influence the adoption of innovations; (5) limited skills of the farmers and key actors especially in controlling soil erosion, organic farming and agroforestry; (6) land speculation that put constant pressure to the forest and causing land conversion; and (7) weak institutional support. To address the gaps and the challenges of plan implementation, following strategies are proposed: (1) promote the acceptability of the plan by integrating in CLUP and disseminate information about the watershed management plan (2) build the technological skills of key actors and resource managers on sustainable land management; (3) attract investors and support the forest-based livelihoods or local ecotourism, (4) strengthen institutional collaboration and supporting multisectoral coordination meetings, (5) strengthen environmental management and social protection by supporting law enforcement demarcation and zoning of conservation areas, and (6) improve monitoring the milestones.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Population growth and urban development are affecting land use, and the ecosystem services, including supply of freshwater (Martin et al., 2017). Human activities as well as natural events that occur in a watershed can affect water quality (Gillard et al., 2009). People are impacted positively and negatively by the interaction of water with other resources use. The impacts of these interactions do not follow political boundaries since water flows downhill regardless of how people define their political boundaries. What is done in the highlands can have significant effects in the villages downstream. Activities undertaken in upland areas of a watershed eventually have some impact downstream (Working Group on Watershed Management and Development, 1988). Since externalities cut across political boundaries, what may be sound resource use from the point of view of communities in the upland may not be sound resource use from a broader, societal point of view, due to undesirable downstream effects (Working Group on Watershed Management and Development, 1988). Since it is very rare that the watershed confines within the political boundary, it is important to have an overall framework that will bring in together all the key stakeholders and key actors in the watershed. Without having an overall framework, there is a tendency that the planning of one unit (District or Commune) will proceed without regard to its externalities (offsite impacts) of its developments (e.g. impacts to downstream areas). A watershed management approach incorporates "soil and water conservation" and "land use planning" into a broader, logical framework. The use of a watershed approach will bind together the key players and stakeholders into a common purpose.

Deforestation are happening all over the country including land degradation resulting from poor soil conservation practices and a decline in aquatic habitats. Vast tracts of forests have been converted to agriculture to cater to the needs of the growing population and urbanization. As the population grows and economy improves, the conflict intensifies. Conflicting land development priorities are also becoming more common. Under a diverse and often conflicting demand for watershed services, finding an optimal allocation of the lands that is economically feasible, socially acceptable, and environmentally compatible is very challenging.

Kampong Speu had many cases of land conflicts that include the overlapping land title, illegal land grabbing, and unclear boundaries (Kampong Speu, 2011). Recognizing these growing conflicts over land uses, the Royal Government of Cambodia has implemented the Commune/Sangkat land use planning (CLUP). CLUP is a land use plan for the whole commune/ Sangkat, both state owned land and privately-owned land, by considering the potential of land and water resources, possible uses of land, and social and economic characteristics, so that appropriate use of land can be made. Nonetheless, existing experiences on spatial planning are still limited in the country (MLMUPC, 2016). The proactive management of the ecosystems, particularly the watersheds, are still not in place making CLUP/Sangkat Land Use Planning so parochial and are not based on broader framework. Suffice it to say that the Communes who developed their CLUPs were myopically focused on the current land uses without regard to the broader context where the commune is situated. Bringing the watershed concept to land use planning of the different communes is an attempt of making sure that the land uses of the communes will contribute to the sustainable management of Prek Thnot watershed.

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PREK THNOT WATERSHED

The majority of Prek Thnot watershed is located in Kampong Speu province. The province has increasingly been exposed to hazards and disasters, particularly droughts, flood, pest and diseases, and storms that affect people’s food and nutrition security (Provincial Department of Agriculture, 2013 cited by Ra, 2017). The watershed is at risk of impairing its ecological function. The ongoing deforestation in the uplands increasingly subject the downstream areas to flooding.

2.1 Importance of Prek Thnot Watershed

The upstream of Prek Thnot watershed play a very important role in providing ecosystem goods and services and support the livelihoods and production systems of the upstream and downstream communities. Under proper management, the watershed can provide significant economic and environmental services.

2.1.1 Economic Importance of Prek Thnot Watersheds

Prek Thnot is the site for important economic developments such as rice and industrial crops such as cassava, sugarcane and potato. The watershed is also the site for the production of Kampong Speu palm sugar that has gained Geographic Indication (GI) certification.

Fishery Resources and Fishing. The rivers and tributaries of Prek Thnot provide significant volume of fishes to the people. These areas are located in major tributaries and reservoirs or manmade ponds and extend to rice fields. FiA has been targeting these areas (rice fields, reservoirs and streams) as fish refuges.

Forest Products. The forests in Prek Thnot has been a source of wood for charcoal, timber (mostly extracted illegally), NTFPs and sometimes wildlife for food (bushmeats). Fruits abound in many parts of Prek Thnot watershed. Wildlife however is hunted illegally, although there is a great potential that prolific breeders like feral pigs can be managed sustainably for bushmeat production. There is still no law allowing for the sustainable harvest of wild pigs. The CFs and CPAs have great potential of supplying timber and non-timber products. Small diameter timbers can be extracted from the forests for the production of high value products if provided with right technology. There are tree plantations developed by ELCs and tree farmers, mostly plantation species like Eucalyptus, acacias and other fast-growing species.

Esthetic Values and Ecotourism. There are only very few ecotourism projects implemented in the area. The relatively successful ecotourism project is implemented by Chambak CPA located near Kiriroam national park. Restoring the forests will enhance the esthetic values especially in areas that have waterfalls.

Water Security. The headwaters of Prek Thnot watershed support the farms downstream. Asian Development Bank (ADB) has funded the construction of several reservoirs and a

network of irrigation canals connecting the rice production areas. However, there is still a need to manage the water distribution. Uneven distribution of water is common resulting to crop failures of some rice farms especially during summer.

2.1.2 Ecological Significance of Prek Thnot Watershed

The forest of Prek Thnot connect to the Cardamom mountain and serve as a habitat of some important flora and fauna. Phnom Aoral (Aoral Mountain) which is the highest mountain in Cambodia is designated asWildlife Sanctuary. Most of the forest areas are confined in Phnom Aoral Wildlife Sanctuary which is home to Pig-tailed Macaque (Macaca nemestrina), Slow Loris (Nycticebus coucang), Silvered Langur (Semnopithecus cristatus), Pileated Gibbon (Hylobates pileatus), and Gaur (Bos gaurus) (Birdlife: www.birdlife.org).

2.2 Terrestrial Component

2.2.1 Geology and Soil Characteristics

The watershed area is made up of more than 20 types of geological formations. The majority of geology type in this watershed is Pediment covering around 47 % of the total land area followed by Terrace alluvial deposits.

Red-yellow podzols accounts for 27.8 % of the total area followed by Acid Lithosols (26.3%) and Planosols (18.6%). Lacustrine alluvial soil type only accounts a small part in the watershed covering 0.02 % of the total land area of the watershed.

Around 66.2 % of Prek Thnot watershed have low fertility and only about 6.7 % have high fertility are located mostly in the northeast of watershed where the elevation is low.

2.2.2 Topography

Most of the watershed area have low elevation ranging from 4 to 260 masl1. These areas are located mostly in the East, South, and mid-part covering 85.3 % of the total area. About 13.5 % of the total land has an elevation of 270-960 m above sea level (MASL) and located along the boundary of the watershed from the North, West and South-West. About 93.1 % of the total area have slopes of less than 3 degrees. The steep slope areas are mostly located in the Northwest, West, and the Southwest of the watershed along the boundary.

2.2.3 Land Use and Vegetative Cover

Good forests are confined mostly in the mountainous and hilly parts at the periphery of the watershed (Figure 1). Significant portion are developed to rice and industrial crops. There are

1 masl= meter above sea level

3 existing Economic Land Concessions operating within the watershed. While the ELCs offer a major source of employment, the propriety of its location is in question considering that some are located within the conservation areas (i.e. National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries).

Figure 1. Forest cover of Prek Thnot watershed

2.2.3.1 Forest Type

Forest resources play the third main source of income contributing around 13% of the total annual income of the people in the watershed. Forty-four percent of the people collected firewood from the forest including frogs and bamboo shoots. Most of Aoral, Phnom Srouch, and Thpong districts still have some forests. Based on the forest cover data released by Forestry Administration (FA) in 2010, the forest cover in Prek Thnot Watershed was classified into 4 main forest cover type: evergreen forest, semi-evergreen forest, deciduous forest, and other forest. Deciduous forest dominates in the watershed followed by semi-evergreen forest (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Forest cover in Prek Thnot Watershed Source: Forestry Administration

2.2.3.2 Cultivations and Rice Producing Areas

With farming being historically dependent on rainfall, the majority of lowland farmers grow just one crop a year (Smith and Hornbuckle, 2013 in Ra, 2017). Average rice yield in 2010 was 2.76 tons per hectare in the wet season, compared to 4.2 tons per hectare in the dry season.

2.2.3.3 Land Concessions

This watershed management plan is expected to be a useful tool to attract investors, that include private individuals and agroindustry companies. Several economic land concessions are existing within Prek Thnot watershed (Figure 3). The ELCs mostly developed their areas for industrial crops although there are few that develop their areas for fast growing timbers like acacias and eucalyptus. The operation of ELCs are not without issues. Some conflicts are reported due to tenure and ELCs contribution to deforestation. The controversy is also attributed to inappropriate siting of ELCs.

Figure 3. Economic land concessions in Prek Thnot watershed

2.2.3.4 Community-based Forest Management

Community-Based Forest Management (CBFM) communities are distributed in Prek Thnot watershed (Figure 4). CBFMs are either Community Forestry (CF) or Community Protected Areas (CPA). The CFs are managed by Forestry Administration while the CPAs are managed by Ministry of Environment. The CPAs are issued to communities within the protected areas. CBFM communities are important stakeholders in the watershed considering that they are recognized by the government as partners in managing the forests. While CPAs are limited to utilizing the forest for traditional use, the CFs can conduct commercial production of their community forests provided that they have Community Forest Management Plans (CFMPs).

Figure 4. CBFM in Prek Thnot watershed

2.2.3.5 National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries

Portion of the watershed are located within the national parks and wildlife sanctuary mostly on the northwestern part of the watershed. In these areas, the terrain is steep and where the headwaters are located. The western part of Prek Thnot connects to Bothom Sakor National Park (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Conservation area in Prek Thnot watershed

2.3 Water and Hydrologic Component

Prek Thnot watershed is abound with numerous creeks and river systems that are main tributaries of Kampong Speu river. The main river drains towards Kandal and Phnom Penh and finally to Tonle Bassac river. Any disturbance in the upstream therefore will have profound impacts to Phnom Penh area.

2.3.1 Climate and Precipitation

The average annual rainfall in Prek Thnot Watershed ranges from 800-1600 mm. The majority of the area receive rainfall of 1,200 to 1,400 mm. These are located mostly in the East and Northeast. In general, the area on the West and Northwest are the upstream of watershed that receive more rainfall than the rest of the watershed. Rainy season of the province starts in May and last until October. The average monthly rainfall of Prek Thnot watershed is shown in Figure 6 and 7. Infiltration in non-forest land are very low compared to forested areas (Table 1).

Figure 6. Average Monthly Precipitation of Prek Thnot basin

Figure 7. Rainfall pattern of Prek Thnot Watershed Source: Atlas Cambodia

Table 1. Soil water infiltration in the different land uses Land uses Soil water infiltration rate (cm/mn) Soil water infiltration (L/ha) None forest land 0.06 8,800 Forest land 0.31 45,000

2.3.2 Lakes, Rivers and Streams

Prek Thnot Watershed consists of different type of water channels classified as canal, river/stream, levee, intermittent river/stream, lake and pond. Intermittent rivers have a total length of 1,872 km across the watershed, mostly in the upstream. Canals are mostly located in the agricultural areas downstream (Figure 8).

Figure 8. River system in Prek Thnot Watershed Source: Atlas Cambodia for hydropower dam and MLUPC for river system

2.3.3 Hydrology

A study was conducted to determine the current (baseline) hydrologic condition of Prek Thnot Watershed in terms of landscape-wide soil erosion, surface runoff and ground water discharge. Determining the hydrological condition at the landscape level is a complicated due to the variability of the condition, e.g. topography, land cover, rainfall. A study was conducted to determine the hydrological condition of the watershed using SWAT 2012 model. The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) is a public domain model jointly developed by US$A Agricultural Research Service (US$A-ARS) and Texas A&M AgriLife Research, part of the Texas A&M University System. The SWAT has been developed in order to predict the impact of land management practices on water, sediments and agricultural chemical yields in large complex watersheds with varying soils, land use and management conditions (Neitsch et al. 2011; Arnold et al. 2012). SWAT is a physically based semi-distributed hydrologic model operating on a daily time step and uses a modified Soil Conservation Service-Curve Number (SCS CN) method to calculate runoff. It is a physically based model which computes readily available data (e.g. weather, soil, vegetation, land management practices), and allows the study of short to long-term impacts, processing data on a continuous time mode as it receives continuous meteorological time series (Neitsch et al. 2011).

The SWAT 2012 model was linked to a GIS interface (ArcGIS) to simulate hydrologic assessment in the Prek Thnot watershed over a 30-year period beginning in 1985 up to 2014. Prek Thnot Watershed is delineated into 3 sub basin by the SWAT model and Peam Khley gauge station was used to calibrate the model (by comparing the model output with the observed values). The model is disaggregated to the following periods:

▪ Warm up model: 1980 – 1984 ▪ Calibration period: 1996 – 2008 (13 years) ▪ Validation period: 2009 – 2014 (6 years)

The SWAT model for Prek Thnot watershed used both spatial and time series data: The following thee main spatial data are required for SWT model application which is shown in Figure 9.

1. Digital Elevation Model (DEM). The data source is the 1:50,0000 scale American topographic maps and available on 50 m grid. 2. Land cover map: Basically, there are 44 land use types covering the entire Prek Thnot Basin. The land use types are grouped and presented into one type; finally, a total number of 4 land use types are obtained. 3. Soil map: Based on MRC soil classification map, 18 soil types are classified covering the entire Prek Thnot watershed.

Tables 2 and 3 shows the climatic and rainfall stations that are sources of the data. The maps used for the model is shown in Figure 9. One requirement of the model is that it estimates the hydrological parameter based on the catchment of the watershed. Thus, the estimate was based on the entire Prek Thnot Watershed instead of confining the administrative jurisdiction of Kampong Speu province. The result of the model shows that the average surface runoff of selected discharge point is 94.14 mm and ground recharge of 333.14 mm and erosion of 41.19 t/ha. The schematic presentation of the estimates that is generated by the model is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 9. Topographic data, Land use and Soil in Prek Thnot for SWAT Model

Time Series Data. Time series data for setting-up SWAT model include rainfall, discharge and climatic data. Climatic components consist of of maximum and minimum temperature (Tmp), relative humidity (Hmd), solar radiation (Slr) and wind speed (Wnd) (Figure 10). The weather data used to set-up SWAT model of the Prek Thnot Watershed were obtained from various line agencies

12 in Cambodia such as Department of Water Resources (DWR), Ministry of Water Resource and Meteorology and Department of Plantation Development and Forest Private, Forestry Administration, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

Figure 10. Location of climatic, discharge and rainfall stations used in SWAT model setup at Prek Thnot Watershed

Climatic Data: This data consists of Minimum and Maximum Temperature, Relative Humidity, Solar Radiation and Wind speed from year 1985 – 2014 (Table2)

Table 2. List of Climatic stations used for updated SWAT model N0 Station ID Station Name Latitude Longitude Hmd Slr Tmp Wnd 1 110425 Pochentong 11.55 104.9167 x x x x 2 110514 Prey Veng 11.4667 105.15 x x x x

Daily Hydrological data from year 1985 – 2014 was used for calibration and validation model performance (Table 3).

