ESSAYS:
Department of Social and Economic Geography
Payment for Ecosystem Services in Vietnam Perceptions of policy mobility on different levels
Theresé Engwall
ABSTRACT
Engwall, T. 2019. Payment for Ecosystem Services in Vietnam – Perceptions of policy mobility on different levels. Department of Social and Economic Geography, Essays, Uppsala University.
Payment for Ecosystem Services (PES) has been seen as a strategy to reduce poverty while maintaining and increasing the supply of ecosystem services. Vietnam is the first country in Southeast Asia to implement PES as a law for forest protection. Several studies of PES in Vietnam have been done, where the positive results tend to come from provinces with higher payments. This also seem to correlate with the level of environmental awareness and engagement among local communities. In this study, interviews with NGOs and institutions were conducted with the purpose to investigate their perception of the understanding of PES on a local level, and how they are working for improvements. All interviewees recognized that there are problems with the top-down design of the policy and raised issues such as lack of communication, low and risky payments and low rates of engagement within local communities. The interviewees are working for improvements from different angles and levels. The effectivity approach has led to an overall higher understanding of PES in Vietnam, whilst a more fair approach might be needed to achieve a long-term change of behaviour.
Keywords: PES, Fairness, Effectivity, Inclusivity, Communication.
Supervisor: Bert Eriksson
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank SIDA (Swedish International Development Cooperation
Agency). The Minor Field Study scholarship provided by them, made the fieldwork which is
the foundation to this study, possible. I would like to thank Hue Le Thi Van at Vietnam National
University & CRES (Central Institute for Natural Resources and Environmental Studies) for
her assistance and help during this fieldwork, as well as Anna-Klara Lindeborg, Uppsala
University´s Chief Representative in Vietnam for her support. I would also like to thank the
people I met in Mai Chau, Pa Co, Sa pa and Ta Phin for their help before, during and after the
observations. Added here are Mr. Nguyen Viet Dung at PanNature, Mr. Hoan Trong Do at
ICRAF, Mr. Nguyen Phu Hung at VFSTA, Mr. Cuong Nguyen Chien at VNFF, Mr. Pham
Hong Luong, Director at Cat Tien National Park and Mr. Richard Oliver Rastall. With their
time and participation, this study was made possible. Also, a big thank you is given to my
supervisor Bert Eriksson, for all his support and feedback.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIRATIONS 4
1. INTRODUCTION 5
2. BACKGROUND 6
2.1 The importance of forests 6
2.2 Policy mobility 6
2.3 PES 7
2.4 PES in Vietnam 7
2.5 Implementation of PFES 9
3. PREVIOUS RESEARCH 10
4. METHODOLOGY 12
4.1 Semi-structured interviews 12
4.2 E-mail interviews 13
4.3 Observations 14
4.4 Ethical considerations 16
4.5. Limitations of the study 16
5. RESULTS 16
5.1 Communication flow 16
5.2 Awareness among local communities 17
5.3 PFES as a market based mechanism 18
5.4 Ideas for enhanced inclusivity 20
5.5 The future of PFES 21
5.6 Observations in Ta Phin 22
5.7 Observations in Pa Co 23
6. DISCUSSION 24
6.1 Communication and leadership 24
6.2 Payment rate 26
6.3 Work for inclusivity 27
6.4 PFES as a long-term solution? 28
7. CONCLUSION 29
REFERENCES 31
APPENDIX 34
4
ABBREVIRATIONS
CPC – Commune People´s Committee CSO – Civil Society Organization
CIFOR – Center for International Forest Research ES – Ecosystem Services
FPDF – Forest Protection and Development Fund ICRAF – World Agroforestry Center
VND – Vietnamese Dong
VNFF – Vietnam Forest Protection and Development Fund VFSTA - Vietnam Forestry Science and Technology Association NGO – Nongovernmental Organization
MARD – Ministry of Agricultural Development PES – Payment for Ecosystem Service
PFES – Payment for Forest Environmental Services
1. INTRODUCTION
Human activities affects the natural habitats for a numerous of species and causes reduction in biodiversity, i.e. the variety of biological life and essential to ecosystems function (Strahler 2015, pp.297). Johan Rockström et al. (2009), states that there are 9 planetary boundaries within which humanity can continue to thrive for generations to come. Crossing these boundaries, however, could generate irreversible environmental changes, and one of the most critical boundary is the loss of biodiversity (ibid). Today, various policy instruments with the objective to protect ecosystems and to reduce poverty are included within the conservation development discussion, where the market based PES policy is seen as an important one (Phan et al. 2016).
PES (Payment for Ecosystem Services) is a strategy aiming to create incentives for public or private entities to conserve or increase the supply of ecosystem services (ES), with the purpose to regulate the exploiting and overconsumption of natural resources by giving them an economical value. ES are the abundance of benefits that nature provides to society, such as the regulation of the global climate by storing carbon dioxide and produce oxygen (Cole et.al, 2014, pp.9-10).
In Vietnam, the natural vegetation cover is tropical rainforest, which holds the rainforest ecosystem (Strahler 2015, pp.304, 310). These ecosystems are the perhaps most diverse on earth and are by ecologists regarded as a genetic reservoir of countless species of plants and animals (ibid). As a way to preserve biodiversity and at the same time tackle the problems with poverty in the country, Vietnam adopted the Biodiversity Conservation Law in 2008 and became one of the first countries in Southeast Asia to establish a national law promoting PES as a policy instrument (Cole et.al, 2014, pp.33). The target of protection in Vietnam are forest environmental services, hence the name of the policy; PFES. Many of the existing studies on PFES in Vietnam have been focusing on the implementation from a local perspective, whilst less attention is given to policy makers. By interviewing NGOs and institutions about their thoughts about PFES, a wider image of the policy implementation might be provided for further research within that field.
Research purpose and questions
The purpose of this study is to investigate different NGOs and institutions respective perception of the PFES scheme and the implementation at different geographical locations. The areas of focus will be communication flow, inclusivity and engagement among local communities.
Research Questions:
What are the different NGOs and institutions perceptions of local peoples understanding and engagement in the PFES policy?
What factors are considered as problems and how are they being solved?
