4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference Sep.7–10, 2010. Legazpi City, Philippines

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand Takashi MASUNO National Museum of Ethnology, Japan [email protected]

Masuno, T. 2010. “Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand”. Asian Rural Sociology 4(1): 190–200.

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand Takashi Masuno National Museum of Ethnology, Japan [email protected]

Abstract Farmers in the hillside area of northern Thailand are not only engaged in upland rice cultivation for subsistence, but also in the production of cash crops such as maize, ginger, and cabbage, etc. The Mien (Yao), one of the hill tribes of northern Thailand, cultivated maize for cash income since the 1980s. After mid-1990s, maize production has become widespread that it became the main agricultural crop of many hillside communities. This paper aims to elucidate the social relationships associated with hybrid maize production in Mien Hillside Village, The research results showed that maize harvesting was not only done by household members but also through labor exchange among the households in the village. In addition, some households used wage labor for their maize harvesting. Some of the villagers also harvest maize and work as wage-based laborers in other villages. This case study suggests that maize production as a cash crop has been maintained through various social relationships within and outside communities. Keywords: cash crop, hill tribe, labor exchange, wage labor, Yao

Introduction Farmers in the hillside area of northern Thailand not only practice upland rice cultivation for subsistence but also engaged in cash crop production. It is known that the planted cash crops in this area had changed dramatically after the 1970s (Michaud 1997). For example, many hill tribes, such as the Mien (Yao) and Hmong, who live in hillside areas, had cultivated opium as a cash crop until the 1970s. However, after the ban of opium cultivation by the Thai government, farmers in upland areas began to cultivate new cash crops. The Thai farmers grow maize for the commercial animal feed market (Ekasingh et al. 2004, p. 10). Thus, maize became a popular cash crop for some hill tribes. These changes regarding cash crops contributed to changes not only in agricultural techniques but also in their socioeconomic activities (Jian 2001). For example, in one Mien hillside village, which was the focus of this study, the farming method changed from shifting cultivation to permanent farming in the 1990s (Masuno and Ikeya 2008). In addition, after the late 1990s, planting of high yielding maize varieties became widespread (Masuno and Ikeya 2008). It actually became a mainstay crop-greater than upland rice-thus becoming the main cash crop of the village. The study of Yoshino (1996) found out that in upland rice cultivation in the late 1980s to early 1990s, the use of exchange labor was paramount. However, when the agricultural situation had 190

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference

Takashi Masuno

changed dramatically after the 1990s, how were the agricultural operations conducted in regard to newly introduced cash crops, such as maize? Thus, the objective of this study was to elucidate the social relationships of villagers by analyzing their methods of hybrid maize production, with special focus on social relationships during maize harvesting.

Research Area and Methods The field research was conducted at the PD village in Phayao Province in Northern Thailand (Figure 1). The area has a monsoon climate, with a distinct rainy season from June to October and dry seasons from November to May. This village is located on a hillside, about 950 meters above sea level. This village has been in existence for at least 100 years. The villagers consist of an ethnic minority called the Mien (Yao) people, which originated from South China. The village consists of 20 households, which are labeled from household A to household T, and totaled about 128 people in 2005.

Figure 1. Study area The main subsistence and economic activity in the study village is agriculture. Protected forest areas operated by the Royal Forest Department have restricted villager’s field use since 1991 (Masuno 2009). Villagers grow upland rice for subsistence and hybrid maize for cash income. Each household cultivates their own fields and keeps several types of livestock, such as chickens, pigs, dogs, and cattle. Most households raise chickens and pigs, which are frequently sacrificed (Masuno and Ikeya 2010; Masuno and Nakai 2009) for Mien rituals. The Mien rituals that require cattle sacrifice are extremely limited. Cattle are raised in order to make a profit (Masuno 2010).