Table 3. List of Discharge stations used for updated SWAT model calibration and validation N0 Station ID Station Name River Latitude Longitude 1 640103 PeamKhley St. Prek Thnot 11.4705 105.369

Daily Rainfall data: All stations are available from year 1985 – 2014. Totally, there are 16 rainfall stations are chosen to determine the average rainfall per sub basin of SWAT model as seen in Table 4.

Table 4. List of Rainfall stations used for updated SWAT model N0 Station ID Station Name Porovince Latitude Longitude 1 110411 Phnom Penh (Bassac) Phnom Penh 11.37 104.53 2 110425 Pochentong Phnom Penh 11.55 104.92 3 100403 Kirivong Takeo 10.60 104.73 4 100421 Koh Andeth Takeo 10.79 104.95 5 110431 Baset Kampong Speu 11.15 104.54 6 110404 Kampong Speu Kampong Speu 11.34 104.06 7 110432 Kong Pisey Kampong Speu 11.30 104.63 8 110433 Oral Kampong Speu 11.69 104.14 9 110415 Oudong Kampong Speu 11.78 104.73 10 110413 Phnom Srouch Kampong Speu 11.38 104.38 11 110434 O Taroat Kampong Speu 11.54 104.42 12 640103 Peam Khley-Dam Site Kampong Speu 11.47 104.37 13 110436 Prey Dop Kampong Speu 11.22 104.56 14 110435 Prey Pdao Kampong Speu 12.80 104.83 15 110416 Sre Khlong Kampong Speu 11.33 104.29 16 110445 Trapeang Chor Kampong Speu 11.82 104.14

To cover all areas of land allocation , SWAT model was required to set up for the entire Prek Thnot Watershed instead of confining the administrative jurisdiction of Kampong Speu province. The result of the model shows that the average surface runoff of selected discharge point is 94.14 mm and ground recharge of 133.26 mm and erosion of 41.19 t/Ha. The schematic presentation of the estimates that is generated by the model is shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Baseline water balance model for Prek Thnot Wateshed

2.4 Stakeholders, People and Economy

There are different stakeholders in Prek Thnot Watershed of Kampong Speu province. These stakeholders include:

▪ Ministry of Environment involves mainly in the management of protection forest, national park, and wildlife sanctuaries. ▪ Forestry Administration (FA) which is under the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fishery. FA involves mainly in the management of production forest. ▪ General Directorate of Agriculture under the MAFF, whose main role is managing crop and agricultural lands. ▪ Economic Land Concession (ELC) secretariat which is under Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries involves in the management of ELC in Cambodia. ▪ MOWRAM a Ministry involves mainly in water resources management including reservoir, development and construction of irrigation system. ▪ Ministry of Land Management Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC) involves mainly in land administration. ▪ Ministry of Mine and Energy (MIME) involves in the management of mine and energy as well as identification of areas for mining and energy development such as hydropower dams. ▪ Local Authorities which is under the Ministry of Interior involve mainly in the management of local planning ▪ NGOs involves with local livelihood and also conservation of natural resources.

▪ Farmers who are either landless settlers or tenured ▪ Fisherman who may also be farmers but occasionally go fishing in the rivers, rice fields and other bodies of water.

2.4.1 Demography

Around 68 % of families in Prek Thnot engaged in agriculture activities (Kampong Speu. 2011). Among the total families in Kampong Speu province, there were only 14.7 % who have access the irrigation system. It was reported that 63 % of the families have access/use chemical fertilizer. While the area is predominantly Khmers, there are also Kuoy ethnic group who live in Aoral district mostly in the middle or upper part of Prek Thnot Watershed. The area was known to be inhabited by Kuoy ethnic people for centuries. This group consisted of 137 families in 2010 but has been increased and spread out to northern areas of Sangke Satob commune of Aoral district. The Kuoy population in the Sangke Satob, however, are small accounting to only 9.9 % of the total families in Sangke Satob Commune or 2.0 % of the total families in Aoral district.

The population density of the province was estimated at 116 persons/km2 in 2013 (Kampong Speu. 2011). The population density in the upstream area was low compared to downstream part of the watershed estimated to be less than 6 persons/km2. The recent improvement of road system caused people to migrate upstream, especially in Aoral district. This led to the degradation of natural resources in the once undisturbed areas.

2.4.2 Investments and Economy

Commercial timber production (plantations) are few, mainly because of the legal, governance- related and commercial challenges perceived by investors. An international investor established a hardwood (teak) plantation in Cambodia. ELCs provide employment to the local communities. Most of these ELCs are developer of sugar cane, cassava, cashew, mango and other industrial crops.

2.4.3 Livelihoods and Poverty

Income sources are grouped into: forest, agriculture, fishery, livestock, and non-farm income. The non-farm income refers to the income from selling labor and their own business. Working in the construction, garment factory, and labor in economic land concession companies are the major source of income to residents in Kampong Speu. Most of the older generation working in industrial crop plantations while the younger generation working in garment factory and construction sites. Majority of the people rely heavy on agriculture and forest product. The major products are paddy rice, maize, and pumpkins. Fishery also provide significant income for people in Prek Thnot watershed. An economic survey conducted in Prek Thnot watershed revealed that 48.1 % of respondents collect firewood while others collect bamboo shoot and mushroom. Downstream, palm juice collection has been an important livelihood.

Poverty of the province was estimated at 21 %. The two districts in the upstream of Prek Thnot Watershed, namely Aoral and Phnom Sruoch districts, had highest poverty rate than other districts within the province. It was reported that there are 10 % of total population are landless because of poverty. The average annual household income was estimated at 23 million riels (Koy, 2016). The income during rainy season was around 12 million Riel which is higher than the dry season (only around 11 million riel). The forest resources are second main source of income during dry season.

The families involved in forest-based enterprises are low, indicating the unattractiveness of forest- based enterprises to the people. The watershed is characterized by a large number of landless migrants (Maningo et al., 2017). There are indications that communes closer to the forest have higher poverty incidence. This observation seems to conform of some authors who observe a link between forest and poverty. Although forests are known to provide economic benefits, other factors are needed to transform these resources to real economic factors of production and may be absent in rural areas. Spatially, poverty incidence is rampant in the western part of the watershed, where forests are mostly located. The same study of Maningo et al., (2017) also noted that communes with farming as predominant source of livelihood have higher poverty incidence indicating the limited contribution of farming in alleviating poverty. However, there are indications that communes that have more business establishments have lesser poverty incidence. Commercial establishments are ideally located in urbanized areas, which can be sources of immediate or direct employment. In principle, land concessions provide employment to the locals. But Maningo et al. (2017) noted that in communes that have ELCs, poverty remain high. Likewise, poverty remains high in communes that have CBNRM (i.e. CFs and CPAs) indicating that CBNRM does not offset poverty. This can be explained however that poor households have the propensity to settle in areas that are covered by CF/CPA. Also, CBFM was not able to offset poverty since most forests are degraded.

2.4.4 Infrastructure and Settlements

2.4.4.1 Road Networks

Most of the districts within Prek Thnot watershed are connected to a road network, except in Tasal commune located in the north-western part of Prek Thnot watershed. Some roads are dirt roads and generally accessible all year round. These are regularly maintained by the government.

2.4.4.4 Irrigation Systems

Irrigated agriculture in Cambodia is responsible for approximately 90 % of total water abstractions, although the estimate varies from between 80% and 95 % (Ra 2016). Lack of water during dry season rice farming is a perennial problem and occasionally caused conflict among farmers (Ra, 2016).

2.5 Management Issues and Gaps in Prek Thnot Watershed

The most critical issues in Environment and Natural Resources (ENR) are: a) Surface water management, both as an age-old challenge and now increasingly critical and the implications of climate change; b) Land allocation and use, especially on forested state land; c) Depletion of forests, primarily through logging and concessions for resource extraction, and; d) Degradation of soil driven by unsuitable agricultural practices. Managing Prek Thnot watershed is very complex considering that the watershed is subject to various incompatible land uses.

2.5.1 Non-point Pollution and Watershed Disturbances

Nearly all watersheds have something in common: they are populated by humans. As the population increases, some of the developments extend to critical areas (i.e. in areas that are in steep slopes, in biodiversity-rich areas and in riparian areas). Water runs off from the settlements and farms carrying various pollutants. These are referred as non-point source pollution because it comes from multiple sources over a large area (Gilland et al., 2009). Also, fertilizers from farmlands are carried by surface run-offs to waterways. Some are also released to atmosphere as greenhouse gases. Main drivers for increased greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Cambodia are expected to be forest degradation and land uses change (Johnsen and Munford, 2012). Flooded rice is a major greenhouse gas emitter, especially of the highly potent nitrous oxide from fertilizers and methane.

2.5.1.1 Forest Encroachment Land Conversion, Deforestation and Forest Degradation: Drivers and Impacts

Although logging in Cambodia is technically not allowed it is still taking place sporadically and large volumes of timber and forests are being cleared and burned particularly in land concessions (Johnsen and Munford, Unpublished). The damage to watersheds from deforestation leads to reduced water infiltration and drying of groundwater. It also leads to increased soil erosion and hence reduced agricultural productivity (Johnsen and Munford, Unpublished). Some forest areas have been allocated to industrial crop plantation or agriculture. The main drivers of changes in land use and in land loss are conversion of state land to farming by large corporations and by landless people. The expansion of towns happens for three, interconnected reasons: Expansion of housing, increase in commercial areas and land speculation. The damage to watersheds from deforestation leads to reduced water infiltration and drying up of groundwater (Johnsen and Munford, 2012).

2.5.1.2 Erosion: Causes and Impacts

The main climatic factors that influence soil erosion are rainfall (amount, frequency, duration, and intensity), and wind (direction, strength, and frequency of high-intensity winds), coupled with drying-out of the soil. Land use, soil type, and topography are the other key factors. Climate change is likely to affect soil erosion by water through its effect on rainfall intensity, soil erodibility, vegetative cover, and patterns of land use. Erosion and other elements of decreased soil fertility brought about by poor land management further compound the problem of low agricultural productivity (Johnsen and Munford, 2012). A study conducted by CARDI in cassava plantation in Phnom Proek district where the conventional practices was implemented and the soil erosion was

18 higher estimated at 60-80 t/ha or 4.3-8.5 cm surface depth. The areas that are particularly vulnerable to erosion are located in the northwest and western part of the watershed, and these are the areas that have steep slopes (Figure 8).

Figure 12. Areas in Prek Thnot watershed vulnerable to erosion

2.5.1.3 Pesticides and Fertilizer Loads: Sources and Impacts

The excessive and incorrect use of fertilizers contributed to chemical pollution. Excess fertilizers are carried by surface runoffs causing eutrophication of water bodies. As a result, dissolved oxygen is decreased and the water is unable to provide a healthy environment for aquatic life (Gilland et al., 2009). Traditionally, Cambodian farmers use mainly animal waste and compost to improve and maintain soil fertility. More recently such practices are being supplanted by use of chemical fertilizers. Average household use of fertilizers has now reached 115 kg for each production season.

2.5.2 Conflicting and Incompatible Land Uses

Road developments are viewed as one of the key driving factors that contributed to agricultural expansion and intensification, and illegal logging (for fuel wood and timber) (ADB, 2011). Increased access to previously isolated areas has resulted in a rash of new land claims (MoE/CBD, 2010 in Johnsen and Munford, 2012). In Prek Thnot, some areas which were classified as forest cover has been allocated for Economic Land Concession (ELC), household distribution through Sub-Decree 01, and Community Forestry.

2.5.3 Inefficient Land Use Plans

Johnsen and Munford (2012) noted that the current expansion of urban areas has not properly been planned, and there is little investment for improving the urban environment and sanitation. Even though there is standing guideline in CLUP, the land allocation is still inadequate and unable to consider the carrying capacity of the landscape. It was noted that most of the planning approach only account for the prevailing land use instead of making an optimal allocation of the land. This watershed management plan aims to improve the approach in land use planning.

2.5.4 Flooding

In Kampong Speu, flood affected several districts, including Chbar Morn, Phnom Sruoch, Thporng, and Baseth in 2010 (Provincial Department of Agriculture, 2013) (Figure 12). Flash floods occurred due to heavy rainfall in upstream areas. Areas along Prek Thnot River are among the vulnerable to flooding. These areas include Krong Chbar Morn, Samrong Torng, Aoral, and Phnom Sruoch districts. Areas prone to disasters are situated downstream where the majority of agriculture developments are located. The flood in 2010 affected 1,766 ha of paddy field (Provincial Department of Agriculture, 2013).

Figure 13. Flooding incidence in Prek Thnot watershed

2.5.5 Periodic Drought

Drought is the most prominent hazard for agriculture sector in Kampong Speu province. Severe drought episodes occurred in 1987, 1999, and 2000. There are four main characteristics of drought affecting agricultural sector in Kampong Speu province (Provincial Department of Agriculture. 2013):

▪ Unpredictable delays in rainfall in the early wet season ▪ Unpredictable variations in wet season rainfall in term of amount and duration across different areas ▪ Early ending of rains during the wet season ▪ Common occurrence of drought spells of up to three weeks or more during the wet season, which can damage or destroy crops without irrigation

The incidence of drought in Kampong Speu affected 539 families in 2011 (Kampong Speu data base, 2011). Drought is second to flooding when it comes to damage. Serious drought occurred in 2002, 2003, 2004 (the longest and most damaging until 2006) 2006 and 2016. The drought in 2016 was regarded the most severe affecting almost the whole country. In May 2016, the National Committee for Disaster Management said that 2.5 million people in Cambodia were directly

21 affected by drought (Open Development Cambodia, 2016).

2.5.6 Land Tenure

Many Cambodian landholders still do not have formal title and depend on “soft” possessory rights. In the absence of formal title, landholders face the risk of land conflict. In 2014 alone, nearly 50,000 in land disputes were recorded. Land that has not been registered in the national registration system is at risk of being granted to private companies in the form of land concessions. Despite the suspension of grants of economic land concessions in 2012, land disputes involving villages and ELC holders are still reported (Open Development Cambodia, 2015). Land registration is primarily conducted under the Land Administration Sub-Sector Program (LASSP) of the Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction (MLMUPC). The CF and CPA Agreements provide a sense of security over the lands that the community managed which are issued by the Forestry Administration (FA) and Ministry of Environment (MoE). However, some areas in Prek Thnot remain untenured and or open access which are subject to encroachment and conflicting claims.

2.6 Legal Framework

The development of management plan is based on the existing policies and laws of Cambodia. Some of the societal goals are drawn from these laws and policies. The laws and policies cited herein covers the management of watersheds, land use planning and management of forest resources.

2.6.1 Forestry Law, 2002

The objective of the law is to ensure the sustainable management of these forests for their social, economic and environmental benefits, including conservation of biological diversity and cultural heritage (Article 1). The law prescribes areas in the forestlands to be reforested. Among others, the Forestry Administration is mandated by the law to: (1) Assess boundaries, classify and demarcate forests in order to establish a land use map of the Permanent Forest Estates in coordination with the Ministry of Land Management Urban Planning and Construction, local authorities and communities and (2) Promote forestation on degraded forestland and idle forestland (Article 7). In Article 42, the Forestry Administration Cantonment, through consultation with parties concerned, has the duty to study conditions of the Permanent Forest Reserve in order to accurately demarcate and allocate suitable forest areas as Community Forest based on the capacity of forest resources and the needs to ensure customary user rights of local communities. The need to demarcate the permanent forest estate is specified in Articles 7 and 42. Article 45 provides that the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries shall recognize the religious forest of local communities, living within or near the forest, as Protection Forest serving religious, cultural or conservation purposes. The formulation of the National Forest Programme 2010-2029 is already a demonstration of compliance of the law. However, the target for restoration is not reflected spatially. The accuracy of the target for restoration may be unrealistic based on the real situation in the ground because there are still no integrated land use plans in the country that will guide the rehabilitation and estimating the targets for reforestation or restoration. The demarcation of

Permanent Forest Estates (PFE) is also on-going including the development of CLUPs. Except for a few, there is no landscape level plan that sets the target for restoration. In the above provisions, there is a need that the FA should identify sites for restoration. This can be integrated to the Commune Land Use Plans, Land Use Plans of the ELCs, CFs and the development of the Master Plan for the provinces, Districts and towns.