How are the different NGOs and institutions working to raise awareness and inclusivity
on local level?
6
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 The importance of forests
Forests affect the global climate, whilst the global climate change affect forests. Not only are forests the habitat for a numerous of plant and animal species, they also play a major role in the earth's carbon cycle as they absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and produce oxygen (Strahler 2015, pp.274). The root systems help binding the soil in which they grow, which decreases the risks of erosion and counteract the risks of desertification. About 13 million hectares of forest are lost each year, where more than half is in South America, Africa and equatorial Asia, mainly for agricultural purposes (Strahler 2015, pp.323). Changes in agricultural land and deforestation of tropical forests account for one third of the global greenhouse gas emissions, which reinforces the global warming (Gattinger et.al, 2011). Changes in the global climate, with effects like rising temperatures, heat extremes, drought and heavy precipitation, are events that are likely to become more frequent in the future (Reyer et. al, 2015). Changed conditions affect forests differently depending on the type of forest and the geographical area. Due to their respective complexity it is difficult to foresee how these ecosystems will respond to changed conditions. Research shows that regardless of these factors, the forest ecosystems will be affected. This might affect the supply of ES (ibid), thus it is necessary to conserve the natural habitats for biodiversity (FAO, 2018).
2.2 Policy mobility
A policy can be explained as a wide framework with the purpose of creating direction of motions, such as the UN Agenda 2030 (Andersson 2018, pp.12), or the global PES policy. A policy is always designed or applied by an organization or institution which holds the authority to make decisions within a specific subject, and it is always involving some sort of activity (ibid). A policy may lead to the development of programmes, which in detail describes different strategies aiming to make the policy successful, such as the PFES policy in Vietnam. A programme may then in turn lead to the development of schemes containing measurable activities which are to be implemented within a certain timeframe (ibid).
Policy mobility is when parts of, or an entire policy is transferred between different places and organizations, often with some adjustments suitable for the new context (Andersson 2018, pp.113-14). Current research within the subject investigates the effects of policies that are transferred between different geographical places (Andersson 2018, pp.9). Most case studies of policy mobility so far have shown positive results. However, studies on the PFES policy in Vietnam shows that the scheme oversees questions such as gender, age, geographical- and cultural contexts, which could have negative effects on the policy’s success (Pham TT et al.
2013).
2.3 PES
PES is a strategy for adaptation and mitigation to climate change and conserving of biodiversity
and natural resources. It is considered a strategy for reduction of poverty as small-scale
landowners gets an income for their maintenance of ES (Cole et.al, 2014, pp.2). Those who
benefits from the ES usually become the buyers (i.e. benefactors or users) and those who have influence over ES become the sellers (i.e. suppliers or providers) (ibid). Globally, PES is often defined as a “voluntary transactions between service users and service providers that are conditional on agreed rules of natural resource management for generating offsite services”
(Thu-Ha Dang Phan et al 2018).
2.4 PES in Vietnam
Fig 1, Map of Vietnam, showing capital city and major towns. Source: Australian National University.
8
Vietnam (fig.1) is a country in Southeast Asia that with the length of 1600 km follows the coastline from the Gulf of Thailand, the South China Sea and up to the Gulf of Tonkin (Globalis, 2014). In the north and central highlands, lush forests and mountain ranges characterizes the landscape, whilst the Mekong delta stretches through the south.
Apart from great variety of landscapes, Vietnam holds a history of colonization, war and poverty. In 1858, the French invaded Vietnam and in 1883 the country was divided into three parts. The south (Cochinchina) was a French colony, whilst the north (Tonkin) and the center (Annam) served as protectorates (Phan, P.C 2011, pp.131). The French withdrew from Vietnam in 1954, and the Vietnam War, or the American war as it has been called by the Vietnamese, began between the north and the south (Phan, P.C 2011, pp.129). Since the American war ended in 1975, Vietnam has been an independent communist one-party state with a strong government and has gone from being a low-income agricultural nation to an industrial middle income nation. This development has gone relatively fast due to the change of economic system, from central panning economy to a market based economy, which was established in the 1990´s (Utrikespolitiska Institutet, 2019). In 1993, 14% of the Vietnamese population used electricity as their main source of lightning. In 2016, the rate was up at 99%. The same year, 77% of the population in rural areas had access to sanitation facilities and 70% had access to clean water, compared to 1993, when the rates were 36% and 17% respectively (World Bank, 2018).
The gender gaps have become smaller, and according to the World Bank, the net enrolment for primary and junior secondary school is now practically equal and there are more females than males attending the upper secondary and tertiary education levels (ibid) . Vietnam is home to a little over 95 000 000 people (2017) (Utrikespolitiska Institutet 2019). There are 54 acknowledged ethnic groups in Vietnam (ibid), where the majority is kinh (viet) with 85,7%.
The largest minority groups are tay 1,8%, muong 1,5 %, khmer 1,5%, mong 1,2%, nung 1,1%, other/unspecified/none 5,3 % (1999) (Globalis, 2014).
As a way of hindering deforestation, which had been a problem in Vietnam, the government implemented some large-scale reforestation programmes in 1990. The programmes have so far resulted in an increase of forest cover from 27,8% in 1990 to 41,5% in 2014 (Le ND et al.
2016). Using the concept of PES, the government of Vietnam included the programme of
Payment for Forest Environmental Services (PFES) in the revised Forest Protection and
Development Law set out in 2004. In 2007 the Prime Minister proclaimed Decision No.18 on
Vietnam Forestry Development Strategy for the period 2006-2020 (Pham TT et al. 2013). In
2008, Vietnam established the Biodiversity Conservation Law and by the implementation of
Decision No. 380 the first PFES projects could be piloted. These were set out in Lam Dong and
Son La Provinces between 2008 and 2012. They resulted in an improvement of the living
standards for local people and a reduction of illegal logging, as well as providing for forestry
sector employments (Cole et.al, 2014, pp.35). In 2010, Decree No. 99 was established, making
Vietnam the first Asian country to implement a nationwide PFES scheme as a law (Pham TT
et al. 2013).
