Rural areas of the Southeast Asian mainland and the agricultural sector in general, form the majority of Southeast Asia’s population. Rural agricultural areas, including forested land, constitute more than half of Southeast Asia’s land area. The number of persons [31] (1. taken 2. engaged 3. residing) in agriculture, part or full time, varies from country to country. It averages, however, between 70% and 80%. In terms of these factors, that is, land and population, the rural areas are important. Even more important are the local people’s ways of [32] (1.responding 2. opposing 3. appealing) to modern development, especially in terms of their economic and social benefits and costs.
Looked at [33] (1. with 2. from 3. as) an economic point of view, the agricultural sector becomes extremely important. Developing nations throughout Asia depend on agricultural production both for domestic consumption and for their export economies. Further, close to 45% of Southeast Asia’s economy in terms of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) depends on agriculture. These developing countries’ livelihood itself comes from their agricultural products. Further, rural people in small communities contribute in [34] (1. erratic 2. probable. direct) ways to the whole society as well as the environmental conservation of Southeast Asia.
In order to examine how rural people develop their own ways of [35] ( 1. governing 2. handling 3. producing) modern economic and social demands, we must first keep in mind that the states of Asia show a great variety in their physical and geographical features as well as in the populations that have traditionally lived in these diverse areas. Of these, the most important distinction is that between “lowland” and “highland” areas. “Lowland” refers to the lower-altitude areas where most urban and rural areas lie, and also to their populations, which are the majority. “Highland” refers to the hill and mountain areas that have far fewer, usually minority, people, but that are [36] (1. rich 2. located 3. consistent) in forests and other resources. Based on this distinction, the modern Asian nation-state has come to categorize farming people as belonging in two groups: first, lowland people, who may be defined as the majority group or the major nationality, and second, highland people, who are normally defined as minorities or “hill tribes.”Between these two major groups there are, of course, many cultural, institutional, and practical differences. Yet the problems they face within the modernizing nations of Southeast Asia have many similarities.
These problems include, first, education and the job market. There is a mismatch between the education in rural areas and the [37] (1. prices 2. Skills 3. Demands) of the modern labor market. Modern forms of employment require updated skills and education, and often cannot absorb workers with only a basic education. Second, in many cases such people have lost their traditional livelihood. The land or the forest on which the rural majority [38] (1. rests 2. places 3. depends) can be bought up by corporations, industries, or real estate developers, or it can be lost through the failure to understand the complicated legal requirements of private ownership. When land or forest is cleared for development, their livelihood disappears. As their education does not equip them to find immediate employment elsewhere, their survival is in [39] (1. jeopardy 2. need 3. consequence).
Third, modern agriculture uses chemicals to kill weeds and insect pests as well as to fertilize the soil in order to increase productivity. In principle, it is desirable to increase productivity and the [40] (1. income 2. expense 3. consumption) that goes with it. For this reason farmers often agree to use expensive, imported chemical fertilizers and pesticides. As farmers are frequently exposed to these chemicals, they are also the most numerous [41] (1. causes 2. vehicles 3. victims) of the illnesses associated with them. Further, the average farmer cannot afford the constant expenses that are needed to maintain modern agricultural products. When prices on the international market are high, they may be able to recover their expenses, but when prices drop, their debts increase.
Finally, people who have lost their land to developers and have no economic resources to fall back on are normally forced to rely on occasional employment in seasonal or day labor. More often, they must migrate to find work. When they go out to find work, they encounter new and different problems at their work destinations. The family who remain in the village also bear a larger burden due to the [42] (1. absence 2. power 3. effort) of the adult earner. All of these newly arising problems need new solutions and new ways of formulating them.
Traditional Societies did have their own forms of political and social decisionmaking when facing problems in the community. Before their exposure to western-style democracy, rural people could discuss their needs and plans [43] (1. in 2. among 3. to) themselves at village meetings, in temple gatherings, or elsewhere. In these traditional ways of discussing and governing, the position of the village head or other local leaders was an inherited position, and this system had its drawbacks in that it was feudalistic and authoritarian. But the [44] (1. advantage 2. reason 3. idea) was that these leaders were people from the same local area and they understood the local culture and values.
Modern governance and representative democracy, however, bring in people from the center or capital city to govern the local area. These outsiders are normally from urban areas and are highly educated. They have an understanding of the central governments politics and the way that government organizations operate in decision-making. But this does not mean that they can understand the local or traditional way of life. They often do not possess either local knowledge, or knowledge of the reasons behind local ways of living. [45] (1. Discussions 2. Merging 3. Conflicts) of opinion can easily occur between them and the local people.
In fact, within traditional ways of life, there was traditional or indigenous knowledge, that is, knowledge about the natural environment, about sustainable production and consumption, and about remedies for illnesses. With modernization, “modern” knowledge that comes from education and textbooks was given priority. [46] (1. Such 2. They 3. So) were the uses of machinery and chemicals in work and production. Until recently these had been seen as the sole ways of finding solutions to agricultural poverty. Now, however, the world has begun talking about sustainable development [47] (1. as though 2. merely 3. in order) to overcome our previous tendency to overconsumption and pollution. And for us to achieve sustainability in the 21st century, we must once again put into practice traditional kinds of knowledge.
Nowadays, in many areas of rural Asia, local communities are using their traditional knowledge and finding their own ways to address problems and pursue development, including marketing local products made by community businesses. Local movements and associations have also succeeded in greatly reducing the [48] (1. base 2. use 3. price) of harmful chemicals in agriculture. Local government agricultural offices, some NGOs, and academic experts have worked together to seek ways of [49] (1. replacing 2. producing 3. promoting) chemical agriculture without loss of income. Further, the villages and rural districts now have their own elected officials who were born in the same area, and who understand local ways of thinking and local ways to make and market local products.
Modern development has brought about many benefits, but it has also raised many serious issues for rural people in Southeast Asia. These people have also, however, been the ones to try out their own ways of resolving these problems. The initiatives above are examples of successful local [50] (1. discussions 2. efforts 3. products) to choose and manage development on their own terms, and can serve as models to others facing similar issues.
コメントを残す