2.6.2 National Forest Programme, 2010-2029

The National Forest Programme (NFP) 2010-2029 aims to achieve sustainable forest management and alleviate poverty in Cambodia. Specifically, it identifies objectives and goals in developing and managing forests to improve livelihoods, environmental services and overall economic development. The NFP aims to increase the current level of forest cover to 60% of the total land area as its strategic indicators. It sets a target of 500,000 ha of high value commercial plantation established and 10 million tree seedlings distributed per year and two million hectares of forest land allocated for Community Forestry (approximately 1,000 CF). The NFP targets the establishment of 25,000 ha of forest a year. The NFP recommended the landscape approach in forest planning. At the landscape level, the degraded forest areas are designated for forest rehabilitation, through enrichment planting and silvicultural tending.

2.6.3 Law on Management, Urban Planning and Construction

The objective of the Law on Land Management, Urban Planning and Constructions is to promote the organization and embellishment of the urban and the rural areas throughout the Kingdom of Cambodia with the purpose of assuring development of the country. This is in consideration of the welfare of the society and aimed at protecting the patrimony, environment and protecting natural resources of Cambodia. The MLMUPC is mandated to develop a Master Plan in each special region to protect the patrimony and the Environment, and to assure the economic development of any particular region.

2.6.4 Land Law, 2001

The Land Law (2001) sets out a comprehensive system of land classification and ownership rights. It includes provisions on social and economic land concessions, indigenous land rights, land registration and land dispute resolution. The Law also authorizes the enactment of a series of important sub-decrees and other legislation. The significant elements of this law for the ENR sector are three-fold: a) definition of state public property; b) definition of state private property; c) definition of indigenous property under the collective ownership category. The law distinguishes between state land in the public domain, such as forests and PAs, and state land in the private domain, which is used to provide land for economic and social development. The 2001 Land Law formalized the legal framework for granting concessions for economic purposes (Johnsen and Munford, 2012). The Sub-Decree on Economic Land Concessions, adopted in December 2005 and amended in 2009, was an important advance in establishing the legal and regulatory framework for the granting and management of ELCs. The Land Law in Cambodia helps to identify the types of land that come under the direct control and ownership of the State (State Private and State Public Lands). Natural bodies of water and water courses are considered property of the State according

23 to this legislative document. The Land Law directs the Committee for Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction of Phnom Penh or the Sub-Committee for Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction of each province and municipality to draw up their own development master plans for the re-organization and development of their respective city, province and municipality (Article 5 and 6). Accordingly, land use master plan shall clearly indicate the area to be allocated for national defense, agriculture, commerce, industry, handicraft, culture, tourism, religion, and administrative buildings and public facilities (Article 7). From these provisions the area set aside for tourism and public facilities can be allocated for the targeting for restoration or tree planting.

2.6.5 Implementation Manual on Commune Land Use Planning

The principles of developing this watershed management plan were based on the Manual on Commune Land Use Planning. Notably, the CLUP Manual emphasize the usefulness of the land management to better management and in promoting investment. The aims of Commune Land Use Planning are:

1. Provide competency to commune/Sangkat councils in preparing effective land and natural resources use and management 2. Support equitable and sustainable socioeconomic development 3. Contribute to the people poverty reduction 4. Help to achieve productivity of land use in the Commune/Sangkat based on the actual conditions and natural potential of the land 5. Respond to the land need of authorities and Commune/Sangkat residents 6. Help prevent degradation and inappropriate use of land and natural resources 7. Facilitate better fulfillment of representatives in determining and managing state land in the Commune/Sangkat 8. Seek supplementary technical support from various institutions and units as well as from Commune/Sangkat development plan and investment programs

The development of CLUP follows the following Guiding Principles:

1. CLUP will identify present land use and future land potential and constraints 2. CLUP should be geared to commune-level capacities 3. CLUP is linked to exiting processes, principally the CDP/CIP 4. CLUP cannot resolve land tenure issues and land conflict but provide a basis for further investigation and agreement where needed 5. CLUP outputs will be merged into the CDP/CIP

2.6.6 Sub-Decree on Economic Land Concession

The sub-decree determines the criteria, procedures, mechanisms and institutional arrangements for initiating and granting new economic land concessions, for monitoring the performance of all economic land concession contracts and for reviewing economic land concessions (Article 1). The law provides that Economic Land Concessions may be granted to develop the land for intensive agricultural and industrial-agricultural activities based on the land use plan for the area but should

24 be within the framework of natural resource management based on appropriate ecological system (Article 3). Articles 4, 5 and 14 emphasize the need for the economic land concessions to conform to Land Use Plans adopted by the Provincial-Municipal State Land Management Committees and in consideration to the perpetual environmental protection and natural resources. Following the provisions of the Sub-Decree, the Technical Secretariat on Economic Land Concessions should ensure that the ELCs should include in their development plans provision for restoration of the critical areas such as the riparian areas and the areas with steep slopes. The Economic Land Concessions are required to conform to the Land use plan for the land has been adopted by the Provincial-Municipal State Land Management Committee. However, although the ELCs are required to submit a land use plan in their proposal they are not required in their plan to restore the areas especially on critical areas along the riparian areas or areas in steep slopes. The ELCs must be required to come up with the restoration plan which should be provided to the Commune for integration to the CLUP.

2.6.7 Water Law

The Law on Water Resources Management was approved in 2007, building on the National Policy on Water Resources Management and the Strategic Plan on Water Resources Management and Development (2005-2008). The Law is set within the framework of IWRM, recognizing the different sector interests in water while calling for greater coordination and the need to balance social and environmental considerations. Integrated water resources management is still unimplemented.

2.6.8 Laws on Protected Areas

The objective of this law is to manage and effectively implement the conservation of biological resources and sustainably use the natural resources in the Protected Areas. According to this law, the state recognizes and secures access to traditional uses, local customs, beliefs, and religions of local communities and indigenous ethnic minority groups residing within and adjacent to the protected areas. Article 11 of the Law on CPAs categorized the protected areas as: 1. National Park, 2. Wildlife sanctuary, 3. Protected landscape, 4. Multiple use area, 5. Ramsar site, 6. Biosphere reserve, 7. Natural heritage site, 8. Marine park. Each protected area shall be divided into four (4) management zoning systems, as core zone, conservation zone, sustainable use zone, and community zone.

2.6.9 Environmental Protection and Natural Resources Management Law, 1996

This law establishes the basic provision for environmental protection and preservation of natural resources in Cambodia, including important provisions on the requirement for environmental impact assessments. The law calls for the development of a National Environmental Plan. The law has multiple aims that include assessment of environmental impacts of proposed projects to “ensure the rationale and sustainable preservation, development, management and the use of the natural resources” and to promote public participation on environmental protection and natural resource management.

2.6.10 Green Growth Roadmap

Cambodia’s Green Growth Roadmap aims to achieve economic growth in Cambodia in an efficient way with less resources and waste; to be clean, without polluting the environment; and to be green, with preserving greenery, waterways and the natural heritages. The Green Growth Road mentions the parks and landfills to be targeted for tree planting. In tree planting, these areas should be considered in the land use planning in the Master Plan and the Commune Land Use Plans. The rights of ways and open spaces are targeted for planting.

2.6.11 Law on Commune and Sangkat Administrative Management, 2001

The law on Commune and Sangkat mandates the communes to protect the resources in their communes (Article 41) that includes the environment and natural resources (Article 43). Under this provision, the FA should include in its policy strategies of involving the Communes in the developments. The Partnership Forestry recommended by the NFP should be considered in engaging the Communes in restoring the forests. Article 60 mandated the Commune Councils to prepare, approve and implement a commune development plans consistent with the national economic and social development plan (Article 61). The Communes should be involved by the FA and MoE in identifying sites for restoration pursuant to Article 43

2.6.12 National Strategic Development Plan, 2014-2018

The NSDP outlines the importance of conserving Cambodia’s unique natural heritage and biodiversity, along with enhancing environmental sustainability, sustainable economic growth, poverty reduction, and improvements on the lives of rural communities. The National Strategic Development Plan (NSDP) (2009-2013) serves as the ‘roadmap’ for implementing the RS-Phase II and it aims to support the sustainable use of all natural resources in the country. The NSDP recognize the need to give highest attention to manage the environment and natural resources to minimize impacts of climate change. The NSDP 2014-2018 also emphasizes the need for Cambodia to “balance between development and conservation” and recognize the need for: (1) green cover, forest and wildlife conservation; (2) sustainability manage the fisheries resources; and (3) ensure the sustainability of the ecosystem, so that the quality of land and sustainability of water sources could be improved by focusing on the protection of biodiversity, wetlands and coastal areas. Among others, the NSDP sets target to (1) clearly determining the ownership of natural resources; (2) developing an appropriate incentive scheme for the conservation of natural resources and empowering the sub-national government, communities and individuals to participate in their conservation; and (3) stepping up cooperation with concerned stakeholders under the framework of green growth and climate change. The NSDP sets a national target of 60% forest cover with an annual area to be reforested of 25,000 ha from 2014 to 2018. Considerable achievements have been made in the development of the land use plans by various agencies.

NSDP reported that MOE has created a green buffer zone to prevent encroachment on the protected areas through developing agro-industry projects and ecotourism projects. Another green buffer

26 zone has been created through setting up protected area communities, a strategy in which forestlands within the protected areas are given to the local communities and ethnic groups for sustainable management and (local) consumption for non-timber forest products. The FA and the MoE should align their targeting for developments to the completed Master Plans of the MLMUPC for forest developments and restoration works. At present there is very limited sharing of information among the Key Players on the priority areas for developments.

2.6.13 CAMBODIA Climate Change Strategic Plan, 2014-2023

This Strategic Plan provides a policy of mitigating the impacts of climate change and securing people’s support in the mitigation activities. CCCSP also aims to make the critical ecosystems (e.g. Tonle Sap Lake, Mekong River, coastal ecosystems, highlands, etc.), biodiversity, protected areas and cultural heritage sites more resilient to climate change. Besides protection of water and forest resources, the Royal Government is promoting tree planting, rehabilitation of degraded forests and investment in production of biofuels.

Strategic Objective 1 (Promote climate resilience through improving food, water and energy security) identified the watersheds as one of the areas that need to be developed to increase resilience and improving food, water and energy security in the country. MoE is mandated to (1) strengthen biodiversity conservation and rehabilitation of ecosystems affected by climate change; (2) Encourage and promote community-based solutions, ecosystem-based solutions and ecotourism as effective ways to respond to climate change; and (3) Promote Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES), including REDD+. The CCCSP however only broadly mentions the engagement of the communities and PES. There is no concrete mention of engaging the community in restoring the uplands and means of compensating their efforts of restoring the forests. Except for REDD+ and ecotourism, PES is still not taking off in Cambodia. The mechanism by which the upland communities will be able to get benefits from hydropower dams, irrigations and fisheries needs to be developed to encourage participation of the communities on restoration.

The Strategic Objective 3 of CCCSP identified the community-based approaches as cost-effective ways of addressing climate change. It also recognizes the importance of community participation in developing the land use plans.

2.6.14 National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP) 2002

The NBSAP provides a framework for action at all levels that will enhance ability to ensure the productivity, diversity and integrity of natural systems resulting to the ability of Cambodia to reduce poverty and improve the quality of life of all Cambodians. It promotes the conservation of biodiversity and the sustainable use of biological resources and describes how Cambodia can contribute to international efforts to implement the Convention on Biodiversity. It aims to ensure that the benefits of sustainable biological resource use contribute to poverty reduction and the improved quality of life for all Cambodians. The National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan propose 17 themes aimed at protecting the natural resources, land use planning, community participation and poverty reduction. The NBSAP promotes reforestation and rehabilitation of

27 degraded forest areas in all provinces (area reforested). The NBSAP requires zoning of the sustainable uses of the protected areas for tourism and recreation. The NBSAP aims to develop a national and provincial land use master plans that take full account of environmental considerations in the socio-economic planning process and identification of alternatives and priorities (Theme 11). The areas that can be targeted for restoration will be the following:

▪ National botanical gardens and buffer zones of the protected areas (Theme 1). The natural botanical gardens can serve as in-situ and ex-situ conservation site. ▪ Mining area (Theme 8) ▪ Natural and cultural sites (Theme 9) ▪ River banks, lake shores and riparian areas (Theme 12) ▪ All degraded sites (Theme 5)

The communes and concerned agencies (FA, MoE, MIME and MoT) should indicate in their land use plans areas that are ideal for conservation like the botanical areas, biodiversity rich areas, mining areas, natural and cultural sites, river banks or riparian areas and degraded sites. These sites will be reflected in the map for forest development (e.g. restoration, rehabilitation or reforestation).

2.6.15 Five-Year Development Plan (2015-2019) of Kampong Speu Province

The five-year development plan (2015-2019) of Kampong Speu Province was develop the plan cover all sectors in the province. This development plan mentioned the strategies in managing environment, natural resources and land use in Kampong Speu province. Many points have been pointed out for land use strategy. These include the following (Kampong Speu, 2015):

▪ Enhance land tenure, land market, land conflict resolution, and commune land use plan ▪ Dissemination of related existing laws and regulations ▪ Transferring public land to people for agricultural production and settlement ▪ Mine clearance ▪ Review and put necessary measure to increase effectiveness of public land ▪ Strategy for managing natural resources and environment

It is noted that the development plan and investment plan in Kampong Speu province described the general activities that the province intend to implement. Most of identified locations for the development plan are only in the provincial town such as road rehabilitation, drainage system, and light along the road side in provincial town.

2.7 RESPONDING TO THE GAP

The plan endeavors to make development in the watershed more systematic and orderly. Degraded areas located in the critical areas are targeted for rehabilitation and restoration. By identifying the areas for rehabilitation and need to be conserved, will ultimately contribute to preventing further

28 loss of the forest resources. The project aims to address the drivers of deforestation in the watershed by putting in place a platform for land developments. The plan itself promote the sustainable management of the forests located in the watershed by allocating the areas for SFM. The land allocation plan aims to maximize the economic benefits of different land uses without impairing the ecosystem.

3.0 Description of the Plan

The general objective of this plan is to come up with a spatial plan for Prek Thnot watershed so that a range of ecosystem services can be maintained for the benefit of all stakeholders. The land use plan provides a means of optimizing the generation of benefits through holistic watershed planning in contrast to fragmented planning and helps the commune council in developing their Commune Land Use Plans (CLUPs).

3.1 Land Use Planning and Watershed Carrying Capacity

In ecology, carrying capacity means the maximum number of individuals that can be supported in an environment without experiencing decreases in the ability to support future generations within the area (Kormondy 1996). The concept is used to point out that there is a limit to the growth of biological populations, and an analogy can be made for human societies (Schroll et al., 2012). The Watershed Management Plan provide a land use allocation that maximize the societal benefits without breaching the carrying capacity of the watershed.

3.2 The Planning Process

The development of the watershed planning undergoes the following phases: development of the optimum land allocation model, developing the land allocation map, and developing the watershed management plan based on land allocation. The steps involved in land allocation is shown in Figure 13. Along the process, series of stakeholder consultations were made.

Figure 14. Steps involved in developing the Integrated Watershed Management Plan of Prek Thnot watershed

3.2.1 Consultation Process and Public Involvement

Information, consultation and active involvement of stakeholders are the cornerstones in any spatial planning process. Participation allows for identifying what the planning issues are, optimizing the planning results through broad interdisciplinary inputs and guaranteeing consistent implementation and control through understanding and ownership of stakeholders. Series of consultations were conducted with the stakeholders as part of the legitimization process of the land allocation and Integrated Watershed Management Plan (IWMP).