In Decree No. 99, the buyers are identified as water supply companies (2%), hydropower (98%) plants, eco-tourism companies (0,1%), and aquaculture business. Sellers are organizations, households or individuals, which owns or leases forest from the State for permanent use for forestry purposes (Le ND et al 2013, Pham TT et al. 2013). Given that Decree No.99 is law, participation is mandatory. On December 31
st2017, the PFES policy had been implemented in 25 provinces, including more than 400 000 households nation-wide (VNFF 2017). The PFES revenue represents 0,8% of the national forestry budget, and has generated a total revenue of VND 1,782 billion (~ USD 85 million) (Pham TT 2013). Stated in the policy is the so called K-coefficient, which can be seen as an index including factors as forest quality and is aiming to adjust the distribution of benefits by these (Le ND et al, 2016). There are uncertainties in how to use the K-coefficient in the implementation of projects, as it often is seen as abstract and difficult to apply, which is why it is not used frequently (ibid).
Since the introduction of PES in Vietnam, the average level of income among PFES participants has increased with 45%, and forestry is now seen as the second most important source of income after agriculture (Thu-Ha Dang Pha et al, 2018).
2.5 The PFES implementation process
The level of payment is set by the government. Then VNFF (Vietnam Forest Protection and Development Fund) signs contracts with service buyers, stating the amounts they have to pay for ES. On a provincial level the Forest Protection and Development Fund (FPDF) works with both buyers and sellers, where some of the work consists of signing contracts with service buyers and collecting the money that the ES in the province brings. They are also developing payment plans and monitor payments to service suppliers. The FPDF reports back to VNFF on a regular basis (Pham TT et al. 2013). The amount paid to each seller is dependent on the total payments from watershed service buyers. The level of payment is determined by the forest area they manage and by the watershed; the more the buyers can earn from a watershed, the higher the payment level is to the sellers, regardless of the size of the forest area that is being managed (Le ND et al. 2016). A 10% management fee and a 5% reserve fund contribution is drawn by the provincial FPDF before the payments are distributed to forest owners on a per hectare basis (ibid).
There are two types of forest protection agreements. First, forest owners as individual
households, and secondly forest owners as communities. Individual households signs contracts
with the Commune People´s Committee (CPC). The process for the community agreements is
as follows: the village head organizes a meeting where information about PFES and the
agreement is communicated to the villagers. Signatures from all inhabitants are gathered and
the contracts are signed with CPCs on behalf of the community. In cases where people are
illiterate, fingerprints are used instead of signatures (Le ND et al, 2016). People living in
villages where the PFES schemes are implemented are excluded from the negotiation of the
agreements (Le ND et al, 2016) and the contracts are renewed annually (Thu-Ha Dang Pha et
al 2018). When the scheme has been fully implemented, the activities on local level will include
10
the maintaining and improvement of the forest and soil (Suhardiman et al. 2013), forest patrolling to detect illegal logging and fire prevention (Le ND et al, 2016).
3. PREVIOUS RESEARCH
Since the implementation of PFES in Lam Dong Province, which was one of the two piloting provinces, long-term studies including both socio-economic and ecological factors, have been made in the province. Based on 15 years of satellite images, the researchers could conclude that the forest cover in the Don Doung district increased from 57,7% in the year 2000, to 62,6% in 2014 (Thu-Ha Dang Phan et al 2018). The lowest levels are in 2008 just before the piloting phase began, whilst the most significant increase happened in 2009. In 2010 the tree cover decreased to the same levels as in 2008, only to again rise in 2011, which is the same year as PFES was officially recognized by law. The tree cover remained at the same levels until 2014 (ibid). The satellite images showed that the variety of forest was much bigger before the implementation of PFES than after, with a stabilization since 2010 (ibid). The photosynthetic activity was measured in 2007, 2008, 2013 and 2014. The result showed how the average activity was significantly higher in 2013 and 2014 (ibid). Since the official implementation of the PFES scheme, the illegal logging incidents have dropped with 60% in Don Doung district. Seen from a national level, however, CIFOR (Center for International Forestry Research) states that a high level of deforestation and degradation still remains in Vietnam. The forest cover has increased to 41,5% (2014) of the total land area since 1990. However, the planted forests are often of lower quality than the natural forest, which highly threatens the biodiversity (Le ND et al, 2016).
The study in Lam Dong Province by Thu-Ha Dang Phan et al (2018), also includes a socio- economic perspective. That part of the study stretches for 7 years between 2008 and 2014 and includes in-depth interviews with participants and non-participants of PFES programmes. The study showed that the environmental awareness improved both among participants in the scheme, as well as among those who were not involved. There has been a major change in people’s attitudes towards forest protection and according to the study, 50% of the non- participants showed an interest in getting involved if given the opportunity (ibid).
The other pilot project was set out in Son La Province in the north of Vietnam and studies have shown lesser of a success than the pilot project in Lam Dong Province (Suhardiman et al. 2013).
In Son La Province, less money was put in the trust fund and the payments to forest owners
were delayed mainly due to problems with the coordination within the province (ibid). The
northwest of Vietnam is the poorest area in the country and holds the highest rates of
inequalities (Tuyen 2015). Found in this area are the provinces Hoa Binh, Lao Cai and Son La,
which also are the home provinces to a large proportion of people belonging to different ethnic
minority groups (ibid). Inequalities can be found among different minority groups, but there is
a significant difference in the level of income between minority groups and the kinh majority
group. The average level of income among the kinh majority increased with 8,6% between the year 2002 and 2012. Within the same time frame, the average level of income increased with 6,1 % among the minority groups (ibid). Given that these are the average numbers, the level of income might vary between different regions, due to the geographical and socio-economical contexts, including agricultural possibilities and labour opportunities (ibid).
Furthermore, peoples vulnerability and local adaptation to climate change are socially differentiated and largely shaped by social, gendered, political and economic conditions and processes (Huynh & Resurreccion 2014). Poor women in rural areas in developing countries are often seen as the most vulnerable group to the effects of climate change and also that they often are more disadvantaged than men due to their gendered-specific responsibilities and less access to resources (ibid). In a study where women in rural Vietnam were targeted, the authors could conclude two things: 1) by overseeing factors as gender when designing a policy, it might in fact do more harm than good, 2) by seeing women as a homogenous group, increases the risk of a policy being unsuccessful, hence an intersectionality approach is needed for a long-term commitment (ibid).