September 2010  Legazpi City, Philippines

191

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

Two Mien villages and one lowland Thai village are found within 5 km from the PD village. The TP village is located 4 km east of the PD village, and here, villagers consist of Mien people. Meanwhile, the PY village is located 5 km north of the PD village, and villagers here consist of Mien people. The PT village is located next to the PY village, and the villagers here consist of lowland Thai people. Some villagers of the PD village have relatives in the PT village and the PY village; thus, villagers of those three villages have close relationships each other. Direct observation and interview research were conducted at the Mien hillside village, where each worker was interviewed regarding their use of labor power, such as labor exchange, wage labor, and others. Intensive field work at the village was conducted from February to March 2004 and from March 2005 to April 2006.

Social Structures and Relationships in Mien Society An ideal social structure in transition According to Yoshino (2005, pp. 91-92), the Mien community is basically a patriarchal one. This organization is similar to that of the Han people of China. Mien people also have their name written in Chinese characters. They usually inherit their family name from the paternal line, and basically, family members living in the same house form the biggest independent social group. This is known as pyau in the Mien language. The unit of toi in the Mien language describes a nuclear family. In the past, it was believed by many Mien people that an extended family centering around the paternity line is an ideal family structure, where for example, parents, their son, and the son’s wife, living together in a single house, form one pyau consisting of two toi. However, Yoshino (2003) reported that the social structure of the Mien shifted from the extended family to the nuclear family. This means one pyau indicates one toi. The PD village consisted of 20 households, and most households formed nuclear families in 2005. Thus, in this paper, the members of one house were treated as one nuclear family. Social relationships in agricultural activities It was pointed out that Mien people work together by utilizing labor exchange among households in various agricultural activities (Yoshino 1996, p. 145). Labor exchange is called pwi kong in the Mien language, and in this labor exchange, a household that uses labor from another household must offer labor to another household. Yoshino (1996) also pointed out that the number of such labor and the working days are more important, than the types of jobs performed. This labor exchange rule can be used for any type of job in the community. However, most villagers are farmers; thus, labor exchange is usually performed along the area of agriculture. Labor exchange is frequently used for seeding and harvesting upland rice (Yoshino 1996, p. 145).

192

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference

Takashi Masuno

Agriculture in the study village Villagers grow upland rice for subsistence and hybrid maize for cash income. Since the mid-1990s, the villagers have switched from shifting cultivation to permanent farming (Masuno and Ikeya 2008). Villagers repeatedly use the same fields for cultivation, and in 2005, all households used herbicide and chemical fertilizer for upland rice and hybrid maize cultivation. The average cultivated area was 7.5 ha per household in 2005 (Figure 2), and upland rice and hybrid maize accounted for 9% and 88% of the total area, respectively. Maize fields account for a large share of the agricultural fields of the PD village, and the household of the PD village usually cultivate one area for upland rice field per year. However, most households cultivate more than two areas for maize fields every year. Upland rice

Maize (hybrid)

Other crops

18 16 14 Area (ha)

12 10 8 6

Average 7.5 ha/household

4 2 0 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Ranking

Figure 2. Areas cultivated by each household in the PD village (2005) Source: Masuno and Ikeya (2008) Both upland rice and maize are grown once a year during the rainy season (Figure 3). Villagers prefer to cut undergrowth and burn dried vegetation to prepare new fields from March to May, before the onset of the rainy season. Longer time is required for the field preparation, seeding and harvesting of maize than that of upland rice, as they cultivate multiple areas for maize fields and larger areas than those for upland rice fields. Actually, planting maize is performed for nearly three months from June to August, and harvesting for nearly five months from November to March. Maize is harvested by hand (Figure 4) and is usually stored in granaries built on-site at the maize fields (Figure 5).

September 2010  Legazpi City, Philippines

193

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

Crops

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr. May. June

Field preparation

Upland Rice

July

Aug. Sept.

Oct.

Nov.

Dec.