The first provincial consultation workshop was held in the provincial town of Kampong Speu in March 30, 2016. The first consultation serves as a kick off of the project, and at the same time, disseminate information about the issues of the watershed and the role of the APFNet project in addressing the issues. In that consultation, the concept of integrated watershed management and the issues of Prek Thnot watershed and the proposed land allocation were presented to the participants. The participants were also asked on additional land uses that they think are appropriate to the area. In that session, the participants provided some of the criteria for the allocation of each land allocation. These served as guide in developing the land suitability of the different land uses in the watershed.

The provincial consultation workshop on “Land Use Planning in Prek Thnot Watershed” was conducted in November 7, 2017 in Kampong Speu Province. In that workshop the draft land allocation map was shared to stakeholders. Feedbacks were also provided by stakeholders on the draft land allocation map as well as the mitigating measures in areas where there are incompatible uses. In that workshop, the outcome of the allocation was presented to the participants. The participants also defined the vision and ways of enhancing the services from the watershed. These are used in shaping the watershed management plan. The most important services from Prek Thnot watershed include irrigation, flood mitigation, fishing, ecotourism, recharge of the ground water, hydropower dam, agriculture production, habitat, food production, economic services, clean water, controlling soil erosion and ecosystem services. The most important problems/issues that must be addressed are soil erosion, land degradation, land conflict, flood, drought.

The final leg of series of consultation is the District consultation where the content of the IWMP was validated to the stakeholders. A district consultation was decided in order to have wider participation from the stakeholders. There were two district consultations made: (1) the first consultation workshop was conducted on 22 March 2018 (for Oral and Thpong districts) at the Oral District Hall with participation of stakeholders from central and provincial Forestry Administration, local authorities (Districts and Communes heads), relevant offices from the two districts, representatives of Community Forestry and Community Protected Areas, local NGOs and Communities level; and (2) The second workshop was conducted on 30 March at the Phnom Srouch District Hall (for Phnom Sruoch and Samrong Tong Districts) with participation of the same groups of participants.. The objectives of these workshops were to i) share the draft of land use planning to stakeholders and ii) get feedback from stakeholders for improvement of this draft IWMP.

The workshops were structured by presentation and group discussion. The group discussions were divided into 4 and 5 groups. Each group had the opportunity to go through with each question. The questions were designed to collect more information on proposed land use, strategies to increase

32 the financial and economic benefits from the watershed, and how to get support from stakeholders on implementation of the land use planning.

As the results of workshops, all participants were aware of the proposed land use, the mechanics of developing landscape approach to planning, biophysical and socio-economic characteristics of the watershed, draft of land use plan of the watershed, final land allocation in the Prek Thnot watershed and the management plan. The participants had the opportunity to discuss and share information as well as their idea on land allocation and contribute to the land use planning. The workshops were actively participated, shared information, and learned from each other. The workshops provide a useful information and suggestion for the improvement of draft land use planning of Prek Thnot Watershed.

3.2.2 Field Data Collection

Basic hydrological data were collected from agroforestry demonstration plots in Prek Thnot. The hydrological data was used in validating the assumptions of the allocation model. Rain collectors were also installed in these areas.

3.2.3 Allocation Modeling

The heart of the land use allocation is a mathematical model. Linear and goal programming is a formalization of managerial decision making into a formal mathematical construct. The model enables to solve complex problem of harmonizing the conflicting demands of watershed services and carrying capacity. Linear and Goal programming were used in land allocation. Although this approach has been widely used in many resource management problems, this is still relatively new in Cambodia. The works of Gimenez et al. (2013) and Ostadhashemi et al. (2014) demonstrated the applicability of optimization model in the sustainable management of industrial plantations and resource allocation. Goal Programming (GP) model seeks to minimize the deviations between the desired goals and the actual results to be obtained according to the assigned priorities (Ostadhashemi et al., 2014) while Linear Programming (LP) technique is relevant in optimization of resource allocation and achieving efficiency in production planning.

The allocation involves the following activities: (1) Determining the Optimum Allocation and Carrying Capacity Model (2) Weights/Pairwise Ranking (3) Determining the Compromised Land Allocation Model. The different societal goal considers maximization of benefits and minimization of the externalities or negative impacts. The goals of the allocation include:

1. Maximize Income from Land Use (Honey, Mushroom, Sugar, Rattan, Resin, Rice, Fruits, Ecotourism, etc.) (Products and Employment Income) 2. Maximize Rice Production (Limited by Site Carrying Capacity) 3. Maximize Meat Production - Bushmeat and Livestock (Limited by Site Carrying Capacity) 4. Maximize Supply of Construction/High Value Timbers 5. Maximize Supply of Fuelwood 6. Maximize Total Biomass Produced

7. Maximize Forage Production 8. Maximize Water Infiltration for 3-Hr. Rain 9. Minimize Soil Erosion 10. Minimize Total Pesticide Loads 11. Minimize Social Cost for Protection Management

The GP model provide feasible solution on the allocation of the watershed under different constraints expressed as coefficients of the equation (Table 5) (please see Annex 2). It should be noted that the result of the allocation only provides the numbers (i.e. the hectare) but may have limited utility value in management and planning. The allocation was then spatially reflected in the watershed using GIS. The siting was guided by the land suitability constraint maps that were earlier developed based on the criteria set by the stakeholder consultation workshop (please see Annex 1). Figure 15-18 show the spatial representation of the results of land allocation.

Table 5. Result of the Land Allocation Land Use Area by District (ha) Total

Aoral Basedth Chbar Kong Odongk Phnum Sam- Thpong Mon Pisei Sruoch raong Tong Rice Production - - 7,200 9,700 9,000 8,400 56,200 13,800 104,300 Industrial Crops 67,000 200 - - - 11,300 1,300 12,700 92,500 Industrial Tree 3,200 100 - 400 - 4,300 3,500 2,300 13,800 Plantations Fruit Orchard 39,400 100 600 13,200 - 69,400 3,600 8,900 135,200 High Value Crops 2,000 - - - - 3,500 1,400 500 7,400 Conservation/Pro 95,100 - - - - 5,700 100 100 101,000 tection SFM 19,000 600 100 1,500 - 20,100 5,800 5,200 52,300 Forage ------0 Production Total 225,700 1,000 7,900 24,800 9,000 122,700 71,900 43,500 506,500

Table 6 shows a comparison of the proposed land allocation and the current land use of Prek Thnot watershed. It can be noticed that there is no change on the existing rice production area. The current area that is subjected to SFM are only those areas covered by CBFM. Under the proposed allocation, the CBFM will be expanded to 52,300 ha from the current 9,600 ha. The fruit orchard and high value crops will also be given emphasis for development. Currently, there are around 131,600 ha that have no specific land use or idle lands. These areas will be fully developed under the plan. The current productivity of these lands is highly variable and there is very limited information as to their current productivity. It is anticipated that the plan will contribute to increasing their productivity with the introduction of technologies.

Table 6. Comparison of the proposed allocation and current land uses Land Use Baseline Allocation Rice Production 104,300 104,300 Industrial Crops 93,900 The existing Industrial crops only considers the 92,500 areas covered by ELCs. There are also private plantation owners and farmers who developed their lands for cassava, potato and other crops. But there are no data on the extent of areas covered other than the ELCs. Industrial Tree Plantations 14,000 13,800 (ITP) Fruit Orchard No Data 135,200 High Value Crops (HVC) No Data 7,400 Conservation/Protection 153,100 National Parks 101,000 SFM (Sustainable Forest 9,600 CBFM 52,300 Mgt.) Forage Production No Data 0 Others 131,600 Idle Areas/Unclassified/Unknown Uses - Total 506,500 506,500

Figure 15. Proposed land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed (Conservn = Conservation Area; Fruits = Fruit Orchard; HVC = High Value Crops; IC = Industrial Crops; ITP = Industrial Tree Plantations; Rice = Rice Production; SFM = Sustainable Forest Management)

Figure 16. Proposed conservation areas in Prek Thnot watershed

Figure 17. Proposed agriculture production

Figure 18. Proposed for wood production in Prek Thnot watershed

3.2.4 Validation of the Land Use Allocation

A provincial consultation workshop on “Land use planning in Prek Thnot Watersheds” was conducted on November 7, 2017 in Kampong Speu Province. The objective of the workshop was to (1) share the draft land allocation map to stakeholder and (2) get feedback from stakeholder for the improvement of the draft land allocation map. During the workshop, the stakeholders provided some inputs on the proposed measures to be conducted in areas where there are conflicts over the land use.

Figure 19. Consultative workshop conducted

During the validation workshop, the participants suggested to modify the proposed land use. They proposed to develop part in Aoral, Phnum Sruoch and Samrong Tong for ecotourism. To be compatible of the proposed land management, the sites identified for ecotourism has to be devoted for conservation. The site proposed for ecotourism is shown in Figure 20. Table 7 summarizes the adjustment of the land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed. Ecotourism is being introduced in the conservation area.

Figure 20. Revised land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed (Conservn = Conservation Area; Fruits = Fruit Orchard; HVC = High Value Crops; IC = Industrial Crops; ITP = Industrial Tree Plantations; Rice = Rice Production; SFM = Sustinable Forest Management)

Table 7. Revised land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed Land Use Area by District (‘000 ha) Total

Aoral Basedth Chbar Kong Odongk Phnum Sam- Thpong Mon Pisei Sruoch raong Tong Rice Production - - 7.000 9.700 9.000 8.400 56.000 13.800 103.900 Industrial Crops 67.000 0.200 - - - 11.300 1.300 12.700 92.500 Industrial Tree 3.200 0.100 - 0.400 - 3.400 3.500 2.300 12.900 Plantations Fruit Orchard 39.400 0.100 0.600 13.200 - 69.200 3.600 8.900 135.000 High Value 2.000 - - - - 3.500 1.400 0.500 7.400 Crops Conservation/ 95.100 - 0.200 - - 8.800 0.300 0.100 104.500 Protection Sustainable Forest 19.000 0.600 0.100 1.500 - 18.100 5.800 5.200 50.300 Management (SFM) Forage ------Production Total 225.700 1.000 7.900 24.800 9.000 122.700 71.900 43.500 506.500

3.2.5 Analysis of Proposed Land Allocation and Incompatible Land Uses

An analysis was conducted to identify areas where there are incompatible uses between the proposed and actual land use. The incompatible land uses are summarized in Table 8 under each situation, mitigating measures were provided.

Table 8. Incompatible use and mitigating measures

Situation and Proposed Actions in the Different Land Uses Existing Land Uses Allocated for IC, HVC and Fruit Allocated for SFM and ITP Allocated for Rice Production or Conditions Orchard Currently covered by Issues/ Description of ELCs Developed for Incompatibility: ITPs ▪ The plan recommended Intensive Agriculture (excluding Rice) to some areas that are currently covered by ELCs developed for ITP ▪ There are 13,600 ha falling in under this situation. Land Management Option: ▪ Enjoin the ELC to adopt a Taungya Agroforestry Techniques ▪ Enjoin the ELCs to develop along the roads multistorey Agroforestry

Situation and Proposed Actions in the Different Land Uses Existing Land Uses Allocated for IC, HVC and Fruit Allocated for SFM and ITP Allocated for Rice Production or Conditions Orchard The Area Falls Issues/ Description of Issues/ Description of Issues/ Description of Under Critical Areas Incompatibility: Incompatibility: Incompatibility: (Conservation Areas/ ▪ The plan recommended for ▪ The plan recommended SFM and ▪ The plan recommended rice National Parks and intensive agriculture (excluding ITP to areas that are within the production to some areas that are Riparian Areas) rice) in critical areas due to the critical areas (i.e. along riparian within critical areas (i.e. along present land use. areas and national park). Mostly, riparian areas and national park). ▪ The area falling under this these are existing cultivations of These are mostly existing situation is approximately 78,900 individual farmers. Driving out cultivations of individual farmers. ha. the farmers from their present Driving out the farmers from Land Management Option: cultivation is not an option their present cultivation is not an ▪ Enjoin the farmers to practice especially if these are covered by option especially if these are sustainable land management and titles. covered by titles. ecoagriculture (i.e. contour ▪ The areas falling in these ▪ The areas falling in these plowing, putting up of soil and categories need to be conserved categories need to be conserved water control measures, considering that the SFM/ITP considering that these will have agroforestry) may have moderate impacts to serious impacts to the watershed. ▪ Promote precision agriculture the watershed. ▪ In these areas, the feasible technology and judicious use of ▪ There are 26,500 ha that are management options are to chemical fertilizers and under this situation. engage landholders to mitigate pesticides. This requires mapping Land Management Option: the impacts of their current land soil fertility and fertilizer ▪ Apply low impact logging use. requirements in the watershed. technology ▪ There are 12,300 ha. that are ▪ Promote agroforestry or tree ▪ Develop Forest Farming under this situation. plantations to the farmers Agroforestry Techniques Land Management Option: ▪ Enjoin the landholders to set ▪ Promote organic rice farming aside buffer planting along the ▪ Enjoin the landholders to conduct riparian areas (2,650 ha. /10% of buffer planting along the riparian the total area) areas

3.2.5.1 Proposed Industrial Crops, High Value Crops and Fruit Orchards in Areas Developed for ITP Covered by ELC

Around 13,600 ha are recommended for industrial crops (Industrial Crops, High Value Crops and Fruit Orchard) but are covered by ELCs that develop industrial tree plantations (ITPs). The incompatible land use is located in Aoral and Phnum Sruoch District. Intensive agriculture can be interfaced with the production of agricultural commodities. To achieve this objective, agroforestry techniques will be introduced. Taungya Agroforestry will be introduced in the areas that are newly harvested or planted areas and multistory agroforestry will be introduced in areas along the roads.

3.2.5.2 Industrial Crops, High Value Crops and Fruit Orchards in Critical Areas

The plan recommended for intensive agriculture (excluding rice) in critical areas. The allocation of areas for industrial crops are unavoidable due to the current developments (i.e. the area is covered by ELCs and have existing cultivators). Approximately 78,900 ha area falling under this situation. In these areas, the farmers will be enjoined to practice sustainable land management and ecoagriculture (i.e. contour plowing, putting up of soil and water control measures, agroforestry). The area will also be targeted for precision agriculture technology and judicious use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Soil mapping and fertilizer requirements study will be conducted. Agroforestry or tree plantations will be promoted to the farmers.

3.2.5.3 Proposed Sustainable Forest Management) and Industrial Tree Plantations in Critical Areas

The plan recommended Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) to some areas that are currently within the critical areas (i.e. along riparian areas and national park). Mostly, these are existing cultivations. The areas falling in these categories need to be conserved considering that these will have serious impacts to the watershed. In these areas, the landholders will be enjoined to develop their lands for sustainable forest management. There are 26,500 ha that are under this situation. Specifically, the following land management options will be pursued:

▪ Promote agroforestry or tree plantations to the farmers ▪ Enjoin the farmers to develop portion of their areas for ITP/SFM and Agroforestry ▪ Enjoin the landholders to set aside buffer planting along the riparian areas

3.2.5.4 Proposed Rice Production in Critical Areas

Some parts along the riparian and conservation areas are already developed for rice production. The plan will as much as possible respect the existing land uses most especially that rice production is one of the important goal the plan aims to achieve. It is recognized however that the continued operation of rice farmers may impact the environment. The areas that are recommended for rice production falling in critical areas is 12,300 ha. In these areas, the land management options are:

▪ organic farming in the areas ▪ precision agriculture technology and judicious use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. This requires mapping soil fertility and fertilizer requirements in the watershed. ▪ agroforestry or tree plantations to the farmers ▪ set aside buffers along streams for forest

3.3 Vision

Based on the consultation workshop, the following vision for Prek Thnot watershed is drawn: “A healthy watershed that provides protective and ecosystem benefits and contribute to the livelihoods and economic wellbeing to the people”.