In 2016, CIFOR published a report based on field studies carried out in Dien Bien province, where households and village heads answered surveys about PFES. The study showed that up to 56% of the surveyed village heads and 100% of the surveyed households were uncertain about how the PFES agreements was drafted and by whom (Le ND et al, 2016). Only 6% of the village heads knew that Dien Bien FPDF was involved (ibid). 44% of the village heads mentioned forest rangers and 29% were unfamiliar with the overall terms of the agreement and what kind of activities that were required from them. They claimed that they were either not fully informed about the terms of the agreement, or that they didn´t fully understand the agreements that they had signed (ibid). The study also showed that villages with higher PFES payments had better knowledge about the agreement than those with lower payments (ibid).
CIFOR states that there might be a correlation between the size of PFES payments and the
interest in PFES by farmers in the studied communities (ibid). The case study also showed that
women were significantly less informed compared to men, since they rarely participated in
village social activities (ibid). Both village heads and households stated that the payments were
too low compared to the work effort and that patrolling the forest often was seen as a duty rather
than a commitment. (ibid). Given that the PFES scheme is mandatory, everyone in a community
has to involve in forest protection activities. The CIFOR case study showed that some
households in the studied communities, which are considered relatively rich, had less interest
in these activities since, according to them, the benefits were too low (ibid). The case study
showed that there is an information deficit among local land users, which could result in failure
to act according to the PFES agreement. Lack of information and communication can lead to
conflicts according to previous global REDD+ projects. By giving the village head a key role
in providing information to the residents’, means that this person also gets a big responsibility
in doing so in a satisfactory way, which requires that he fully understands the agreement
(ibid).
12
Looking at conservation development strategies outside of Vietnam, there are some successful examples. Case studies on Joint Forest Management, conservation agriculture and tree planting in southern and eastern Africa, shows a correlation between two-way communication between communities and stakeholders and the empowerment among local people (Dyer et. al. 2013).
Where the local people were involved in the process from an early stage, including the involvement in setting the objectives of a project, the higher became the rate of understanding the purpose and benefits of the project and so the willingness to participate. This was enhanced further when local knowledge were incorporated in the project (ibid). In the studied communities, locally-trained extension officers were positioned as a link between the local people and the stakeholders. As the officer was present at all times, people in the community could highlight questions about the project at any time, which enabled for the detection of problems and the solving of those in an early stage (Dyer et. al, 2013). The role of the leader also showed to be of essential value. Where the leadership was clear and based on mutual respect and where the different roles within the projects were communicated, the empowerment and engagement among the local people was enhanced (ibid).
4. METHODOLOGY
The fieldwork which lies the foundation of this study, was done in collaboration with Hanna Liljekvist, bachelor student at the department of cultural anthropology, Uppsala University.
One could get many benefits when conducting an interdisciplinary case study where several researchers are involved. It can contribute to widen the perspective as more aspects of a phenomena can be included. Hanna will present the results from a cultural anthropological perspective in a separate thesis. The fact that two people are doing the observations and interviews, also enables for the researchers to focus on different things whilst one might perceive something that the other one is not, and vice versa (Bryman 2011, pp.273). However, there might be differences in how the researchers are conceptualizing the answers in the interviews and conversations during observations. Misunderstandings may occur due to the fact that neither the researchers, nor the interviewees are native English speakers. To ensure a high level of validation and triangulation, secondary data, such as maps, reports and articles were used and discussed (Bryman 2011, pp.354). The data collected in the field, was documented through recordings, notes and photographs.
4.1 Qualitative Interviews
To answer the research questions, qualitative semi-structured interviews with local NGOs and
institutions placed in Hanoi was conducted. The NGOs and VFSTA were chosen through
purposive sampling, given their respective involvement in PES in Vietnam (Bryman 2011,
pp.392). The respondents at VNFF and Cat Tien National Park, were reached through snowball
sampling (Bryman 2011, pp 196). The contacts to Mr. Pham Hong Luong, Director at Cat Tien
National Park, was provided by Mr. Dung at PanNature during our interview. Mr. Pham Hong
Luong in his turn provided us with the contacts to Mr. Cuong Nguyen Chien at VNFF. An
interview guide (appendix) was designed and used, making sure that the essential questions were asked. However, the interviews were flexible which allowed the detection and solving of any misunderstandings and enabled openings for follow-up questions (Bryman 2011, pp.419- 424). The interviews were held at the NGOs or institutions respective office in Hanoi. Every interview lasted for at least one hour, which enabled for in-depth conversations. The interviews were recorded and transcribed. The written material was then coded, analysed and validated through secondary data.
The following NGOs and institutions were interviewed:
Mr. Hoan Trong Do who is responsible for PES at the international NGO ICRAF (World Agroforestry Center). Approximately one year ago, ICRAF was involved in several projects in reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation where one of those concerned a PES project in Ha Ting, Vietnam. For the moment though, ICRAF is not involved in PES per se and their main focus is currently on research within ES provided through home gardening and agroforestry. In this study, he will be addressed by his first name, Mr. Hoan.
Mr. Nguyen Viet Dung at PanNature, an NGO working with PFES on a local level. Their work contains of research and hands-on practices aiming to protect biodiversity and improve human well-being in a sustainable way. He will be addressed by his first name, Mr. Dung.
Mr. Nguyen Phu Hung who is the president of Vietnam Forestry Science and Technology Association (stated in this study as VFSTA). VFSTA is an institution working on a central level.
Mr. Hung, as he will be addressed in this thesis, used to be the head of the International Relations Department of MARD (Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development).
Mr. Cuong Nguyen Chien at VNFF (Vietnam Forest Protection and Development Fund). VNFF works both on a central level and on provincial levels, where Mr Cuong works at the central level office. He will be addressed by his first name, Mr. Cuong.
4.2 E-mail interviews
To include even more perspectives within a limited time frame, two e-mail interviews were conducted. The first respondent was Richard Oliver Rastall, Technical Advisor regarding climate change, Sustainable Landscapes and REDD+ at SNV Netherlands Development Organisation, Vietnam. SNV is an international NGO with their base in the Netherlands and their work usually involves sustainable forestry where much focus lies on certification of forest.