Harvesting

Seeding

Field preparation Maize

Harvesting

Seasons

Dry season

Seeding Rainy season

Harvesting Dry season

Figure 3. Agricultural calendar of the PD village

Figure 4. Maize harvesting at the PD village

Figure 5. Harvested maize being stored in a granary hut at the maize field 194

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference

Takashi Masuno

Nowadays, villagers use high-yielding hybrid maize bought from local markets. This hybrid maize is the main cash crop and is sold to earn money. This variety has been widespread in the PD village in the 1990s, and before hybrid maize became widespread, villagers grew a “native” maize variety not for sale, but as feeds for their pigs. However, the variety of maize used and the purpose of cultivation before the 1980s and after the 1990s were totally different. Social relationships regarding maize harvesting After harvesting upland rice in November, many villagers would harvest maize. The social relationships formed during maize harvesting are analyzed, mainly using data from all the agricultural activities performed in the PD village on February 2, 2006. Table 1 shows all the agricultural participants in the PD village on this date. Owners of fields and agricultural work Nine (household C, E, F, J, M, N, O, Q, and S) out of 20 households perform agricultural activities in their own fields. These nine households worked on one field per household. The number of participants performing this agricultural work consisted of 38 people. The numbers of workers at one field totaled from one to eight, with 4.2 people working at each field on average. In eight out of nine fields, maize harvesting was conducted, with 37 out of 38 people. One person from household C cleared the undergrowth of his rubber field. Agricultural laborers from each household Eighteen out of 20 households, excluding household K and household T, performed agricultural works. The owner of each field worked on their respective field, and household members from household E and household C harvested their own maize. During harvesting, however, in six out of eight cases, people that were not household members also participated. Three people from household L worked in two places on the same day-in the maize field of household F and household N. Furthermore, household L did not take part in agricultural work in their field. In household C, the husband cleared the undergrowth of his rubber field, and his wife took part in maize harvesting at household C. Household K and household T did not take part in agricultural work that day. Household K made whisky at home, while household T was absent from the village that day. Job categories of agricultural laborers The job categories of agricultural labors are divided into four: those that work at their own field, labor exchange, wage labor, and volunteers. Working at their own field refers to, a member who works on their own field. Labor exchange refers to “pwi kong”, as explained above. Wage labor refers to those who work for a daily wage, and usually, September 2010  Legazpi City, Philippines

195

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

the owner of the field compensates the laborers for their work. In February 2006, the labor rate was 100 baht per day for one person. Volunteer refers to, of course, labor provided without any compensation from the field owner (either through wages or labor exchange). The most frequent workers were those who work at their own respective fields, (Figure 6). Those that took part in labor exchange consisted of 14 out of 38 people on February 2, 2006. Four out of 38 people worked on a wage labor category. Household F and household M used both labor exchange and wage labor.

5%

Working at one's own field (18 people)

11% 47%

Labor exchange (14 people) Wage laborers (4 people)

37%

Volunteers (2 people)

Figure 6. Percentage of job categories regarding maize harvesting (February 2, 2006) Kinship among laborers The relationship between parents and their daughter(s) (two cases), parents and their son (one case), and an older sister and her younger sister (one case) were observed. In all cases, young people worked in the maize fields of older people, such as that of the parents or an elder sister. In the case of the field of household J, the parents and their two daughters worked together. Those two daughters were already married and lived at their respective houses in the PD village. In the case of the field of household Q, the younger sister lives in another Mien village, and she visited her elder sister to enjoy her company. Other than those prominent kinships, it is difficult to see strong relationships between the villagers who work together in the same field. Social relationships with those outside the village Two people from outside of the village were observed as participants in the maize production. One male worked at the maize field of household N. He was a Tai Yai–a different ethnic group-and a friend of the master of household N, and came from Chiang Rai province to visit household N. He mentioned that he took part in maize harvesting for household N on a volunteer basis that day. He also mentioned that taking part in maize harvesting is a worthwhile activity. The other, a female, worked at the maize field of household Q. She is Mien and has an elder sister in household Q, mentioned above. She assisted her elder sister’s maize harvesting without expecting any compensation. 196