3.4 Goals

The goal of the watershed management plan is “To enhance the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot Watershed through improved watershed governance and sustainable management of the resources and contribute to the economic development”.

There are 4 specific objectives (SO) of the integrated watershed management plan:

SO1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed

SO2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed SO3: To improve the natural capital of Prek Thnot watershed SO4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed

The plan is expected to produce the following results:

Specific Objective 1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed Expected Result 1.1: Livelihoods implemented Strategy 1.1.1: Development suitable lands of Prek Thnot to prescribed land uses Specific Objective 2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed Expected Result 2.1: Ecoagriculture and sustainable land management implemented Strategy 2.1.1: Promote sustainable land management among the land users Specific Objective 3: To improve the natural capital of Prek Thnot watershed Expected Result 3.1: Sites developed Strategy 3.1.1: Promote the development of the lands to various uses prescribed in the land use plan Expected Result 3.2 Improved productivity of existing forest Strategy 3.2.1 Enhance the sustainable production of existing forests Specific Objective 4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed Expected Result 4.1: Improved management and protection of natural resources Strategy 4.1.1: Support the implementation of Environmental Management and Social Protection Expected Result 4.2: Land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas developed Strategy 4.2.1: Formulate Management Plans for better management of the watershed resources Expected Result 4.3: Capability building conducted to state and non- state actors Strategy 4.3.1: Technology building of key actors and resource managers. Strategy 4.3.2: Sustainable Funding. Expected Result 4.4: Platform for institutional linkage and co-management established and supported Strategy 4.4.1: Institutional Strengthening and Co-Management Expected Result 4.5: Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan Strategy 4.5.1: Increasing support of the watershed management plan among the stakeholders.

The specific programs under each result is elaborated in section 3.7 and Logframe (Annex 7).

3.5 Expected Impacts and Benefits

The sustainable management of this watershed will provide not only the direct benefits to local communities but also a range of environmental benefits like mitigating the impacts of climate change that we are now experiencing, storing more carbon stock in the forest, and soil erosion control. The expected tangible benefits of the plan include optimizing rice production, increased availability of sawtimber, fuelwood, increased production of forage and biomass. It is also

45 anticipated that the watershed will increase its capability to recharge the aquifers by increased infiltration, reduction of soil erosion, minimized chemical loads to the watershed. The major impacts are shown in Table 9.

Table 9. Results of the Societal Goals Carrying Capacity Maximize Income from Land Use (Honey, Mushroom, Sugar, Rattan, US$ ‘000 /year 585,419 Resin, Rice, Fruits, Ecotourism, etc.) (Products and Employment Income) Maximize Rice Production (Limited by Site Carrying Capacity) t/year 417,200 Maximize Meat Production - Bushmeat and Livestock (Limited by Site kg /year 794,106 Carrying Capacity) Maximize Supply of Construction/High Value Timbers m3/year 157,281 Maximize Supply of Fuelwood m3/year 129,061 Maximize Biomass Production Million ton 7.7 Maximize Forage Prodn t/year 273,935 Maximize Water Infiltration for 3-Hr. Rain (m3/ha.) Million m3 4,906 Minimize Soil Erosion t/year 16,810 Minimize Total Chemical Loads t/year 26,106 Minimize Social Cost for Protection and Management US$ ‘000 /year 1,776

Rice Production = 417,200 t/year. Rice production is estimated at 417,200 t/year based on the Goal Programming model. A reduction factor was considered due to the limited capability of the institutions implementing rice production program all over the watershed.

Construction Timbers = 157,281 m3/year. The potential yield of sawn timber that can be generated from various land uses is estimated at 157,281 m3/year. The volume will mostly come from Industrial Tree Plantations (around 83%).

Fuelwood = 129,061 m3/year. The watershed can potentially produce fuelwood amounting to 129,061 m3/year. The aggregate fuelwood production can be achieved when all intended land uses will be fully developed. Developing the wood supply is necessary since the review of literature reveal that wood will continue to be the main source of fuel. Like in construction timbers, fuelwood will mostly be supplied from industrial tree plantations.

Biomass Production= 1.16 million tons. The land allocation is expected to produce a total of 1,157,480 tons of biomass.

Forage Production = 7.7 million tons/year. Forage production will be produced mainly in CF areas. The forage will be integrated with the forests that are not dense.

Water Infiltration = 4,906 million m3. Estimating the infiltration is quite complicated. An assumption has to be made based on a 3-hour rainfall and computed based on the entire watersheds. The estimated volume of water that infiltrates to the groundwater and charge the aquifers is estimated at 4,906 million m3.

3.5.1 Economic Benefits

A Benefit Cost Analysis (BCA) was conducted to analyze the income stream from different land uses. The social benefits were estimated as 20 % of the total income stream. The social benefits are being used against the investments in the benefit cost analysis.

Income Stream from Land Uses. The total potential income of the watershed could reach to US$585 million if the area will be totally developed. However, these are not usually the case since the actual development, could be much lesser due to the capability of the implementing institution and availability of funds. In this analysis, the total economic benefits are estimated at US$US$ 200 million (Annex 6) for a period from 2019 to 20292. These comes from rice production, agroindustry development of industrial tree plantations, conservation forests and sustainable forest management. The estimate for income stream used the same assumptions in the land allocation model (Please see Annex 5).

Benefit Cost Analysis. The result of the benefit cost analysis indicates that the project has modest rate of return. Using a modified IRR (MIRR) method, the rate of return is estimated at 10.2 %. It is also estimated that the benefits and investments will generate a total Net Present Value of US$74 million. The computed rate of return is modest since the analysis only account for the direct financial benefits. The analysis did not consider the benefits from reducing pollution, water recharging the aquifers, biomass produced (equivalent to carbon sequestered), wildlife, esthetic values among others. The valuation of these externalities will be part of monitoring.

3.5.2 Source Hydrological Impacts

Land use change was made based on the proposed land allocation (i.e. fruit orchard, high value crops, conservation, industrial plantation and industrial tree plantations). The information taken from this data is added into to the SWAT model to determine the impact of land use change. Another set of future scenario using the current land use by using the project climate change. Climate change is extracted from the SIMCLIM software, which provides statistical downscaling the outputs of a set of global circulation models driven with assumptions of intermediate levels of greenhouse gas emissions. The climate change scenario was based on the mean seasonal changes involving mean monthly change of humidity, solar radiation, wind speed, precipitation and temperature change is chosen for this study. This seasonal climate change dataset is employed to adjust the reference 1985-2014 climate.

On average, when applied 100-year flood event on Prek Thnot watershed, particularly at Peam Kley station as seen in Figure 21, it is found that the impact of streamflow made the peak of river change from Baseline by decrease from 194 cms to 172 cms (Land use change). This clearly shows that there is no significant change between the baseline and Land use change. However, it is observed that there is a significantly increase from 194 cms to 210 cms (Climate Change).

2 The watershed management plan uses a timeframe of 2019-2029 to coincide with the National Forest Programme which covers the period 2010-2029.

Figure 21. 100 years Return Period resulted from Baseline, Landuse change and climate Change

For the three scenarios, the differences in total flow volumes are subtle (Figure 22). At Peam Kley, for example, the change in average annual flows relative to the Baseline scenario is -2 % and +3% for the land use change and climate change scenarios, respectively. However, the change in seasonal flow patterns between baseline and climate change is significant. The climate scenario changes the timing of the of the wet season flows, with peak flows occurring later in the year as seen in Figue 23.

Figure 22. Mean Annual Discharge at Peam Kley resulted from Baseline, Climate Change and Land Use Change

Figure 23. Monthly Average Discharge at Peam Kley resulted from Baseline, Climate Change and Land Use Change

The SWAT model is used to assess the impacts of different scenarios including land use change and climate change scenarios on hydrological processes in the Prek Thnot watershed. The landuse change scenario, which represents an increase of forest areas, preserving crop production and reuction of certain landue types resulted in slightly reduction in surface runoff and significant minimizing soil erosion in the Prek Thnot watershed but an increase in groundwater recharge. In response to an expected future change of climate, the result in the hydrological components is predicted to increase in surface runoff, soil erosion as well as groundwater recharge relative to baseline (Figure 24-26).

Figure 24. Surface Runoff (mm/year) under three scenarios development (a) Baseline, (b) Land use change and (c) Climate Change

Figure 25. Soil Erosion (tons/Ha./Year) under three scenarios development (a) Baseline, (b) Land use change and (c) Climate Change

Figure 26. Groundwater Recharge (mm/year) under three scenarios development (a) Baseline, (b) Land use change and (c) Climate Change

Consequently, hydrological phenomena derived from the model are shown in Figure 27 and 28 for landuse change (land allocation) and climate change scenarios respectively.

Figure 27. Hydrology of Prek Thnot watershed as a resulted from Land Use Change (Land Allocation)

Figure 28. Hydrological characteristics of Prek Thnot catchment as affected by climate change

In overall, the development scenarios of land use change result in a decrease surfaced runoff (more runoff and soil erosion but significant increase in groundwater recharge. These results further showed that increasing the area for Sustainable Forest Management (SFM), Conservation, Industrial Tree Plantations increases the capacity to conserve the water as compared to pasture land and other land use types. The results of the land allocation simulation revealed that SFM under land allocation is the largest contributor to decreasing surface runoff and soil erosion but increase in groundwater recharge. Existing land use under baseline condition covering urbanization, deforestation for paddy field and so on can be considered as a potential major environmental stressor controlling hydrological components. For development scenarios of climate change illustrates an increasing of surface runoff with high soil erosion as well as groundwater recharge. More importantly, groundwater recharge reductions can have deleterious effects for people living within the watershed as well as wildlife at Prek Thnot watershed.

3.6 Expected Challenges and Barriers

3.6.1 Limited Awareness

The project is expected to encounter problems during implementation. Awareness levels, education and understanding about environmental and natural systems, services, resource rights and current trends are critically low in all groups of the population (Johnsen and Munford, 2012). The project needs to address the awareness barrier problem. The goals and objectives of the watershed plan has to be explained especially on the impacts of the current practices. Generally, there is limited awareness and understanding on the impacts of the land management practices.

3.6.2 Resistance to Technology Change

Many land owners are likely to be wary of soil and water conservation technologies to be introduced. The resistance may be attributed to the additional investment cost and the low consciousness of farmers on the impacts of farming to the environment. Recalcitrance is expected to be more prevalent among poor farmers. They may adopt the technology only after seeing the technology to be benefitting members in the community. For this reason, awareness raising is important. Areas that will be recommended for organic farming need to be delineated and a Prakas has to be issued to enjoin the farmers practice organic farming. This might meet objection among farmers who perceive that applying fertilizers and pesticides will be a necessity and part of modern agriculture and generate more yield and income to the households. These mindsets have to be transformed through massive information dissemination.

3.6.3 Social Cost and Sustainable Funding

Technology dissemination and providing support to land developments need considerable support. Considering the extent of the watershed, a huge investment is needed. This include support for organic farming, sustainable land management, support for agroforestry, and patrol works in the conservation areas. To overcome this problem, some areas has to be managed by the communities and communes through CF, CPA or PF. Areas suited for community-based forest management (e.g. CF, CPA and partnership Forestry) should be identified. Training and capability building has to be conducted to CFs, CPAs and communes who will participate on partnership Forestry.

3.6.4 Poverty and Limited Livelihood Opportunities

Poverty and limited livelihood opportunities in the watershed has been a major constraint and barrier in the management of watersheds areas that are identified for forest conservation, may disenfranchise the communities of traditional livelihoods like farming. Due to the degraded condition of the forest, only limited income is realized.

3.6.5 Skills

Many forest occupants and farmers in Prek Thnot have limited skills and education. These contributed to the continued unsustainable farming practices. The traditional farming has contributed to the disturbance and deleterious effects to the soil.

3.6.6 Land Speculation

Land speculation often hinders the effective management of the forest. Kampong Speu is among the provinces that is experiencing encroachment by many settlers. The encroachment has been expanding and converted large tracts of land extending even to the conservation areas.

3.6.7 Weak Institutional Collaboration

The watershed covers several administrative units involving several government agencies. For this reason, there is a need for different stakeholders to collaborate and co-manage the watershed. As in many project undertaking, there is difficulty in integrating different programs of different line agencies who have jurisdiction of Prek Thnot watershed. They usually have their own priorities and, in most cases, hardly realign their programs and targets. With the recent devolution of functions of the central governor, the Provincial Government in Kampong Speu will be in a better position to manage the watershed. It is recommended that a Provincial Facilitating Team (PFT) will be organized under the office of the Provincial Administration Unit. Currently, the organizational structure of Kampong Speu Province has no PFT (please refer to Annex 8). The PFT who will coordinate the implementation of Prek Thnot IWMP, will compose of other Departments that include the PRRD, PDoAFF, PDOWRAMand other relevant agencies.3

3 Ministry of Interior. 2008. Situational Analysis of Provincial/Municipal and District/ Khan

3.7 Strategies and Proposed Programs and Milestones

The plan will implement several strategies to address the management gaps in the watershed. Under the different strategies, specific programs are suggested to achieve the objectives of watershed management plan. Different strategies are proposed to achieve the different objectives and results. The specific targets and corresponding budget for the different programs are shown in Annexes 3 and 4). The specific objectives, results and indicators are presented in the logframe (See Annex 7).

Specific Objective 1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed

Expected Result 1.1: Livelihoods implemented

Strategy 1.1.1: Development suitable lands of Prek Thnot to prescribed land uses

[Programs: The programs are linked to SO3]

Specific Objective 2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed

Expected Result 2.1: Ecoagriculture and sustainable land management implemented

Strategy 2.1.1: Promote sustainable land management among the land users

Program 2.1.1.1: Mapping for SLM/Precision agriculture in areas allocated for Intensive Agriculture in critical areas. While the project will promote the development of intensive agriculture (High Value Crops, Industrial Crops and Fruit Orchards) in the critical areas, there is a need to ensure that the adverse effect will be mitigated. Sustainable land management will be implemented covering 78,900 ha. The use of fertilizers has to be moderated according to the need of the plants to avoid leaching and eutrophication of the waterbodies. Mapping of the lands on nutrient and fertilizer requirements will be done to guide the land owners on the optimum fertilizer to be applied.

Program 2.1.1.2: Buffer planting along riparian and headwater areas. The riparian areas will be reforested with the appropriate species in order to minimize the chemicals and topsoil erosion from depositing to the streams or waterbodies. The planted trees could help in absorbing chemicals that are carried by surface runoff. Approximately 2,650 ha will be targeted for the buffer planting.

Program 2.1.1.3: Organic rice production development in critical areas. In rice producing areas located in the critical areas (i.e. areas needed for protection) will be

Administraiton in Cambodia. General Department of Local Administration Project on Improvement of Local Administation in Cambodia (PILAC). October 2008.

promoted for organic rice production. These areas will be demarcated and will disallow the use of chemicals or pesticides. A Prakas may be issued to enjoin the communities from applying chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The farmers will be supported in marketing their products by linking their produce to the provincial or national value chain or with One Village-One Product (OVOP). The areas will cover approximately 12,300 ha.

Program 2.1.1.4: Conservation, protection and monitoring of critical areas. The land allocation indicated that 101,000 ha of the watershed will be allocated for conservation. This include the Protected Areas not covered by the ELCs, the riparian areas and the areas that are sloping.

Specific Objective 3: To improve the natural capital of Prek Thnot watershed

Expected Result 3.1: Sites developed

Strategy 3.1.1: Promote the development of the lands to various uses prescribed in the land use plan

Program 3.1.1.1 Support the development for Systems of Rice Intensification (SRI). The allocation considers the existing rice cultivations covering 104,300 ha. The current productivity of rice however is quite low and need further improvement. The system for rice intensification is expected to increase production to 4 t/ha. If the target 104,300 ha will be fully developed, the watershed can support a total production of 417,200 t/year.