Mr. Rastall is based in Hanoi, and will be addressed by his surname.
The second respondent was Mr. Pham Hong Luong, Director at Cat Tien National Park. Mr
Pham Hong Loung used to work as Deputy Director at VNFF, where he was involved in all the
PFES processes, from designing the policies to their implementation.
14
4.3 Observations
Fig 2: Map showing Lao Cai Province, Google Maps, 2019.
Fig 3: Map showing Hoa Binh Province, Google Maps, 2019.
Observations are often used as a tool in order to understand different kinds of social behaviour (Bryman 2011 pp.264). Due to the linguistic barrier, however, the objective with these observations was rather to get a deeper understanding of how the project sites may look, how the landscape is affected by a project, as well as putting the policy in the context of a place and its inhabitants. Given these premises, staying at the observation sites for a long amount of time was not prioritized. The villages were, however, visited several times as this provided us with better knowledge and understanding (Bryman 2011, pp.377-380). The villages chosen for observations were Ta Phin in Lao Cai province (fig.2) and Pa Co in Hoa Binh province (fig.3).
Both villages are the homes of different minority groups and are located in mountainous areas
and surrounded by lush forests. In a study that investigates inequalities between different
minority groups, both Lao Cai and Hoa Binh provinces are among the target provinces due to
their respective amount of minority groups with low incomes (Tuyen, 2015).
16
Ta Phin was visited three times and Pa Co two times. During the observations informal conversations with local people were held as a way of understanding how people are talking about PFES in general and what their perception of it is, which is why they should be categorized as participant observations (Bryman 2011, pp 266). Five key informants in total were spoken to during the visits and their participation was essential in understanding how the PFES policy has affected the different villages. It is important to note that the information given by the key informants are their own personal views and can not provide for a uniform image of the general perception among other villagers.
4.4 Ethical considerations
When conducting a fieldwork, ethical issues such as power relations between the researcher and the informants could easily occur. Transparency was important when communicating the study and the usage of the interviews with the informants, as well as their possibility in withdrawing or withholding from providing information at any time (Bryman 2011, pp131-132, 137).
4.5 Limitations of the study
This field study does not include any interviews with local people and one important note is that conversations with local people were conducted in informal ways during observations. In order to carry out research containing interviews with local people in rural Vietnam, special visas and permissions are required. There is also a linguistic barrier. Given that I do not speak Vietnamese and that many people in rural Vietnam do not speak English, doing interviews would not be possible without an interpreter.
Given that this is a bachelor thesis, the area of focus has to be quite narrow, which is why this thesis will examine the perception of bureaucrats and compare those with already existing research on local people's perception. The observations should be seen as a complimentary source. The thesis will focus on social aspects. Nevertheless, the environmental aspects are a very important factor, and further research within that area is of essential value in order to fully understand the effects of PES in Vietnam.
5. RESULTS
5.1 Communication flow
VNFF means that it is important that everyone understands the value of forests, which is why their focus lies not only on local people, but on local authorities as well as the policy makers.
Being an institution at a central level, the Vietnam Forest Science and Technology Association
(VFSTA) plays a big part in designing and re-evaluating the PFES policy. NGOs go deep into
different subjects and then report back to the association with their information and ideas about
improvements, often through workshops: We have many NGO organizations that support us in
many cases and we have the case studies and the lesson learned from case studies (VNFF 18- 11-28).
The communication flow on a central and provincial level is set out by meetings and workshops and also publications made by different NGOs. VNFF host different meetings and events and have also set out a PFES network where meetings occur twice per year and include different NGOs and CSOs. When implementing the policy, Mr. Cuong at VNFF says that it is very important to have a close collaboration as different NGOs and CSOs are specialists in different areas in regard to PFES. NGOs and institutions work in close collaboration with the local government in the provinces. To be able to work in a province as an NGO, a work permit is needed and these are issued by the local government. You know that the participation of the local people is important, but we can not do anything without the local government, Mr Hoan at ICRAF says, and continues: I think the local government is the most important factor, and the most important partner that we have to work with when we find a problem (ICRAF 18-11- 06).
Most of the communication to the local people comes from the provincial level and Mr. Cuong at VNFF stated that in some provinces communication comes from campaigns where local authorities collaborate with schools as one way to educate about the importance of the forest from a young age. Good communication with the village heads is important too, as it often is that person who forwards the information to the people living in the villages. When asked whether the authorities have any verification of the information forwarded from the village head to the local communities, Mr Cuong at VNFF says:
Because when we work with the province we see that most of the village heads are involved in PFES activities, and at the local level the provincial fund, not only work by their self but also work closely with the local rangers (...) And the local forest rangers also work closely with the provincial funds to validate research before making payments and so on (VNFF 18-11-28).
5.2 Awareness among local communities
All of the interviewees recognize a lack of information to local people. Mr Hoan at ICRAF explained that there are two main elements of the PFES programmes; efficiency and fairness:
If you want it to be fair then the effectiveness will be low, definitely because you now have to come to every single person and then negotiate with them so then the efficiencies go down (ICRAF 18-11-06). On the other hand, Mr Hoan continues, by focusing on effectivity as many people as possible have to be asked which means that the fairness goes down; This is a fine art to find a balance between those. The PFES program is pretty much now, I think 99% of efficiencies (ICRAF 18-11-06).
When asked about ICRAF´s perception about local awareness and understanding in the PFES
scheme, Mr Hoan refers to a fieldwork done where local people was asked about the money,
why they get it and from where:
18
They say it´s something like environmental money, you know, so they don´t really know the policy, what is the policy and why they get the money (...) I´m pretty sure that they get the money, but I´m also pretty sure that they don’t know why do they get the money and why are they involved (ICRAF 18-11-06).
Mr Hoan at ICRAF continues by explaining that forest protection is a pretty new phenomena in Vietnam, and that no one really care about that (ICRAF 18-11-06).
PanNature was also asked the question about local awareness and understanding, and referred to a case study made by the organization on that subject:
I do not remember exactly the datas and numbers that came up, came out with our assessment. But I would say that not up to 50% of the local, the villagers, can say something clearly about the PFES policy. They did know that, okay, `we´re protecting the forest and then the government pay us´ (PanNature 18-11-09).