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference

Takashi Masuno

On February 2, 2006, agricultural work in the PD village was reformed mainly by the members of the PD village, and any PD villagers that went to other villages to work were not observed that day. However, a few cases where PD villagers did go to work at other villages were observed on separate occasions. Case 1: One member of household J took part in maize harvesting at the PY village on February 3, 2006. He worked as a labor exchange. When household J harvested their upland rice, his PY village relatives came to help the harvesting of upland rice at the PD village. Thus, members of household J must work the same amount. Case 1 shows how labor exchange was conducted, not only within the same village but also among villages. In addition, PY villagers worked during the harvesting of upland rice in the PD village, but PD villagers from household J worked during the harvesting maize at the PY Village. In this case, the participants were relatives, and all of them were Mien people. Case 2: Maize harvesting was done at the TP village on February 28, 2004. The participants consisted of 26 people in total (5 from TP village, 3 from PD and 18 villagers from the TP village consisted) came from another Mien village, which was 18 km away from the TP village). All participants were Mien people. Twenty-two out of 26 people worked as wage labor. The other four people were from the household that owns the maize field. The participants from the PD village and the owner of the maize field were relatives, and each adult participant received 100 baht per day, while children workers-those who were under 14 years old-received 50 baht per day. Case 2 shows that wage labor is being practiced not only within the same village but also among villages. In this case, the participants were also Mien people, and many workers from outside their own village helped the owner of the maize field. The children workers mentioned that they could earn money to pay for school expenses. Social relationships formed through agriculture The villagers of the PD village still grew both upland rice and hybrid maize, as of 2009. After the late 1990s, high-yield hybrid maize became widespread and has become the main crop of the PD village. Studies conducted on February 2, 2006 indicated that almost all the villagers dedicated themselves to maize harvesting in the same period, which is maintained for nearly five months from November to March. This agricultural calendar seemed to be solidified after hybrid maize became widespread. It was pointed out that Mien people work together using labor exchange among households and that Mien people use labor exchange in various agricultural activities (Yoshino 1996, p. 145). The maize harvesting was not only done by household members but also by exchanging labor among the households in the village. Research clarified the fact that Mien people also use labor exchange for hybrid maize cultivation. The cases of household F and household M (Table 1) show that they use a combination of labor exchange and wage labor during maize cultivation.

September 2010  Legazpi City, Philippines

197

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

Hakari (1978, p. 178), who conducted research at Mien hillside villages in northern Thailand during the late 1960s to early 1970s, emphasized that the characteristics of the behavior patterns of the Mien people are related to individualism. Yoshino (1998) also pointed out that when Mien move to a new place, individual decisions are important. However, in my observation in 2006, agricultural work, especially maize harvesting-was not performed in an individualistic fashion, and it is not popular if it is conducted by a single household only. Some of the villagers also worked as wage laborer to help other villages harvest maize (Case 2). In addition, Case 2 shows that there are people who use wage labor intensively for maize cultivation. There is a high possibility that cash income from selling hybrid maize enabled these people to employ wage labor. Yoshino (1996) pointed out that the type of work performed is not important in labor exchange: the number of people that worked and that the numbers of days these people worked were most important regarding labor exchange. In Case 1, labor exchange took place in both the harvesting of upland rice and maize; thus, observations confirmed Yoshino’s description by concrete example. The existence of volunteer worker still remains in the agricultural production activities. The volunteer workers are provided without any compensation but there is possibility that they have different ways of receiving compensation in the complex social relationships among the community.

Conclusion This paper aims to elucidate the social relationships of associated with hybrid maize production in Mien villagers. The results show that maize harvesting is not only done by household members but also through labor exchange among the households in the village. In addition, some households use wage labor for their maize harvesting. Some of the villagers also harvest maize and work as wage-based laborers in other villages. This case study clarifies the fact that maize production as a means to produce a cash crop has been maintained through the various social relationships among the relevant communities; not only inside the village but in neighboring villages as well.