Program 3.1.2 Support the development of Industrial Crops (ICs). The plan will support the development of industrial crops (cassava, sugar cane, potato, etc.) especially those that are currently developed by the ELCs and individual farmers. The areas targeted for industrial crops will be 92,500 ha. In areas that are owned by individual farmers, they may opt for contract farming with the companies, particularly, those who are exporting cassava. It is important that the site has to be evaluated on which specific crops is suitable to the area.

Program 3.1.3 Support the development of fruit orchards. The fruit orchard provides the highest financial benefits among the different land uses. Prek Thnot can be a major supplier of fruits in the country by developing approximately 135,152 ha for variety of fruits, either by the individual farmers or by the private companies. The site suitability maps have to be developed to determine which fruits will be planted in a particular place. In case of very arid areas, alternative crops such as sorghums, which can be used as feeds, may be introduced.

Program 3.1.4 Support the development of High Value Crops (HVCs). The high value crops include cabbage, spices, and may include corns4. The production of HVC will be greatly challenged if the areas have no sustainable supply of water. In this case, the program may be linked to the irrigation program of MOWRAM. Based on biophysical

4 Normally corns that are intended for feeds are considered industrial crops

constraints and profitability, approximately 7,445 ha will be developed for HVC.

Program 3.1.5 Support the establishment of Agroforestry/Taungya models in ELCs. There are 13,600 ha covered by ELCs developed for ITPs that are identified for industrial crops. The incompatible use can be resolved by introduction of the Taungya model of Agroforestry. Intercropping can be done between the newly planted trees until such time that the trees’ canopy closes. Intercropping will resume after harvesting and new planting resumes.

Program 3.1.6 Support the establishment of ITPs. Approximately 13,803 ha are recommended for the establishment of ITPs. The ITPs are mostly on the existing ITPs within the ELCs. However, the small scale industrial tree plantations may also be promoted to individual households who want to develop their farmers for agroforestry or woodlots.

Expected Result 3.2 Improved productivity of existing forest

Strategy 3.2.1 Enhance the sustainable production of existing forests

Program 3.2.1.1: Provide support to manage existing production forest for SFM development. The area in the watershed suited for SFM covers approximately 52,300 ha. The areas to be covered by SFM may be managed by the community (under CF) or by the local authority (under Partnership Forestry).

Specific Objective 4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed

Expected Result 4.1: Improved management and protection of natural resources

Strategy 4.1.1: Support the implementation of Environmental Management and Social Protection. Since majority of population in Kampong Speu province are farmers, disaster risk protection for agricultural sector is very relevant. The plan will be linked to the existing plans related to the watershed. The Provincial Department of Agriculture in Kampong Speu province developed Plan of Action on Disaster Risk Reduction in Agriculture in 2013. This plan of action covers the period from 2014 to 2018. The main goal of this plan of action is to enhance the capacities and resilience of farmers and communities to threats and disasters affecting agriculture and rural livelihoods (Provincial Department of Agriculture. 2013). The different agencies who will implement the plan should consider the communities that will be affected. Particularly, the impacts of the plan to the livelihoods of the community has to be taken into account.

Program 4.1.1.1: Law enforcement. Support will be provided to subnational agencies in their law enforcement activities. The support may include providing access to the state of the art information like satellite images, patrolling logistics monitoring of transported forest products among others. Training and capability building will also be provided to the CF/CPA Patrol group and Park rangers.

Program 4.1.1.2: Demarcation and zoning. Demarcation and survey activities of state forests and conservation areas will be conducted. This will target conservation areas identified in the watershed management plan, management plans for conservation areas or CF and CPAs. The demarcation and zoning will be undertaken by the MLMUPC but will be coordinated with other line agencies notably the FA, MoE and in riparian areas, with the FiA.

Program 4.1.1.3: Conduct environment and governance monitoring. Part of the good practice is to keep track of the progress of development and management of the watershed. The monitoring of indicators will be compared with the baseline and target. Monitoring can be conducted by each agency but this information will be compiled by the PFT.

Expected Result 4.2: Land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas developed

Strategy 4.2.1: Formulate Management Plans for better management of the watershed resources

Program 4.2.1.1: Management Plan Development for Low Impact Logging and Forest Farming in SFM Areas and Impact Plan Mitigation in Critical Areas. The areas that will be covered by SFM is 52,300 ha. About 26,500 ha of the SFM areas are within the critical areas. The management SFM management plan, however, will not substitute the Forest Management Plans that will be developed by the community or EIA that will be developed by private companies in case they will conduct harvesting.

Program 4.2.1.2: Management Plan Development for ITP Areas. Separate plan will also be conducted to support the Industrial Tree Plantation development. While the private sector (ELCs) are leading in this activity, the government may also promote the establishment of the tree plantations with the participation of the communities. Approximately 13,803 ha are allocated in Prek Thnot watershed for ITP.

Program 4.2.1.3: Prediction Modeling and Tracking of Milestones. Monitoring the performance and progress of implementing the programs will be conducted. Models will be used to predict and quantify the externalities. Currently, MRC used tools such as SWAT that predicts the situation and condition of the watershed. These can be adopted to suit to Prek Thnot watershed. Other tools such as Ex-ACT of FAO, invest programs and modeling tools such as STELLA and Insightmaker may be adopted to predict the condition of Prek Thnot watershed.

Expected Result 4.3: Capability building conducted to state and non- state actors

Strategy 4.3.1: Technology Building of Key Actors and Resource Managers. Trainings and seminars on sustainable farming and land management will be conducted to the farmers, line agencies including the NGOs who are working in the area. The trainings will focus on technology applications that minimize soil erosion, organic farming, livelihoods, monitoring production of high value crops and low-cost restoration such as Assisted Natural

Regeneration. Subnational staff will also be trained on extension methods and disseminating technologies to the farmers.

Program 4.3.1.1: Capability Build-up of CF, CPAs and Farmer Groups on CF Management Planning and Sustainable Farming. A separate training program will be provided to communities. The forest-dependent communities and farmer organizations will be trained on actual implementation of agroforestry technologies, soil and water control measures and restoration of the forests and conservation areas.

Program 4.3.1.2: Research and Technology Development. Participatory Action Research (PAR) will be conducted on the farmers’ lots. The PAR will serve a dual purpose of testing or generating certain technologies and at the same time a means of educating the farmers on the benefits of conservation technologies. The field research will serve as learning modality of farmers on sustainable land management and ecoagriculture.

Strategy 4.3.2: Sustainable Funding. Sustainable funding is needed to support the field development activities. Funding the plan may require pooling of resources or realigning the programs of different key stakeholders and line agencies who have development programs in the area.

Program 4.3.2.1: Holding of Investment Forums. Investment forums will be conducted to attract investors. Investment promotion will be aligned to the Commune Investment Plans (CIPs) of the more than 50 communes within Prek Thnot watershed. The Communes should actively play a key role in promoting their respective communes to the investors. It is understood that the CIP is linked to the Commune Development Plan (CDP) and CLUP of the communes. Everything should also be aligned to the land use plan of Prek Thnot watershed

Program 4.3.2.2: Development of Forest-based Livelihoods. Forest-based livelihoods will be implemented in CFs, CPAs and communes (through PF). These communities will be assisted in developing their community enterprises in accordance to their Forest Management Plan. The management plan will serve as guide in commercial development of products in the community forests. It is therefore important that the communities will be able to complete their Management Plans and identify community enterprises feasible in the area.

Program 4.3.2.3: Ecotourism and Other Payment for Environmental Services (PES). Ecotourism will be promoted to sites that are relatively pristine and have esthetic values or historical values. The ecotourism projects however will be linked to regional or provincial network to be viable. A community-based ecotourism should be encouraged. Other PES schemes will be considered for other areas that have no potential for ecotourism.

Expected Result 4.4: Platform for institutional linkage and co-management established and supported

Strategy 4.4.1: Institutional Strengthening and Co-Management. Working in the landscape will need the participation of various actors. A platform of collaboration is essential for the management of a landscape. The programs identified in the plan will be linked to other programs like OVOP and Green growth initiatives of the government.

In implementing the project, the local authority will play a major role in the management of the land resources. The implementation will start from the Provincial level, to the District and finally to the Commune Level. The Commune Council will be the smallest implementing unit, by downscaling the land allocation of Prek Thnot watershed and used as a basis in their respective Commune Land Use Plan. The local authorities will be provided with technical assistance in integrating the land allocation plan to their respective Commune, District and Provincial Plans.

Program 4.4.1.1: PFT and Multisectoral Coordination Meetings. The Provincial Facilitation Team (PFT) will be strengthened to focus on the management of Prek Thnot watershed. PFT will oversee the monitoring and implementation of the IWMP, monitoring the progress and orchestrating the activities of the different actors and align their activities towards supporting the goals and objectives of Prek Thnot watershed. The Sub-Group may also spearhead in securing funding to support the implementation of the plan.

Expected Result 4.5: Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan

Strategy 4.5.1: Increasing support of the watershed management plan among the stakeholders. Under this strategy, the plan will be promoted to different stakeholders especially to government agencies who have jurisdiction of Prek Thnot watersheds. The integrated watershed management plan will likewise be promoted to farmers and other key actors who will be affected by the plans. The plan may be disseminated during District and Commune meetings. Posters about Prek Thnot watershed and mitigating measures will be distributed. Forums with the Commune Councils will be conducted to discuss the proposed mitigating measures and their integration to the Commune Land Use Plans. Community and commune meetings will be conducted to enjoin the different stakeholders to adopt the recommended practices. The ELCs will also be included in the information and dissemination. Mustering support from ELCs will have significant impacts considering that they possess vast tract of lands.

Program 4.5.1.1: CLUP Development, Zoning and Management Plan Development of Conservation Areas. The Communes will be supported in developing or revising the CLUPs. The mitigating measures will be integrated in the CLUPs. The plan will also be used as a framework in developing the management plans conservation areas, CF and CPAs.

Program 4.5.1.2: Promoting Ecoagriculture and Sustainable Land Management and Sustainable Farming. There are areas where the recommended land uses are in conflict either with existing land use or ecological condition. These conflicts identified are: (1) areas that are proposed for conservation located within the ELCs; (2) areas proposed for conservation are located in rice producing areas; (3) areas proposed for conservation are located in high value crop producing areas; (4) areas proposed for intensive agriculture are located in in critical areas; (5) areas proposed for SFM are located in ELCs; (6) areas proposed for sustainable forest management are located in critical area areas; and (7) areas proposed for rice production are located in critical areas. The land use conflicts are discussed in Section 3.2.5.

4.0 CONCLUSION

Prek Thnot Watershed is among the critical watersheds that is subjected to impairment. Sustainable management of this watershed have the potential to provide benefits not to people within the watershed including downstream. Based on the allocation plan the watershed intend to produce significant quantities of rice, wood products and other material benefits. The optimization model is found to be very useful in systematically allocating the lands that maximize production of Prek Thnot watershed with due consideration of the watershed’s carrying capacity. The optimal allocation could not completely avoid the externalities (erosion, pesticide loads, among others). However, these are being minimized. Likewise, the plan could not completely avoid the incompatible land use especially in the areas that have prior rights to the land. For this reason, a mitigation plan is needed. The plan requires considerable budget and need multistakeholder support. A strategy is needed to achieve the goals and ensuring that the programs will succeed. The Watershed Management Plan therefore aims to address these concerns. There is also a need to monitor the impacts. Land use planning in the watershed offers opportunities to sustainable natural resource management. The land use allocation need to be used as a guide in developing the CLUPs of the communes located in Prek Thnot watershed.

REFERENCES

Arnold JG, Kiniry JR, Srinivasan R, Williams JR, Haney EB and Neitsch SL, 2012. Soil and Water Assessment Tool, Input/Output File Documentation, Version 2012. Texas Water Research Institute. Technical Report 439, College Station, Texas Gilland, T., Fox, L., Andruczyk, M., French, S., Swanson, L. 2009. Urban Water-Quality Management: What Is a Watershed, Publication 426-041. https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:yQvsj6aWAUQJ:https://pubs.ext.vt.edu /content/dam/pubs_ext_vt_edu/426/426-041/426-041_pdf.pdf+&cd=17&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=kh Johnsen, S. and G. Munford. 2012. Country Environment Profile. Framework Contract Europeaid/127054/C/ SER/Multi-Lot 6: Environment. Phnom Penh Cambodia: The Euronet Consortium. April 2012 Kampong Spoeu. 2011. Five year development plan 2011-2015 Maningo, L.E.; Kum , V.; Kouland, T. 2017. The Link between Poverty Incidence, Forest Factors, and Non-Forest Factors in the Prek Thnot Watershed within Kompong Speu, Cambodia, International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research ISSN 2348-3164 (online) Vol. 5, Issue 3, pp: (206-214), Month: July - September 2017. www.researchpublish.com Martin, K.L.; Hwang, T.; Vose, J.M.; Coulston, J.W.; Wear, D.N.; Miles, B.; AND Band, L.E.2017. Watershed impacts of climate and land use changes depend on magnitude and land use context. Ecohydrology. Vol. 10, Issue 7. October 2017. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/eco.1870/full#publication-history MLMUPC. 2016. Introduction to the Cambodian Spatial Planning System Spatial Planning Series No. 1. Ministry of Land Management, Urban Planning and Construction General Department of Land Management. Supported by GIZ Land Rights Programme II. June 2016 Neitsch, S.L., Arnold J.G., Kiniry J.R., Williams J.R. and King K.W., 2011. Soil and Water Assessment Tool – Theoretical Documentation – Version 2009.Grassland, Soil and Water Research Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service and Blackland Research Center, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Temple, Texas. Open Development Cambodia. Undated. Disaster, July 20,2016. https://opendevelopmentcambodia.net/topics/disasters/ Ostadhashemi, R.; Rostami Shahraji, T.; Mohammadi Limaei, S.; Roehle, H. 2014. Goal programming and analytical hierarchy process approaches for sustainable plantation. Caspian J. Env. Sci. 2014, Vol. 12 No.2 pp. 233~244. Koy, R. unpublished. Watershed Characterization Report. 2016. Schroll, H.; J. Andersen; and B. Kjærgård. 2012. Carrying Capacity: An Approach to Local Spatial Planning in Indonesia. The Journal of Transdisciplinary Environmental Studies vol. 11, no. 1, 2012 Smith, D.J. and Hornbuckle, J.W. (Eds.). 2013. A review on rice productivity in Cambodia and water use measurement using direct and indirect methods on a dry season rice crop. Technical Report to ACIAR, Canberra, CSIRO Sustainable Agriculture Flagship, Australia. https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/download?pid=csiro:EP1310226&dsid=DS6 Working Group on Watershed Management and Development. 1988. The Role of Watershed Management in Sustainable Development. Working Paper 3. The Working Group on Watershed Management and Development. Minnesota: Forestry for Sustainable Development Program Department of Forest Resources, College of Natural Resources, University of Minnesota. December 1988.

Annex 1. Criteria for Land Suitability

Criteria/ Rice Production Industrial Tree Fruit Orchards Industrial Crops High Value Crops Conservation SFM Forage Production Requirement Plantations (Cor, Sugar Cane, (Vegetables) etc.)