PanNature means that it is important that the people who are protecting the forests sees the patrolling as a commitment and states that a lack of commitment is due to vague information from higher institutions. ICRAF also states that the low level of local participation in large part is due to lack of accessible information. Also the use of words within the policy and contracts are being criticized by ICRAF:
But the level of, well access to information I think there are still a lots of questions. Many of our communities they don´t even speak Vietnamese (...) even if they did understand the Vietnamese they don´t understand the policy language, no way (ICRAF 18-11-06).
Mr Rastall at SNV, states that information is mostly given through meetings at different levels.
Communication is of course always in Vietnamese. Ethnic minority languages may also be used where required. Many ethnic minority languages do not have a written script however. In very remote areas there can be issues particularly with girls/women who do not complete secondary school and thus are not fluent in Vietnamese, however in general VN has extremely high rates of literacy (comparable with the developed world) and in most communes verbal/written communication in Vietnamese is fine. Efforts have to be made to present information in an easily digestible format that is relevant to each level, especially for local households (they don’t need to know about all the UNFCCC decisions etc.) (E-mail 18-11-16).
PanNature states that, even though the PFES scheme so far have showed many issues, the level of awareness of the role of the forests as well as community engagement in forest management, have risen after the implementation of the PFES policy (PanNature 18-11-09).
5.3 PFES as a market based mechanism
Today the PFES policy is market based and depends on the ES users, which is why the payment
rate varies from different provinces. This means that the provinces that holds the most
hydropower also has the highest amounts of money for payments for the local people. So in
Vietnam in general, the north part and central highland of Vietnam are the two main parts that
have the highest payment rate, because more hydropower is set up there (VNFF 18-11-28).
When asked about what ways there are for the lower payed provinces to raise their income from ES, Mr. Cuong at VNFF says
:Because the idea of PFES policy is market based, market oriented mechanism, so we try to harmonize a little bit, but not to equally distribute it among the provinces. Because that policy is come up from the user and buyer. (…) Since implementation up to now we already increased the payment rate once, from 20 VND/kWh to 36 VND/kWh. So that's why, this year 2018, we collect amount almost double then last year, because new payment rate applied to the hydropower, water and so on (VNFF 18-11-28).
However, compared to the real value contributed to the forest, the payment rate to the PFES participants is still quite low in general, which is why VNFF are encouraging the government to raise the payment rate (VNFF 18-11-28).
The amount of money that should be payed to ES suppliers is set out by number of hectares. It is also determined by the economy in the province, due to the market based prices of hydropower and electricity. Mr Rastall at SNV explains it like this in his e-mail:
The policy is unevenly implemented for various reasons: Certain provinces receive much more from PFES because they have more dams or dams with higher electricity generation capacity. Payment distribution also depends on forest land allocation processes and progress – example of Hoa Binh/Son La (CIFOR) where payments are made to tens of thousands of individual households – very small (but quite equitable) payments, high transaction costs (inefficient) but in Central Highlands far less progress on FLA. Capacity is obviously also an issue – different levels of capacity in different provinces (E-mail Mr. Rastall, 18-11- 16).
Mr. Dung at PanNature explained that for one days labour on a hire, a person in the Vietnamese countryside can earn from 150 000 VND (~68 SEK) and from the PFES scheme a family can earn around 300 000 VND for the protection of one hectare per year. The payment is divided and handed out every 3 to 6 months (PanNature 18-11-09). According to some surveys that PanNature have taken part of, the highest number of times a family patrol the forest is 12, and normally it is done 4-6 times per year. It is not stated how long the patrols are.
All of the interviewees agree that the level of payment to PFES participants is too low in general. Mr. Cuong at VNFF says: In fact it is not so much, but the main thing that we like to raise awareness of the local people, to be aware of the role of the forest, to the living condition and so on (VNFF 18-11-28).
In regards to the environmental aspect, PanNature stresses the fact that hydropower and eco- tourism, sectors that stands for 98% and 1% respectively of the money invested in the trust fund for PFES, are in fact drivers of further deforestation.
From 2010 up to 2014 we are working a lot on monitoring of hydropower and we see a lot of bad examples of how small and medium hydro power development in Vietnam has been ruined our remaining of natural forest as well as land use, as well as a lot of environmental problems (PanNature 18-11-09).
20
5.4 Ideas for enhanced inclusivity
PanNature recognizes the uniform per hectare-basis payment as a problem and argues that the payments should be decided based on the quality of the forest and local land use. Mr Hung at VFSTA also says that the payments should be based on these factors and that more accurate data brought from research is needed as classifications of forests would be necessary to rearrange the payment structure (VFSTA 18-11-07).
As a way to introduce these factors into the decision making processes, PanNature have been working together with VNFF with the development of systems for monitoring and evaluating of PFES on a provincial level. This includes a book of indicators as a way of understanding how PFES is implemented step by step on a provincial level, based on three components; 1) how the policy has been working in regards to transparency, 2) the effectivity, and 3) sustainability. For the past 4-5 years, PanNature have also been working with a database for forest information and has developed payment maps in GIS (Geographical Information System), which so far has been based on forest values, such as forest quality and type of forest.
To make it easier for landowners to gather data that shows land use and forest quality at different locations, software for smartphones are being developed and pilots for this kind of monitoring is currently under construction (PanNature 18-11-09). To widen the information in the maps, PanNature will now begin to find information concerning social values such as women´s and ethnic minority´s participation, as well as values for land use, water quality and erosion. After being gathered, the information will be sent to VNFF on the provincial level (PanNature 18-11- 09). This information will be put in a database together with information about how or if PFES has contributed to the poverty reduction, how the land use has changed and how it has affected the environment.
Gender and youth are SNVs key impact areas. One way to promote and advance gender equality, SNV have developed a “Balancing Benefits”-approach used when designing and implementing various projects. Their focus lies also on the creation of opportunities for young people.
ICRAF is not working with PES for the moment, since their main focus is agroforestry. The payment for forest ecosystem services it pretty much focuses on forest land. So we want to expand that sculp to see the benefits of agroforestry systems including home gardening (ICRAF 18-11-06). ICRAF means that a PES project should be developed by development partners and that the involvement in the project should be voluntary, as by the global definition of PES.
