2006
DOI: 10.1080/10357820500537054
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The political culture of corruption in the Lao PDR

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, it should be pointed out that the Lao-based organisations are highly regulated by the state and their freedom of action and expression is still tightly monitored. In fact, the so-called "mass organisations" are one of the four key institutions where leading figures are party members [45]. During this study, we found that the national CSOs were not yet actively involved in the REDD+/FLEGT processes.…”
Section: Civil Society Organisations (Csos) In Lao Pdrmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…However, it should be pointed out that the Lao-based organisations are highly regulated by the state and their freedom of action and expression is still tightly monitored. In fact, the so-called "mass organisations" are one of the four key institutions where leading figures are party members [45]. During this study, we found that the national CSOs were not yet actively involved in the REDD+/FLEGT processes.…”
Section: Civil Society Organisations (Csos) In Lao Pdrmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…The Lao PDR was formerly named Lang Xang, the "Land of a Million Elephants" (Stuart-Fox, 1997), yet little research has been undertaken regarding Lao mahouts or elephants. Obtaining accurate data for Lao captive elephant populations is difficult due to a lack of funding, capacity and a restrictive political environment (see Duckworth, Salter, & Khounboline, 1999;Lair, 2004;Norachack, 2002;Phanthavong & Santiapillai, 1992;Sukumar, 2003).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, several obstacles still exist at local and national levels that make it difficult for the rural poor all over the world to: participate in natural resource management; secure their rights in decision making; and gain access to land tenure, valuable natural resources and markets, and investment opportunities related to such resources (Sivaramakrishnan 2000;Brown et al 2002;Larson 2003;Walker 2004;Taylor 2005;Hyakumura and Inoue 2006). With regard to forest management and utilisation, the key issue is how to achieve a balance between harvest, forest protection and tree planting, and to minimise the negative impacts on the poor and generate benefits for them (Steel 2005). The basic assumption of this paper is that participatory forest management (PFM) is balancing the three aspects of sustainability, environmental sustainability, economic sustainability and social sustainability, as it aim to contribute to conservation and sustainable use of resources and to income-generating practices as well as to participation of poor or minority groups in forest dependent communities (FAO 2001;Grimble and Laidlaw 2002;CIFOR 2005;Sunderlin 2005;Durst et al 2005).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%