CAPÍTULO III: LA CUALIFICACIÓN PROFESIONAL
3.2. Marco Nacional de Cualificaciones Profesionales (MNCP)
As outlined in the objectives, this dissertation analyses current methods for evaluating land degradation and resource conservation from the private and social perspectives. In the first step it investigates whether the evaluation criteria frequently used in project or investm ent analysis (financial analysis) realistically reflect farmers' behavior and responses to changing conditions. How meaningful these criteria are in elucidating the adoption potential of soil and water conservation technologies is also examined at this stage. The second step o f the dissertation examines whether economic analysis can be used to assess the costs and benefits of land degradation and resource conservation from the society's point of view. The main focus here is not so much on the critical analysis of the evaluation criteria themselves but rather on the question of whether our understanding o f environmental processes and their effects on economic systems is sufficient and whether problem identification and quantification allow us to evaluate these effects.
Analysing current methods for evaluating land degradation and resource conservation requires that an attempt is made to apply cost-benefit analysis in a particular situation, in this case the farming systems of the Lahu in the highland of Northern Thailand. To understand current farming practices and their impact on the environment posits that first the agricultural practices and economic situation of the farm household are known. More specifically, information is required on resource (land, capital, labor) availability and the major farming activities to assess the present situation, the economic performance of farm households and the potential for introducing new technologies such as soil and water conserving practices or new crops.
W hile this is crucial, it can, however, only be the first step of an evaluation of current farming systems and the potential for innovations. The villagers' perceptions of their general situation, opportunities and needs, the necessity for soil and water conservation and new crops also have to be assessed. If possible, villagers' views on recent changes should be discovered. In addition, whether villagers have any interest in new crops should likewise be determined. Since the rationale for this study is the investigation of soil conserving land use practices in contrast to practices which result in unacceptable - at least from a political perspective - soil erosion rates, the villagers' perceptions on why soil and water conservation practices should be introduced is a vital part of the study.
To gain an understanding of the present agricultural situation in the study area, a vast amount of data is necessary. A financial analysis of farm households by itself requires many input and output variables which are quite time consuming to collect. Many researchers have described the farming activities of hilltribes in Northern Thailand. Detailed descriptions on farming activities and household economics are available (see e.g. Dessaint, 1972; W ongsprasert, 1974; Geddes, 1976; Walker, 1983) but most are outdated and do not provide the input and output data necessary for a cost-benefit analysis. Furthermore, there is no information available on villagers' perceptions of soil and water conservation.
Anthropologists and rural sociologists frequently contend that the only way to gain a realistic understanding of a group of people and their economic activities is to live with them for an extended length of time. For the study of farming systems, at least one full farming cycle is recommended (Shaner et al., 1982). Depending on the purpose of the study there is little doubt that such an approach is ideal, though it needs to be cautioned that researchers may never know whether they conducted their surveys and made their observations during a "normal" or an "unusual" year. This approach also does not allow for comparisons between, for instance, different villages. For my purposes this, however was crucial, because the mountain ranges of Northern Thailand are not only highly diversified in terms of biophysical characteristics but every village is distinctly different from its neighboring villages in terms o f its socio-economic composition, accessibility, history and other factors. Since the "representative" or "average" village does not exist, I proposed to conduct my research in six villages. To gain an insight of the villagers' perspective of their farming practices and the recommended soil and water conservation practices, I chose to conduct surveys and let the villagers speak.
A questionnaire was designed for data collection (see Appendix 1) with the help of a researcher from the Tribal Research Institute. The questionnaire was then pretested in one village in the study area to assess the relevance and acceptability of the questions. No prior knowledge existed on whether questions about the income situation of villagers, their ages, or their need to borrow or buy rice would be seen as offensive and intrusive. The pretest revealed that people were willing to provide information on sensitive issues - according to western standards - and it also did not appear as if they were trying to impress me by exaggerating estimates of yields or some of their farming problems. It is the inaccuracy or incompleteness of their answers that is problematic in evaluating the situation of farm households. Only experience gained during the course of the survey allowed me to recognize when respondents had greatly over- or under-estimated certain aspects of their situation.
In general, the survey pretest showed that most questions posed no problems during the interviews, but questions on farming activities had to be more detailed to ensure that labor requirements were not underestimated. For instance, many respondents understood the often used term "land preparation" as the slashing of new fields before the burn. However, after the bum, especially in the case of upland rice cultivation, seeding is often only possible after additional clearing, a rebum and weeding activities.
One revision proved to be sufficient for the implementation of the survey. The order of some questions was changed because some respondents had, without specifically being asked, volunteered information on subjects which were to be discussed during a later part of the interview. Also, some questions were slightly rephrased. Not too much weight should be given, however, to the English version of the questionnaire, since the interviews were conducted in Lahu and questions were rephrased very often during the course of the interviews if villagers misunderstood a question. During interviews and at other times, I also asked many additional questions which do not appear in the questionnaire.
The interview form at could be described as sem i-structured. The first part of the questionnaire included baseline questions designed to provide an understanding of the household interviewed. Questions regarding farming practices, especially input and output, had to be structured. Many of the questions regarding household size, number of fields, agricultural inputs and outputs, or data in regard to villagers' livestock were also structured to obtain precise data in order to perform a financial analysis. However, during the interviews, some villagers offered additional information on farming activities or problems related to their specific household situation. These leads were usually pursued which resulted occasionally in quite lengthy interviews.
The last four questions were unstructured and served as a start to an open discussion on respective and related issues. During some interviews, villagers appeared to be less forthcoming with their opinions when they realized that notes were taken. Then the interviews were officially declared finished and the discussions proceeded with a cup of tea and a cigarette. During these discussions, sometimes very valuable information was collected which in some cases even contradicted earlier responses given by the people in describing their households' economic strategies.
This indicates that the interviews followed the questionnaire closely regarding the characteristic o f individual farm households. The final questions served as an opening to a more flexible discussion which lasted at times longer than the initial phases of the interviews. However, there were also several cases in which villagers were reluctant to