ICRAF believe that only quite high amounts of money would truly engage people in forest protection activities, which is why ICRAF promotes other values:
Our assumption is that you can use different forms of incentives, like land tenure. If the people have the secure land tenure you can work with the local governments and then provide land tenures for them, it would be better(ICRAF18-11-06).
ICRAF were previously involved in a project built on these premises, where land tenure, tree seedlings and technical training was provided. Monitory observation showed an enhanced attitude towards forest protection among the participants (ICRAF 18-11-06). Besides projects like these, ICRAF are developing different methodologies within different areas, such as ways to measure the carbon from forests and other land uses together with local people. This is also seen as a way to lower the costs for the institutions and/or NGOs that are involved. As long as you can involve local people that can help you to reduce the cost to enhance the capacity of local people (ICRAF 18-11-06).
According to previous research and also by the observations done in this study, the general assumption among local people is that their payments comes from the government. Given that the money is brought by the local authorities, this is quite understandable. At present, the payments are in cash and these are carried out to the local people in bags, which according to VNFF can not be seen as a safe system. This enables for corruption, which is one issue that makes some local households hesitate from engaging in the projects. In fact, corruption is mentioned as a problem by all the interviewees. This system also calls for a high risk of robbery (VNFF 18-11-28). VNFF are currently working with the development of a banking system that would allow forest owners to get their money directly into a bank account and this is currently being piloted in Mai Chau, Hoa Binh Province. The hopes is that e-payments can increase the transparency (VNFF 18-11-28).
5.5 The future of PFES
All of the respondents were asked about their general thoughts about PES and the future of Vietnam. The high risk of corruption is something that they all mentioned as a factor that might limit the policy’s success.
Mr. Cuong at VNFF stated that with an improved and safer system for the payments and with more data provided from local NGOs, the PFES scheme can be developed and more inclusive.
Despite the problems raised by VNFF, their general thought is that PES can be a useful tool for raising people´s awareness about environmental issues.
Mr Hoan at ICRAF sees the potential of PES for CO2 sequestration in general, but states that he can not make any assumptions regarding specific programs, as different programs have different design indexes. Mr Hoan also discusses the importance in looking at the PFES scheme from the context of Vietnam:
We also have to be aware in Vietnam, we have a strong government, they can do whatever they want, but in other countries I am not sure, you know, it's a public party, a public service. It's extremely difficult to privatise it, and use PFES to achieve what you want (ICRAF 18-11-06).
Mr Dung at PanNature says that the PFES policy is a very easy one to criticize from different
angles and also states that it is very important to look at it from the political, economic and
social contexts of Vietnam. Mr Dung also says that there are many uncertainties within the
22
PFES payments to the trust funds, and that it in part is because of a limited state budget: I think that the government only can maybe enough to cover not up to 30% of the expanses for the...for protecting the natural forest (PanNature 18-11-09). PanNature recognizes many problems in regards to PFES, which have to be addressed in order to make the policy successful. Mr Dung highlights the fact that the general awareness of the importance of forest protection have risen since the implementation of PES in Vietnam, meanwhile he is sceptical towards the scheme as it looks today.
Mr Hung at VFSTA on the other hand, states that the PES policy is working quite well given its conditions in Vietnam;
That is a very stable fund for forest in the futures, because our government invests in forests on thousand million VND, it´s around ten million USD per year (VFSTA 18-11-07).
When talking about PES in Vietnam, Mr Hung do recognize some issues, but has predominantly positive thoughts about the policy and its chances for being successful. In addition, Mr Hung states that hopefully more women can be involved in the PFES scheme, and that education that includes both men and women can be one way forward for a more equal distribution of the forest protection activities (VFSTA 18-11-07).
5.6 Observations in Ta Phin
Observations in Ta Phin were done three times, where conversations with local people showed different levels of understanding of PFES in the area. Brought to Ta Phin was a note written in Vietnamese, saying “Area funded by Payments for Forest Environmental Services”, which was shown to the people living there as a way to find out where I could find the project sites. This, however, turned out to be difficult. Many people were asked about forest protection, but few could answer my questions. There were, however, two conversations that were particularly interesting.
On November 23rd, I asked a man in his 20´s sitting next to me at a café about PFES. He will be addressed as Mr. Nguyen. Mr Nguyen explained that he knew that there had been a project running in the area that was supposed to involve all the villagers, saying that the government did provide the people with money for the protection of the forest. However, the money seems to have stopped coming, since the forest protection isn´t going as planned. We don´t have that much soil here, so we plant pine trees to lower the risks of erosion, he said. According to Mr.
Nguyen, the people in the village got money and was supposed to plant pine trees in the hillslopes since pine trees has strong roots which lowers the risks of erosion and soil loss. Pine trees are also good for building material, said Mr. Nguyen and explained how the people in the village cut trees every tenth year and plant new ones within the same time frame.
Earlier the same day, I went for lunch at my regular place in Ta Phin, where I had gotten to
know the owner a bit. This day, a friend of hers was there, to whom she had briefed about my
thesis. The friend, who will be addressed as Ms. May, is working as a tour guide. She was born
and raised in Ta Phin, so she knew quite a lot about the PFES project running in the area. She said that pine trees had been planted in the hillslopes in the area over 30 years ago, and that everyone living in the village had to participate in the protection of those. However, Ms. May also said that the money from the government had stopped coming since some people cut the trees anyway, often at night time. She added that even though the money is not coming anymore, it is said that people still have to protect the forest and that all sites in the area holding pine trees are protected. Everyone in the village are involved, but there are two people chosen for the main responsibility of the protection work, called forest rangers, whose responsibility is to patrol the pine tree forests. Ms. May told me that people from the provincial office host meetings once or twice a year, with the purpose of giving information to the people about the project. However, only a few villagers have the time to show up at the meetings: they have to work and when they work a lot they don´t have the energy to go to the meetings, she said. The language used in the meetings is Vietnamese, she said and According to her, many people that lives in Ta Phin knows about the project, but that many of them are unable to read.