Main ▪ Include areas ▪ Include areas ▪ Include areas ▪ Include areas ▪ Along roads Road/Highways within 5 km within 5 km within 5 km within 5 km from Main Road from Main Road from Main Road from Main Road

Tenure: ELCs ▪ Outside ELCs ▪ Always Include ▪ Include Existing ▪ Include Existing ▪ Outside ELCs ▪ Outside ELCs Existing ELCs ELCs ELCs/ITPs Tenure: CBFM ▪ Can be include ▪ Outside Existing ▪ Can be include Areas existing CBFM CBFM areas existing CBFM Areas Areas Slope ▪ Can Expand to ▪ Can Expand to ▪ Can Expand to ▪ Can Expand to ▪ Can Expand to ▪ All Areas with ▪ Slope <50% ▪ Slope <50% Areas with Areas with Areas with Areas with Areas with Slope >50% Slope <50% Slope <50% Slope <50% Slope <50% Slope <50% Current Land Use ▪ Outside Existing ▪ Outside Existing ▪ Within Existing ▪ Within Existing ▪ Within Existing ▪ Outside Existing ▪ Outside Existing ICs ICs Fruit Orchards Industrial Crops Areas Planted ICs ICs ▪ All Existing with HVC Irrigated Lands/All Existing Rice Production Areas ▪ Existing Rice Production Areas Forest Condition ▪ Outside Forest ▪ Within Open/ ▪ Outside Forest ▪ Outside Forest ▪ Outside Forest ▪ Natural Forest ▪ Within Areas Degraded Areas Areas Areas Areas with Good Open/Degraded Forest Areas Condition River/Riparian ▪ Outside the ▪ Outside the ▪ Outside the ▪ Outside the ▪ Outside the ▪ All Areas within ▪ Outside the Areas Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian Riparian 1 km from Riparian River/Riparian Areas Areas Areas Areas Areas Areas Areas

Annex 2. Model Coefficients/Assumptions Land Allocation Max Max Rice Max Meat Max Maximize Maximize Maximize Max Minimize Minimize Minimize Income Prodn Prodn Timber Biomass FW Forage Infiltration Erosion Chemical Social Prodn Load cost

US$/ha. kg /ha /year t/ha. /year M3/ha. /year m3/ha. /year t /ha. t/ha /year m3/ha. t/ha. kg /ha. US$/ha/y /Year. /year. /year. ear

Rice Production 300 4 4 1.5 1,410 80 100 Industrial Crops 1,250 5 1,410 80 100 Industrial Tree Plantation 800 6 9.500 13.000 14,091 1.2 20 (ITP) 7.8 0.3 Fruit Orchard 3,000 0.3 10,065 2 40 High Value Crops 1,575 5 1,410 80 100 Conservation/ Protection 150 7.2 0.150 20,130 1.2 12.6 Forest 0.5 SFM 300 12 0.500 0.300 0.6 20,130 1.2 2.52 Forage Production 250 10.2 0.350 0.300 0.5 7 14,091 1.2 2.52

Annex 3. Annual Target

Programs and Budget Respon- Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 and Indicators sible Specific Objective 1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed Result 1.1: Livelihoods implemented Strategy 1.1.1: Development suitable lands of Prek Thnot to prescribed land uses Programs are Linked to Strategy 3.1.1 Specific Objective 2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed Result 2.1: Ecoagriculture and sustainable land management implemented Strategy 2.1.1: Promote sustainable land management among the land users Program 2.1.1.1: SLM/Precision agriculture for areas allocated for Intensive Agriculture in critical areas Hectares Mapped for PFT 78,900 26,3 26,3 26,3 Nutrient and Nutrient 00 00 00 Requirement Program 2.1.1.2: Buffer planting along riparian and headwater areas Hectares in Riparian PFT 2,650 530 530 530 530 530 Areas/Planted Reforested Program 2.1.1.3: Organic rice production development in critical areas Hectares Developed for PFT 12,300 2,46 2,46 2,46 2,46 2,46 Organic Farming 0 0 0 0 0 Program 2.1.1.4: Conservation, protection and monitoring of critical areas Hectares Protected and PFT 101,00 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, Monitored 0 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 Specific Objective 3: To improve the natural capital of Prek Thnot watershed Result 3.1: Sites developed Strategy 3.1.1: Promote the development of the lands to various uses prescribed in the land use plan

Programs and Budget Respon- Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 and Indicators sible Program 3.1.1: Support the development for Systems of Rice Intensification (SRI) Hectares Developed for PFT 104,30 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, SRI 0 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 Program 3.1.2: Support the development of Industrial Crops (ICs) Hectares Developed for PFT 92,500 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 8,40 Industrial Crops 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Program 3.1.3 Support the development of fruit orchards Hectares Developed for PFT; 135,15 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 12,2 Fruit Orchards FA 2 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 87 Program 3.1.4 Support the development of High Value Crops (HVCs) Hectares Developed for MAFF; 7,445 677 677 677 677 677 677 677 677 677 677 677 High Value Crops Program 3.1.5 Support the establishment of Agroforestry/Taungya models in ELCs Hectares Developed for PFT 13,600 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 1,23 Taungya/Agroforestry 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 Program 3.1.6 Support the establishment of ITPs Hectares of Industrial PFT; 13,803 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 Tree Plantations FA 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 Supported Result 3.2 Improved productivity of existing forest Strategy 3.2.1 Enhance the sustainable production of existing forests Program 3.2.1.1: Provide support to manage existing production forest for SFM development Hectares Managed for FA; 52,300 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 SFM MoE; 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 FiA; PFT Specific Objective 4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed Result 4.1: Improved management and protection of natural resources Strategy 4.1.1: Support the implementation of Environmental Management and Social Protection Program 4.1.1.1: Law enforcement Annual Support to Law FA; 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Enforcement MoE; FiA Hectares of Protection MoE; 101,00 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, Forests PFT 0 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 Maintained/Conserved

Programs and Budget Respon- Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 and Indicators sible Program 4.1.1.2: Demarcation and zoning Hectares Surveyed/ FA; 153,30 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 13,9 Demarcated MoE; 0 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 FiA; PFT Program 4.1.1.3: Conduct landscape/watershed impact/environment and governance monitoring Prediction Models 1 1 developed Annual Monitoring MOWR 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Conducted AM; FA; MoE; PFT Satellite and PFT; 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Drone/Aerial MoE Surveillance Monitoring Conducted Hydrological Monitoring MoWR 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Conducted AM; MRC; MAFF; PFT Result 4.2: Land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas developed Strategy 4.2.1: Formulate Management Plans for better management of the watershed resources Program 4.2.1.1: Management Plan Development for Low Impact Logging and Forest Farming in SFM Areas and Impact Plan Mitigation in Critical Areas Management Plans FA; 1 1 Developed MoE; FiA; PFT Program 4.2.1.2: Management Plan Development for ITP Areas Management Plans FA; 1 1 Developed MoE; FiA; PFT Result 4.3: Capability building conducted to state and non- state actors Strategy 4.3.1: Technology Building of Key Actors and Resource Managers Program 4.3.1.1: Capability Build-up of CF, CPAs and Farmer Groups on CF Management Planning

Programs and Budget Respon- Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 and Indicators sible and Sustainable Farming

Training Programs PFT 3 1 1 1 Implemented Program 4.3.1.2: Research and Technology Development R&D Conducted FA; 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 MoE; FiA; PFT Strategy 4.3.2: Sustainable Funding Program 4.3.2.1: Holding of Investment Forums Investment Forums FA; 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Conducted MoE; FiA; PLAU Program 4.3.2.2: Development of Forest- based Livelihoods Community Enterprise PFT 20 5 5 5 5 Projects Implemented Program 4.3.2.3: Ecotourism and Other PES PES and Ecotourism MoE; 4 1 1 1 1 Projects Implemented FA; and Funded PFT Result 4.4: Platform for institutional linkage and co-management established and supported Strategy 4.4.1: Institutional Strengthening and Co- Management Program 4.4.1.1: Formation and Operationalization/ multisectoral coordination meetings of PFT on Prek Thnot Watershed PFT/PLAU /Multisector PFT 1 1 Group Organized Supported PFT/PLAU /Multisector PFT 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Group Meetings Strategic Plan PFT 1 1 Developed Result 4.5: Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan Strategy 4.5.1: Increasing support of the watershed management plan among the stakeholders Program 4.5.1.1: CLUP Development, Zoning and Management Plan Development of Conservation Areas

Programs and Budget Respon- Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 and Indicators sible Communes with CLUPs Commu 33 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 nes; MLMU PC; MAFF Program 4.5.1.2: Promoting Ecoagriculture and Sustainable Land Management and Sustainable Farming Hectares Developed for MAFF 78,900 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 7,17 Sustainable Farming 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 District Awareness MOWR 12 4 4 4 Raising Conducted AM; FA; MoE

*PLAU = Provincial Local Administration Unit; FA = Forestry Administration; MAFF = Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; MoE = Ministry of Environment; FiA = Fishery Administration; PFT = Provincial Facilitation Team; MOWRAM = Ministry of Water Resources and Meteorology.

Annex 4. Annual Budget (‘000 US$)

Programs and Budget and Respo Tota 201 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 Indicators n-sible l 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Total 59,77 6,19 6,18 6,16 5,48 5,43 5,05 5,05 5,05 5,05 5,05 5,0 6 2 2 2 1 1 4 4 4 4 4 54

Specific Objective 1: To increase the production and economic benefits from Prek Thnot watershed Result 1.1: Livelihoods implemented Strategy 1.1.1: Development suitable lands of Prek Thnot to prescribed land uses Programs are Linked to Strategy 3.1.1 Specific Objective 2: To improve the ecosystem function of Prek Thnot watershed Result 2.1: Ecoagriculture and sustainable land management implemented Strategy 2.1.1: Promote sustainable land management among the land users Program 2.1.1.1: SLM/Precision agriculture for areas allocated for Intensive Agriculture in critical areas Budget for nutrient 25 US$/ MAFF 1,973 658 658 658 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mapping Ha. Program 2.1.1.2: Buffer planting along riparian and headwater areas Support for 200 US$/ MAFF 530 106 106 106 106 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 Planting/Developme Ha. nt of Riparian Areas Program 2.1.1.3: Organic rice production development in critical areas Support for Organic 100 US$/ MAFF 1,230 246 246 246 246 246 0 0 0 0 0 0 Farming Ha. Program 2.1.1.4: Conservation, protection and monitoring of critical areas Support for 12.6 US$/ MAFF 1,273 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,2 Protection Ha. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 73

Programs and Budget and Respo Tota 201 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 Indicators n-sible l 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Specific Objective 3: To improve the natural capital of Prek Thnot watershed Result 3.1: Sites developed Strategy 3.1.1: Promote the development of the lands to various uses prescribed in the land use plan Program 3.1.1.1: Support the development for Systems of Rice Intensification (SRI) Support for SRI 10 US$/ MAFF 11,47 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,04 1,0 Development Ha. 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 43 Program 3.1.1.2: Support the development of Industrial Crops (ICs) Support for 10 US$/ MAFF 925 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 84 Industrial Crops Ha. Development Program 3.1.3 Support the development of fruit orchards Support for the 10 US$/ MAFF 1,352 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 123 Development of Ha. ; FA Fruit Orchards Program 3.1.4 Support the development of High Value Crops (HVCs) Support for the 10 US$/ MAFF 74 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 Development of Ha. ; FA High Value Crops Program 3.1.5 Support the establishment of Agroforestry/Taun gya models in ELCs Support for 10 US$/ MAFF 136 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 Taungya/Agroforest Ha. ry Development Program 3.1.6 Support the establishment of ITPs Support for the 10 US$/ MAFF 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 138 Development of Ha. ; FA Industrial Tree Plantations Result 3.2 Improved productivity of existing forest Strategy 3.2.1 Enhance the sustainable production of existing forests

Programs and Budget and Respo Tota 201 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 Indicators n-sible l 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Program 3.2.1.1: Provide support to manage existing production forest for SFM development Support for SFM 10 US$/ FA; 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 523 Ha. MoE; FiA Specific Objective 4: To improve the governance of Prek Thnot Watershed Result 4.1: Improved management and protection of natural resources Strategy 4.1.1: Support the implementation of Environmental Management and Social Protection Program 4.1.1.1: Law enforcement Annual Support to 12.6 US$/ FA; 1399 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,27 1,2 Law Enforcement Ha. MoE; 8.6 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 73 FiA Program 4.1.1.2: Demarcation and zoning Budget for 25 US$/ FA; 3,833 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 348 Demarcation/Zonin Ha. MoE; g FiA Program 4.1.1.3: Conduct landscape/watershe d impact/environmen t and governance monitoring Budget for 20,0 Packa 20 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Development of 00 ge Prediction Models Budget for Annual 20,0 per MOW 220 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Monitoring 00 Monit RAM; oring FA; MoE Budget for Satellite 20,0 per MAFF 220 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 and Drone/Aerial 00 Monit ; MoE Surveillance oring Analysis Budget for 20,0 per MoW 220 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 Hydrological 00 Monit RAM; Monitoring oring MRC; MAFF Result 4.2: Land use and management plans for conservation and CBFM areas developed Strategy 4.2.1: Formulate Management Plans for better management of the watershed resources

Programs and Budget and Respo Tota 201 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 Indicators n-sible l 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Program 4.2.1.1: Management Plan Development for Low Impact Logging and Forest Farming in SFM Areas and Impact Plan Mitigation in Critical Areas Budget for 20,0 lump FA; 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Management Plan 00 sum MoE; Development FiA Program 4.2.1.2: Management Plan Development for ITP Areas Budget for 20,0 lump FA; 20 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Management Plan 00 sum MoE; Development FiA Result 4.3: Capability building conducted to state and non- state actors Strategy 4.3.1: Technology Building of Key Actors and Resource Managers Program 4.3.1.1: Capability Build- up of CF, CPAs and Farmer Groups on CF Management Planning and Sustainable Farming Budget for 7,00 lump MAFF 21 7 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Trainings 0 sum Implemented Program 4.3.1.2: Research and Technology Development Budget for R&D 30,0 lump FA; 660 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 00 sum MoE; FiA Strategy 4.3.2: Sustainable Funding Program 4.3.2.1: Holding of Investment Forums Budget for 8,00 lump FA; 88 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Investment Forums 0 sum MoE; Conducted FiA Program 4.3.2.2: Development of Forest-based Livelihoods Support for 10,0 lump MAFF 200 50 50 50 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Community 00 sum Enterprise Projects Program 4.3.2.3: Ecotourism and Other PES Support to PES and 25,0 lump MoE; 100 0 25 25 25 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ecotourism Projects 00 sum FA

Programs and Budget and Respo Tota 201 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 202 Indicators n-sible l 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Result 4.4: Platform for institutional linkage and co- management established and supported Strategy 4.4.1: Institutional Strengthening and Co-Management Program 4.4.1.1: Formation and Operationalization/ multisectoral coordination meetings of PFT/PLAU on Prek Thnot Watershed Budget for 1,00 lump PFT 11 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 PFT/PLAU 0 sum /Multisector Group Meetings Budget for Strategic 15,0 lump PFT 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Plan Developed 00 sum Result 4.5: Increased awareness and support of the watershed management plan Strategy 4.5.1: Increasing support of the watershed management plan among the stakeholders Program 4.5.1.1: CLUP Development, Zoning and Management Plan Development of Conservation Areas Budget for CLUP 10,0 per Comm 330 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Development 00 Com unes; mune MLM UPC; MAFF Program 4.5.1.2: Promoting Ecoagriculture and Sustainable Land Management and Sustainable Farming Support to 10 $/Ha. MAFF 789 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 72 Sustainable Farming Support to 4,00 lump MOW 48 16 16 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Awareness Raising 0 sum RAM; FA; MoE

Annex 5. Valuation of Watershed Benefits (‘000 US$)

Programs and Budget and Respon Tota 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Indicators -sible l 1.0 Production Areas

Hectares MAFF 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, 104, Developed for SRI 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300 Hectares MAFF 8,40 16,8 25,2 33,6 42,0 50,4 58,8 67,2 75,6 84,0 92,5 Developed for 9 18 27 36 45 55 64 73 82 91 00 Industrial Crops Hectares MAFF; 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 13,8 Developed for FA 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 03 Industrial Tree Plantations Hectares MAFF; 12,2 24,5 36,8 49,1 61,4 73,7 86,0 98,2 110, 122, 135, Developed for FA 87 73 60 46 33 19 06 92 579 865 152 Fruit Orchards Hectares MAFF; 677 1,35 2,03 2,70 3,38 4,06 4,73 5,41 6,09 6,76 7,44 Developed for High FA 4 0 7 4 1 8 5 1 8 5 Value Crops Hectares of MoE 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, 101, Protection Forests 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 Maintained/Conser ved Hectares Managed FA; 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 52,3 for Sustainable MoE; 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 Forest FiA Management (SFM)

