Lesson Learned That Government Should Not Ignore

To keep the right track, one of other ways is looking back what we have done, what lesson learned we got, etc. Similarly, to develop the country further, what the government should pay attention to is lesson learned from the past.

What do I mean Lesson learned from the past? Lesson learned from the past here is what mentioned in the MDG progress report 2008 and the 6th NSEDP. What does it say and what does it recommend? So I won't go through the whole documents. But I will bring some remarks to point out what it said and recommended.

First of all, looking at the MDG progress report 2008. In fact, poverty of Laos declined from 46% in 1992 to 26.8% in 2008 due to economic growth. But the decline of malnutrition rate is slow causing a major concern. Most importantly, there is still high prevalence of malnutrition, around 40% of children under 5 years old.

The MDG progress report 2008 also stated “Economic growth is necessary, but not sufficient for poverty reduction [...] Poverty reduction alone also is not sufficient to meet the targets on reducing malnutrition. In other words, poverty reduction will not automatically result in an improved nutrient dietary intake”.

On top of that, if we look at the table on the right hand side, we will see that MDG 1, target 2 is seriously off track. That means requiring the attention from relevant parties.

Now go to the 6th NSEDP, based on the mid-term review of the 6th NSEDP, it stated that reducing malnutrition is very slow. It also stated that it should increase allocation of resources and strengthened implementation for reducing Child Malnutrition and Implementing strategies for Child Protection and maternal health.

In addition, the report also said that it needs diversified economy, strengthen agricultural and manufacturing sectors, and it need inter-sectoral policies to address both malnutrition and poverty in a comprehensive way.

Conclusion, Lao PDR has high prevalent of malnutrition (40% of CU 5). MDG 1, target 2 is seriously off track. even though economic grows but not it is not sufficient to reduce malnutrition. It requires specific attention to it. It needs diversified economy, strengthen agricultural and manufacturing sectors, and as well as inter-sectoral policies to address both malnutrition and poverty in a comprehensive way.

Not Just Participatory Approach!

One good thing related to the 7th NSEDP is the process of drafting is different from other previous years. The goverment of Laos opened for comments, in other words, it is more participatory from other development partners.

As seen, the ministry of planning and investment (MPI) shared the table of content of the 7th NSEDP and called for comments from the development partners. On top of that, the ministry of planning and investment also shared the executive summary of the 7th NSEDP with development partners in order to get comments from each parties.

Based on that session, lots of relevant parties both provided comments verbal and written paper to the ministry of planning and investment. This is a great exercise and great way!

Meaning that the government of Laos more opened to others than in the past which means drafting the 7th NSEDP is based on the participatory approach. More importantly, this will really strengthen the 7th NSEDP and make it more completed.

However, event though the participatory approach is a great way to do it and the 7th NSEDP has been applied, but not just depends on that. It still has the questions- whether all comments will be considered, how the ministry of planning and investment will consolidate them and how the ministry of planning and investment will improve the draft! Those are still mystery issues or there are still the question in mind of lots of people.

You can leave your comments below or email me at

Full Picture Of Food Security And Nutrition

Talking about FS, there are lots of people misunderstanding on that. Some think that “Food Security is agriculture”. In fact, it is correct but only 50%. Why am I saying that? I am saying that because FS has a larger scope than agriculture. So let me explain to you.

First of all, let’s look at its definition. Based on World Food Submit 1996, food Security is defined as “when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food, and meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life”.

So according to the definition, if we break it down, we will see 4 basic dimensions- Food availability, Food accessibility, Food Utilization and Food Stability.

Food availability addresses the “supply side” of food security and is determined by the level of food production, stock levels and net trade which agriculture contribute to this dimension.

An adequate supply of food at the national or international level does not in itself guaranteed household level food security. Concerns about insufficient food access have resulted in a greater policy focus on incomes, expenditure, markets and prices in achieving food security objectives. This makes accessible to food.

Food Utilization is commonly understood as the way the body makes the most of various nutrients in the food. Sufficient energy and nutrient intake by individuals is the result of good care and feeding practices, food preparation, diversity of the diet and intra-household distribution of food. Combined with good biological utilization of food consumed, this determines the nutritional status of individual

The last one is food stability. Even if our food intake is adequate today, we are still considered to be food insecure if we have inadequate access to food on a periodic basis, risking a deterioration of our nutritional status. Adverse wealth conditions, political instability, or economic factors (unemployment, rising food prices) may have an impact on the food security status. All these mentioned are a basic concept of FSN.

In addition, there is one more thing that we should not forget is NFS is a cross-cutting issue. It is related to all levels, central level provincial level, district level and household level as well as individual. It also requires all sectors to cooperate and collaborate as well as concentrate to solve the problem together (see diagram 1). This is the characteristic of FSN.

Malnutrition In Laos-How Serious It Is

Differences between the 6th and 7th NSEDP

Looking at the 7th National Soco-Economic Development Plan(NSEDP), the current draft and compare with the 6th NSEDP. We can obviously see the difference between the 6th and the 7th NSEDP. There are 3 main things (see diagram on the right hand side).

The first fhing is the 7th NSEDP has clearer structure than the 6th NSEDP and also simple. This is make easily understand if we go througth it.

But the second big thing is there is no cross-cutting thematic as the 6th NSEDP which this will make a big gap for the cross-cutting concerns.

The third thing is there is nutrition section in the 7th NSEDP which the 6th NSEDP did not. But there is no section on Food Security which is the most important section to accerelate and sustain economic growth as well as poverty reduction. Let think when households are in Food Insecurity, how the poverty will be reduced or solved.

New Wave Of Development In Laos

One of the current hottest issues which developers both national and international pay attention to is developing the 7th National Soco-Economic Development Plan(NSEDP) for the year 2011-2015.

What is the NSEDP you might ask? NSEDP is a 5 year plan, a framework of country development on soco-economy which will be applied to the annual plan and be implemented in order to improve livelihood of Lao people.

If we say NSEDP as a wave. Let say currently we are still hitting by the old wave- the 6th NSEDP which started from 2006. But it would be finished at the end of this year. And then the 7th NSEDP, new wave of development of Lao PDR will come soon which The year 2011-2015 will be a new wave of development in Lao PDR. However, the most interesting question is whether the new upcoming wave will be a big and strong wave and it would be able to flow over the country.

In other words, the new wave of developmnet in Lao PDR 2011-2015 is a hope of Lao people, especially the vulnerable groups who are really poor and need help. Do they will get benefits or positive impacts on that?

Therefore, we have to closely follow up what the new wave of developemt will look like and how much it will creat the positive impact on Lao people in the next 5 years.