5.7 Observations in Pa Co
At a café in Mai Chau, I met a man working as a tour guide, born and raised in Pa Co village.
He will be addressed as Mr. Tham. He told me that many people living in Pa Co never went to school and do not understand the terms of PFES or why the forest should be protected. He also told me that the rising prices for electricity have been a problem for many people in the village;
with not enough money to pay for electricity, cutting trees for fire woods is a necessity for survival. Mr Tham and I stayed in touch and at one of my visits to Pa Co, he took me to meet one of the three men working as forest rangers in the area. They told me that the forest here have been a nature reserve since around year 2000.
Both the ranger and Mr. Tham criticize the level of payment provided to the people in the
village, saying that a higher payment is needed in order to get people involved. When I asked
them about how the PFES scheme could be improved, the ranger said that financial support as
well as other activities for long term solutions would be welcomed in Pa Co. He discussed the
trees that was planted in the area, and claimed that a better option would be to plant trees for
multiple purposes, for example trees that produces fruits since this would allow the people in
the village to eat and sell of the harvest to generate more money to the community. Mr. Tham
said that he is hoping for tourism to grow in the area, with homestays and tours in the forest and
that a growing tourism could allow for the ethnic minorities to sell their traditional products
and make an income. However, this kind of project would require some education for the people
living in Pa Co, he said, since English is essential when communicating to tourists.
24
6. DISCUSSION
According to the results, raising awareness and working with improvements of the PFES policy, are the main focus areas among the respondents and this is being done on different levels through different strategies. The interviewees raise issues such as communication gaps, unequal distribution of the payments and lack of understanding of environmental issues within local communities. These problems are interlinked and can be seen as an effect of the top-down implementation of the PFES scheme, where effectivity is prioritized over fairness. This chapter will examine each of these problems, where an intersectional approach will be taken by the author and where different NGOs and institutions work for solutions will be reviewed.
We will begin by looking at the two piloting provinces, Lam Dung and Son La. The implementation of the PFES scheme came with different conditions in regards to payment rate. There were also differences in terms of leadership from higher institutions. The awareness of environmental issues got enhanced both by PFES participants and non- participants after the implementation of the scheme in Lam Dung Province (Thu-Ha Dang Phan et al 2018). Lam Dong Province lies in the central highlands, where most of the hydropower is found (VNFF 18-11-28), which means that the amount of money placed in the FPDFs from the hydropower is higher there compared to other provinces. Son La Province is located in the north of Vietnam, which is the poorest area in the country (Tuyen 2015). Less hydropower is set up there, which means a lower payment rate to local people.
In Son La province, monitoring from higher institutions failed in different aspects, such as the delayed payments to local people. In some cases this was due to difficulties in finding people when payments was to be delivered (Suhardiman et al, 2013).
The results from these different provinces show that the conditions given by the PFES scheme are highly dependent on the prerequisites in the different locations. Given that these were the sites chosen for piloting projects, one can assume that the level of information given to local authorities must have been quite high. Even so, the project in Son La failed in several aspects due to coordination problems (Suhardiman et al 2013). Differences in communication, payment rate and geographical contexts are factors that highly influence the policy’s´ success, which is why it can be argued that these factors should be included in the policy making process. According to Mr Hung at VFSTA, lessons learned from the piloting projects and the research made on local level, serves as the foundation in re-evaluating and improving the PFES scheme. Still, the K-coefficient that includes factors as forest quality is not taken in account in the implementation, as it is seen as difficult and too abstract to include (Le ND et al, 2016).
6.1 Communication and leadership
The provincial governments are responsible in spreading information about PFES among the
participants in the villages. This is often done through village meetings, which according to
the respondents are held in both Vietnamese and any ethnic minority language required for
the specific village. The observations in Ta Phin showed that people are aware that these meetings occur, but rarely attend since they feel it is too time consuming. According to the two key informants, Mr. Nguyen and Ms. May, the payments to the people in Ta Phin have stopped coming, yet they are still supposed to protect the forest. When the payments stopped coming is not stated, but the reason for that is, according to both key informants, due to the high rate if illegal logging in the area. The conversations with Mr. Nguyen and Ms. May shows a difference in understanding of the purpose of the forest protection. Even though two people can not give an accurate image of the perception of all the inhabitants in the village, it does say something about the information given from local authorities.
All of the interviewees confirm that there is an information deficit between different levels and they all recognizes this as a problem. Lower rates of understanding among local communities correlates with lower willingness to participate in forest protection activities (Dyer et al. 2013). This is confirmed by Mr Dung at PanNature as he states that there is a lack of commitment from local people when it comes to engaging in the forest patrolling and other PFES activities. He believes that this is due to vague information from higher institutions (PanNature 18-11-09). He also states, however, that the overall understanding of the role of the forest in terms of environmental hazards has increased in Vietnam since the implementation of the PFES scheme.
According to the case studies made in southern Africa, a clear and respectful leadership that promotes local empowerment through inclusivity, have shown to be an important factor in conservation development projects successes (Dyer et. Al 2013). The leadership came with a locally-trained extension officer that was present in the villages at all times, making it possible for people to address any issues at any time. In Vietnam, the village heads do play a major role in providing information to the PFES participants, since they are the link between the local government and the community. The village head has a great local knowledge and understands the geographical and cultural contexts that characterize a place and its inhabitants. Both Mr Hung at ICRAF and the tour guide from Pa Co, Mr Tham, confirms that many people living in rural Vietnam, especially people belonging to different minority groups, are not fluid in written Vietnamese. Mr Tham told me that many people living in Pa Co have not finished school and can not read or write. Mr Hoan at ICRAF states that the policy language is very difficult to understand for local people that lacks a higher education. Hence, verbal communication and information from local authorities and village head is of essential value, which requires that the village head fully understands the agreement and what is expected of him or her and of the local people (Le ND et al. 2016).
According to the interview with VNFF, village heads in affected villages tend to participate
in meetings and workshops held by the local authorities, which is why they are assumed to
be aware of both the importance in forest protection and the benefits of PFES. However,
there does not seem to be any measurement of the information flow from the village head
back to the community. Studies in Dien Bien Province showed that only 44% of the surveyed
26