2.0 Direct 4,00 121, 170, 218, 266, 315, 363, 412, 460, 509, 557, 605, 1,73 609 046 483 920 357 794 231 668 105 542 979 Financial Benefits 8 ('000 US$)

System of Rice 30 per 344, 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 31,2 Intensification 0 Ha. 190 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 (SRI) Industrial Crops 1,2 per 693, 10,5 21,0 31,5 42,0 52,5 63,0 73,5 84,0 94,6 105, 115, 50 Ha. 750 11 23 34 45 57 68 80 91 02 114 625 Industrial Tree 80 per 121, 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 11,0 Plantations 0 Ha. 466 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 Fruit Orchards 3,0 per 2,43 36,8 73,7 110, 147, 184, 221, 258, 294, 331, 368, 405, 2,73 60 19 579 439 298 158 017 877 737 596 456 00 Ha. 6 Hectares 1,5 per 70,3 1,06 2,13 3,19 4,26 5,33 6,39 7,46 8,52 9,59 10,6 11,7 Developed for High 75 Ha. 55 6 2 8 4 0 6 2 8 4 60 26 Value Crops Protection Forests 15 per 166, 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 15,1 Maintained/Conser 0 Ha. 650 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 ved Sustinable Forest 30 per 172, 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 15,6 Mnagemetn (SFM) 0 Ha. 590 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90

Annex 6. Benefit-Cost Analysis

Programs and Total 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Budget and Indicators Net Benefits Accrued 200,087 6,080 8,502 10,924 13,346 15,768 18,190 20,612 23,033 25,455 27,877 30,299 to Society (Exclude the Positive Externalities of the Project): Approximately 5% of Tangible Marketable Benefits ('000 US$)? Investment Cost ('000 59,776 US$) 6,192 6,182 6,162 5,481 5,431 5,054 5,054 5,054 5,054 5,054 5,054 Future Value of 295,072 Benefits @ 10% interest ('000 US$) 15,771 20,048 23,417 26,008 27,934 29,295 30,177 30,657 30,801 30,665 30,299 Present Value of Costs 39,768 ('000 US$) @10% interest 6,192 5,620 5,093 4,118 3,710 3,138 2,853 2,594 2,358 2,144 1,949 NPV ('000 US$) 73,995 Modified IRR (%) 22.2%

Annex 7. Development LogFrame

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

OVERALL OBJECTIVE

To enhance the ecosystem function ▪ There is an increase on the ▪ Socioeconomic survey ▪ Continued support of Prek Thnot Watershed through productivity and economic ▪ Monitoring report from local authority improved watershed governance production of Prek Thnot ▪ Satellite image analysis ▪ Funding to support and sustainable management of watershed and aerial survey the patrol works the resources and contribute to ▪ At least 62% of Prek Thnot the economic development. watershed will be covered with forests ▪ Land developments in the watersheds has been mitigated using sustainable farming

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES, RESULTS AND ACTIVITIES

SO1: To increase the production ▪ The aggregate rice production ▪ Socioeconomic survey ▪ Funding for the patrol and economic benefits from in the watershed will produce ▪ Monitoring report operations Prek Thnot watershed at least 50% (192 thousand ▪ Satellite image analyst ▪ Continued support tons) of its potential and aerial survey from the local ▪ The forest will produce at least authority 60% (252 thousand cubic ▪ The area for meters) of annual growth development has potential of sawtimber volume been identified ▪ The forest will produce at least 60% (344 thousand cubic meters) of annual growth potential of fuelwood volume ▪ The watershed will have least 60% (695 MT) of potential biomass ▪ The watershed will generate at least 60% of the potential (114 MT) of annual forage production ▪ The watershed will generate at least 30% of the annual total economic benefits (approximately 34 million US$/Yr.

R1.1 Livelihoods Implemented ▪ At least 20 livelihood projects ▪ Field monitoring ▪ Comparative implemented by the project in ▪ Reports of the line livelihoods have been the watershed agencies identified ▪ Socioeconomic ▪ Budget support is monitoring made available ▪ A supply chain was conducted

Program 1.1.1 Implementation ▪ 20 Forest-based and Farm- Sources of information: ▪ Livelihood of Livelihood based Livelihood Projects ▪ Field monitoring opportunities has Projects/Community enterprises Implemented and Funded ▪ Progress report been identified ▪ 2 PES and Ecotourism Projects ▪ Budget: Linked to ▪ There is interest Implemented and Funded Program 3.1.1 among the target beneficiaries to participate ▪ Budget support is available

SO2: To improve the ecosystem ▪ Eco agriculture and sustainable ▪ Field monitoring report ▪ Budget support is function of Prek Thnot land management measures ▪ Satellite image analysis provided watershed implemented in the critical areas and aerial surveillance ▪ Acceptance from the ▪ The watershed has at least 62% stakeholders forest cover ▪ Eco agriculture technology has been

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

disseminated and properly implemented ▪ There is regular monitoring on the progress

SO3: To improve the natural ▪ Plans developed the ▪ Satellite image analysis ▪ The area for Capital of Prek Thnot conservation areas ▪ Field monitoring restoration has been Watershed ▪ CLUPs developed ▪ Progress report identified ▪ Area demarcated ▪ Aerial monitoring/satellite ▪ There is a support ▪ CBFMs established image analysis for forest restoration among the state and ▪ Forest developments conducted non-state actors ▪ There is awareness of the plan

R3.1 Sites developed ▪ The areas identified for Sources of information: ▪ Budget are available to development in the land use ▪ Field verification support the plans are developed ▪ Maps submitted development program ▪ Accomplishment/Progress ▪ There is no land report conflict ▪ The area for forest development has been identified in the map ▪ The ELCs will activity participate in the program ▪ There is technical assistance provided to field implementor ▪ There is no major change on the land priority developments

Program 3.1.1: Support the ▪ 104,300 ha Developed for SRI Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available development for Systems of Rice ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and Intensification (SRI) ▪ Maps inters of the land ▪ Reports of the line owners agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $11,500,000

Program 3.1.2: Support the ▪ 92,500 ha Developed for Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available development of Industrial Crops Industrial Crops ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and (ICs) ▪ Maps inters of the land ▪ Reports of the line owners agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $925,000

▪ 135,152 ha Developed for Fruit Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Orchards ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and ▪ Maps inters of the land Program 3.1.3 Support the ▪ Reports of the line owners development of fruit orchards agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $1,352,000

Program 3.1.4 Support the ▪ 7,445 ha Developed for High Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available development of High Value Value Crops ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and Crops (HVCs) ▪ Maps inters of the land owners

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

▪ Reports of the line agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $74,000

Program 3.1.5 Support the ▪ 13,600 ha Developed for Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available establishment of Taungya/Agroforestry ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and Agroforestry/Taungya models ▪ Maps inters of the land in ELCs ▪ Reports of the line owners agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $136,000

Program 3.1.6 Support the ▪ 13,803 ha of Industrial Tree Sources of information: ▪ Preliminary establishment of ITPs Plantations Supported ▪ Field monitoring consultation has ▪ Progress report been, made ▪ Aerial monitoring/satellite ▪ Assessment of the image analysis potential sites has been Budget (2019-2029): supported/identified $138,000 by local authority ▪ Budget support to implement the project ▪ The ELCs are willing to participate in the program

R3.2 Improved productivity of ▪ 52,300 ha Managed for SFM Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available existing forest ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and ▪ Maps inters of the land ▪ Reports of the line owners agencies

Program 3.2.1: Provide support ▪ 52,300 ha Managed for SFM Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available to manage existing production ▪ Field verification ▪ There is support and forest for SFM development ▪ Maps inters of the land ▪ Reports of the line owners agencies

Budget (2019-2029): $523,000

Specific Objective 4: To ▪ At least 62% (320,530 ha) are ▪ Maps (satellite image ▪ Continued support improve the governance of Prek covered with forest (39,800 ha analysis and aerial from local authority Thnot Watershed for ITP), (30,600 for ITP, surveillance) ▪ Funding to support 197,130 ha for conservation and Progress report the patrol works protection forest and 83,600 ha for SFM).

Result 4.1: Improved ▪ The following activities has been Sources of information: ▪ Land ownership and management and protection of conducted: (1) regular law ▪ Field monitoring tenure has been natural resources enforcement; (2) demarcation ▪ Progress report resolved or the and zoning; (3) impact ▪ Aerial monitoring/satellite occupants and monitoring of the landscape image analysis owners of the land are willing to develop their lands for conservation ▪ Budget is available ▪ There is a support from the line agencies

Program 4.1.1: Law ▪ Annual Support to Law Sources of information: ▪ Budget is provided enforcement Enforcement ▪ Field report ▪ There is ▪ PFT/PLAU report technological ▪ 101,000 ha of Protection Forests capability of the line Maintained/Conserved Budget (2019-2022): agencies

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

$14,000,000

Program 4.1.2: Demarcation ▪ 153,300 haSurveyed/ Demarcated Sources of information: ▪ There is budget and zoning ▪ Maps support ▪ Progress report ▪ The area for ▪ Field verification demarcation has been finalized Budget (2020-2029): ▪ There is no exiting $3,833,000 conflict

Program 4.1.3: Conduct ▪ 1 Prediction Models developed Sources of information: ▪ Budget is provided landscape/watershed ▪ Field report ▪ There is impact/environment and ▪ PFT/PLAU report technological governance monitoring capability of the line Budget (2020): $20,000 agencies

▪ 11 Annual Monitoring Sources of information: ▪ Budget is provided Conducted ▪ Field report ▪ There is ▪ PFT/PLAU report technological ▪ 11 Satellite and Drone/Aerial capability of the line Surveillance Monitoring Budget (2019-2022): agencies Conducted $660,000

▪ 11 Hydrological Monitoring Conducted

Result 4.2: Land use and The project has conducted the ▪ CLUPs ▪ There is support for management plans for following activies: completed/submitted the implementation conservation and CBFM areas 1. Conducted CLUP Development ▪ Management plans of CLUP developed and zoning/updating of CLUPs submitted ▪ There are available 2. Developed the Management ▪ Field verification professionals who Plans for the conservation areas will assist the 3. Demarcated priority areas for development of conservation CLUP 4. Established or CF/CPA or PFs ▪ Developed/improved the existing forests

▪ 1 Management Plan Developed Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available ▪ Management/conservation ▪ Capability of FA staff Program 4.2.1: Management plans submitted Plan Development for Low to develop the management plan Impact Logging and Forest Budget (2019): $20,000 Farming in SFM Areas and ▪ The CBFM are Impact Plan Mitigation in strong enough to Critical Areas undertake the planning and development

Program 4.2.2: Management ▪ 1 Management Plans Developed ▪ Updated Maps ▪ Budget support is Plan Development for ITP ▪ Monitoring report provided Areas ▪ Acceptance from the Budget (2019): $20,000 stakeholders ▪ There are investors ▪ Funding support for the conservation areas

Result 4.3: Capability building At least 40 CBFMs are supported for ▪ Processing of the ▪ Budget is available conducted to state and non- sustainable farming training and training ▪ The plan is state actors design; Training report integrated to the ▪ Assessment reports plans and programs submitted of line agencies ▪ Monitoring report ▪ The key persons involved are identified ▪ There will be no changes of the assignments

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

Program 4.3.1: Capability ▪ 3 Training Programs Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Build-up of CF, CPAs and Implemented ▪ Field validation ▪ The watershed plan Farmer Groups on CF ▪ Progress report is integrated to the Management Planning and ▪ PFT/PLAU report plans and programs Sustainable Farming of line agencies Budget (2019-2021): $21,000 ▪ The key persons involved are identified ▪ There will be no changes of the assignments

Program 4.3.2: Research and ▪ 22 R&D Conducted ▪ Technology Packaged ▪ Budget support by the Technology Development ▪ R&D reports produced/ line agencies submitted/ published ▪ Technological capability Budget (2019-2029): $660,000

Program 4.3.3: Holding of ▪ 11 Investment Forums Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Investment Forums Conducted ▪ Field validation ▪ The respective ▪ Progress report communes developed ▪ PFT/PLAU report their CLUPs and Budget (2019-2029): $88,000 CDP/CIP

Program 4.3.4: Development of ▪ 20 Community Enterprise Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Forest-based Livelihoods Projects Implemented ▪ Field validation ▪ The management ▪ Progress report plans of the CFs ▪ PFT/PLAU report were completed ▪ The prospective Budget (2019-2022): entrepreneurs were $200,000 identified

Program 4.3.5: Ecotourism and ▪ 4 PES and Ecotourism Projects Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Other PES Implemented and Funded ▪ Field validation ▪ The area for ecotourism ▪ Progress report has been identified ▪ PFT/PLAU report

Budget (2020-2023): $100,000

▪ Organized a sub-group under the ▪ Organizational structure ▪ The watershed Result 4.4: Platform for PFT developed management plan institutional linkage and co- ▪ Minutes of PFT/PLAU will be supported by management established and meetings the PFT/PLAU supported ▪ PFT/PLAU ToR There will be budget support

Program 4.4.1: Formation and ▪ 11 PFT/ Multisector Group Sources of information: ▪ PFT/PLAU has been Operationalization/multisectoral Meetings ▪ Field validation organized/ToRs has coordination meetings of ▪ Progress report been approved PFT/PLAU on Prek Thnot ▪ PFT/PLAU Subgroup Watershed report

Budget (2019-2029): $11,000

▪ 1 Strategic Plan Developed Sources of information: ▪ PFT/PLAU has been ▪ Field validation organized ▪ Progress report ▪ Budget has been ▪ PFT/PLAU report provided

Budget (2019-2021): $15,000

▪ At least 75% of the target ▪ Impact monitoring ▪ Budget is allocated Result 4.5: Increased awareness stakeholders are aware of the conducted and supported and support of the watershed watershed management plan and ▪ Reports of the line ▪ The target areas are management plan the proposed programs agencies finalized ▪ Action Plan Submitted

Intervention logic Objectively verifiable indicators of Sources and means of Assumptions achievement verification

▪ Conducted district awareness raising and investment forums

Program 4.5.1: CLUP ▪ 33 Communes with CLUPs Sources of information: ▪ Line agencies will set Development, Zoning and ▪ CLUPs submitted aside budget for CLUP Management Plan Development ▪ Progress report development of Conservation Areas ▪ The watershed Budget (2019-2023): management plan will $330,000 be acknowledged by the Communes ▪ Capability of line agencies to undertake CLUP

Program 4.5.2: Promoting ▪ 78,900 ha Developed for Sources of information: ▪ Preliminary Ecoagriculture and Sustainable Sustainable Farming ▪ Field monitoring consultation has Land Management and ▪ Progress report been, made Sustainable Farming ▪ Assessment of the Budget (2019-2029): potential sites has $789,000 been supported/identified by local authority ▪ Budget support to implement the project ▪ The ELCs are willing to participate in the program

▪ 12 District Awareness Raising Sources of information: ▪ Budget is available Conducted ▪ Accomplishment reports ▪ The watershed of line agencies/ management plan is PFT/PLAU Monitoring supported by the FA and Other Line Budget (2019-2021): $48,000 Agencies

Annex 8. Organizational Structure of the Province

Members of the Project Management Team

Dr. Sokh Heng : Proejct Director Dr. So Thea : Project Coordinator Mr. Ma Vuthy : Central Project Staff Mr. Suy Sotheara : GIS Staff Ms. Kheav Channara : Admin/Financial Mr. Mao Borimin : Provincial Coordinator Mr. Chea Saron : Field Project Staff Mr. Ly Kimsan : Field Project Staff Dr. Edward V. Maningo : International Consultant