Acknowledgements This research was carried out as part of a project by the Research Institute for Human and Nature titled, “A Trans-disciplinary Study on Regional Eco-history in Tropical Monsoon Asia: 1945–2005”. This work was partly supported by the Sasakawa Scientific Research Grant from the Japan Science Society.

198

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference

Takashi Masuno

References Ekasingh, B., P. Gypmantasiri, K. Thong-ngam, and P. Grudloyma. 2004. Maize in Thailand: Production Systems, Constraints, and Research Priorities. Mexico, D.F.: CIMMYT. Hakari, H. 1978. “Economic Life” In: Shiratori, Y. (ed.). Ethnography of the Hill Tribes of Southeast Asia. Tokyo: Kodansha. pp. 161–185. (In Japanese) Jian, L. 2001. “Development and Tribal Agricultural Economy in a Yao Mountain Village in Northern Thailand” Human Organization. Vol. 60. No. 1. pp. 80–94. Masuno T. 2009. “The Influence of Watershed Management Activities Operated by the Royal Forest Department on the Land Use of Local Smallholders in Northern Thailand” In: Sapit, D. and Puangchit, L. (eds.). Tropical Forestry Change in a Changing World Volume 3: GIS/GPS/RS: Applications in Natural Resources and Environmental Management. Bangkok: Kasetsart University. pp. 183–203. Masuno, T. 2010. “Seeking Sustainable Cattle Production in Protected Forest Areas of Northern Thailand” In: Haldane, J. (ed.). Proceedings of the Asian Conference on the Social Sciences 2010 (ACSS2010). Aichi: The International Academic Forum. pp. 1611–1619. Masuno, T. and Ikeya, K. 2008. “Fallow Period and Transition in Shifting Cultivation in Northern Thailand Detected by Surveys of Households and Fields” Tropical Agriculture and Development. Vol. 52. No. 3. pp. 74–81. http://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jsta/52/3/74/_pdf (August 1, 2010) Masuno, T. and Ikeya, K. 2010. “Chicken Production and Utilization for Small-Scale Farmers in Northern Thailand: Case Study at a Mien Hillside Village” In: Sirindhorn M.C. and Akishinonomiya, F. (eds.) Chickens and Humans in Thailand: Their Multiple Relationships and Domestication. Bangkok: Siam Society. pp. 290–312. https://www.nstda.or.th/index.php/royal-project/1277-chickens-and-humans-in-thailand-their-mul tiple-relationships-and-domestication (August 1, 2010) Masuno, T. and Nakai, S. 2009. “Pig Husbandry” In: Akimichi, T. (ed.) An Illustrated Eco-history of the Mekong River Basin. White Lotus: Thailand. pp. 55–58. Michaud, J. 1997. “Economic Transformation in a Hmong Village of Thailand” Human Organization. Vol. 56. No. 2. pp. 222–232. Yoshino, A. 1996. “The Dry-Rice Cultivation Process of the Mien-Yao: Report on the Swidden Cultivation of the Mien-Yao of Northern Thailand, (1)” Bulletin of Tokyo Gakugei University. Series III, Social Sciences. Vol. 47. pp. 139–155. (In Japanese) Yoshino, A. 1998. “Migration by Swiddeners and Migration by Ancestors: The Ethnicity and Migration of the Mien of Northern Thailand” Southeast Asian Studies. Vol. 35. pp. 759–776. (In Japanese with English Summary) Yoshino, A. 2003. “An Interim Report of a Study on the Increase of Nuclear Family Households among the Iu Mien of Northern Thailand” Bulletin of Tokyo Gakugei University. Series III, Social Sciences. Vol. 54. pp. 117–125. (In Japanese)

September 2010  Legazpi City, Philippines

199

Social Relationships Formed Through Maize Cultivation in a Mien Hillside Village, Northern Thailand

Yoshino, A. 2005. “Iu Mien (Yao)” In: Hayashi, Y. and Gouda, T. (eds.). The First Peoples of Southeast Asia. Tokyo: Akashishoten. pp. 84–97. (In Japanese)

200

4th Asian Rural Sociology Association (ARSA) International Conference